Abstract

The idea of instituting an Agency of Public Policy Evaluation in Chile has been included in government programs of both President Bachelet (2006-2010) and President Pinera (2010-2014). In that context, this article seeks to offer evidence about the functioning of program evaluation in the country and, consequently, to contribute to the debate about the design of a potential Agency. With that purpose, the work begins with the question on What effects have had the evaluations of public programs on government decisions and program management? The study analyzes a sample of 23 public programs which have been evaluated through the modalities of "Expert Panel" or "Impact Evaluation". Three of them have been evaluated through both modalities. The cases of analysis were selected considering criteria of intentioned sampling and theoretical saturation. The evaluation reports were analyzed considering their methodological rigor and whether the evaluations are succeed in capturing the reality of the program management. With the same purpose, "Integral Management Balances" and "histories of budget laws" from 2006 to 2011 were also analyzed. The research included interviews to people related to the evaluated programs in roles of managers, ministers, undersecretaries, congressmen, and evaluators. Interviews were conducted on February 2012. The study concludes that Chilean evaluation practice is concentrated, formal and information that produce does not have true influence on the policy decision making on the programs. These findings leads to the opening of a convenient debate about the dependency of a potential Agency, whether it would be appropriate to decentralize some aspects of the evaluation and to separate the functions of budget approval and control from the evaluation of the program, as well as the tasks that an organization impelling program evaluation in the public sector should fulfill.