Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation

Find an Article

Find an Article

More →
Submit a Manuscript

Submit a Manuscript

More →

The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation (CJPE) is an open-access journal published by CES three times per year to promote the theory and practice of program evaluation in Canada. It contains:

  • Articles of up to 7,000 words (including references) on evaluation theory and practice, including innovative methodological approaches, original empirical research, standards of practice, strategies to enhance the implementation, and reporting and use of evaluations.
  • Research and Practice Notes of up to 3,000 words presenting exemplars of innovative evaluation practice and cases.
  • Book Reviews of up to 1,000 words providing a critique of authored and edited volumes of interest and relevance to the evaluation field.
  • Roots and Relations (R&R) section, which includes articles, audio and video recordings, and visual representations honouring our lineage, growing our kinship, and sustaining our intergenerational legacies of Indigenous wisdom and practices in and through evaluation. (See more information on this section below.) 
    • Call for Submissions for the fourth issue of R&R: Full submissions are due June 28, 2024, for consideration to be published in the “Roots and Relations: Celebrating Good Medicine in Evaluation” section in the December 2024 issue. Click here for more information.

If you have any questions about the CJPE, please  send us an email

Articles: Submissions of up to 7,000 words on evaluation theory and practice, including innovative methodological approaches, standards of practice, strategies to enhance the implementation, reporting and use of evaluations. Articles reporting original empirical research on evaluation are of particular interest.

Submitted manuscripts will be evaluated through double-blind peer review in relation to:

  • Interest and relevance to evaluation practice in Canada and abroad - the articles must focus on areas of evaluation theory and practice of interest to evaluation scholars, students or practitioners.
  • Clarity and conciseness of the article.
  • Originality of the issue, method or practice reported in the article.
  • Please note that the Journal does NOT publish evaluation summaries or reports.
  • The Journal publishes articles in both French and English. For specific Manuscript Submission Guidelines please see next section.

Research and Practice Notes: A Research and Practice note is a brief, structured description and analysis of a subject of importance to evaluation practice. This type of manuscript results from the systematic examination of one or many dimensions of evaluation practice and seeks to share lessons learned with other practitioners and researchers.

These papers should be no longer than 3,000 words including references. The dimensions of evaluation practice that could be the subject of a practice note include (but are not limited to): managing an evaluation function, planning evaluation work, designing evaluation methods and data collection strategies, engaging evaluation stakeholders, employing innovative evaluation methods and strategies, conducting evaluation projects, reporting and communicating evaluation results, fostering evaluation use, and teaching evaluation.

Research and Practice Notes should be structured in the following way:

  • Introduction and/or context section to orient the reader
  • Brief description of the dimension(s) of practice being examined, with references to relevant literature
  • Overview of method(s) used to systematically examine or analyze the dimension(s) of practice to extract what was learned (e.g., reflective case study, post-mortem, key informant interviews, analysis against theoretical model or framework, etc.)
  • Description and analysis of what was learned, with emphasis on highlighting the factors that are thought to account for success (or lack of success)
  • Conclusions and implications for evaluation practice, theory and/or research, in Canada or elsewhere

Manuscripts will be subject to double-blind peer review. The evaluations will be based on the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the practice of evaluation
  • Credibility of the analysis
  • Validity of conclusions and implications
  • Originality
  • Clarity and conciseness
  • Reader interest

Book Reviews: Reviews of current publications relevant to theory and practice in program evaluation are reported in most issues. Reviewers are solicited directly by the Book Review Editor. Book reviews should be no longer than 1,000 words and include a basic description of the book's contents as well as an original critique of the book.

The purpose of Roots and Relations (R&R) is to honour our lineage, grow our kinship and sustain our intergenerational legacies of Indigenous wisdom and practices in and through evaluation. R&R will work to sacredly hold traditional knowledge, celebrate and make visible culture and language utilization, protect and assert sovereignty, provide space for Indigenous voices and celebrate Indigenous wisdom and innovations in and through the lens of evaluation.

The vision for R&R is that it will:

  • Develop and sustain a welcoming and safe space for any Indigenous led contributions to be considered, discussed, reviewed, and published in order to keep evaluation decolonized and with an Indigenous focus (p. 353, Bowman, Dodge Francis, and Tyndall, 2015).
  • Establish a place of Indigenous branded scholarship where Indigenous contributors can offer a diverse offering of published evaluation work that is not limited only to text submissions.
  • Utilize blended model for the editorial process that incorporates a traditional Indigenous framework and review process for the purposes of curious inquiry, holistic human development, engaged learning, and kinship supports on the pathway to future publication.
  • Inclusion of intergenerational relationships (youth or young adults through Elders) so the origins and purposes of RR remains rooted in traditional knowledge and language, cultural protocols and practices, nation-to-nation (Bowman, 2019) and inclusion of Tribal/First Nation sovereignty, and Indigenous ethics as a sustainable, regenerative, and celebratory pathway for publishing representative Indigenous scholarship.

R&R submissions are aligned with the four directions of the Medicine Wheel (Bowman, 2018) that help us have a holistic and traditionally rooted perspective as we view evaluation:  

  • Eastern Door: Be a Good Relative. We come to the work rested and ready in ways that reflect traditional, cultural, and spiritual ways of knowing as a process where we respectfully listen and seek to understand first, then decide on best pathways together.
  • Southern Door: Be of Good Mind. This is the awakening, rooting, and centering of pre-contact and post-contact Indigenous and community- centered and created knowledge and practices that are restorative, regenerative, strength based, protect the privacy, and respect the sovereignty of Indigenous nations related to data, cultural, intellectual, human, and non-human.
  • Western Door: Do Good Work. This supports the development of culturally specific responsive and regenerative strategies, studies, policies, processes, and work products that align with the need for healthy, reciprocal, respectful and relevant Indigenous approaches to evaluation.
  • Northern Door: Be on a Good Journey. Using the wisdom of our Ancestors and Elders, we will be grounded in traditional knowledge to celebrate and share what is working and embrace and learn from challenges. We will support walking on sacred pathways for innovative and sustainable Indigenous evaluation that inspires the next Seven Generations.

Possible topics or content addressed by the submissions includes origin stories; traditional knowledge; oral history; Indigenous theories, frameworks, ethics; working nation to nation; treaties; oral agreements, innovative approaches to Indigenous evaluation; traditional ways of sense making; sustainability; environmental stewardship; and differentiating what “wisdom” is (our Elders) vs. simply the production of more knowledge (western ways).

Editor-in-Chief: Jill Chouinard, Professor, School of Public Administration, University of Victoria

Editorial Coordinator: Paisley Worthington, PhD Student, Queen's University

Associate Editor - Articles (English): Leslie Fierro, McGill University, Max Bell School of Public Policy

Associate Editor - Practice Notes (English): Jane Whynot, Partner, Goss Gilroy Inc. (GGI)

Associate Editor - Articles and Practices Notes (French): Naïma Bentayeb, École nationale d’administration publique and McGill University, Social Work School

Associate Editor - Roots and Relations: Larry Bremner, MA, CE, President, Proactive Information Services Inc.

Associate Editor - Roots and Relations: Nicole Bowman / Waapalaneexkweew (Lunaape/Mohican), University of WI-Madison and Bowman Performance Consulting

Associate Editor - Book Reviews: Tiffany Tovey, Department of Educational Research Methodology, Office of Assessment, Evaluation and Research Services, Greensboro, NC

Jeremy Acree, University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Courtney Amo, Atlantic Canada Opportunity Agency 

Tim Aubry, University of Ottawa

Isabelle Bourgeois, University of Ottawa

Ayesha Boyce, Arizona State University

Nancy Carter, Evaluation Scientist

Brad Cousins, University of Ottawa

Gédéon Dosson Djissa, Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Sarah Earl, YMCA GTA

Paul Favaro, York University

Steve Jacob, Université Laval

Marlène Laeubli, LAUCO Evaluation & Training

Chris Lovato, University of British Columbia

James McDavid, University of Victoria

Michael Obrecht, Independent Consultant

Burt Perrin, Independent Consultant

Cheryl Poth, University of Alberta

Lynda Rey, École nationale d'administration publique

Lucie Richard, Université de Montréal

Valéry Ridde, Université de Montréal

Ray Rist, The World Bank

Michelle Searle, Queens University

Mark Seasons, University of Waterloo

Robert Schwartz, University of Toronto

Daniela Schröter, Western Michigan University

Sandra Sellick, Royal Roads University

Sanjeev Sridharan, The Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation