From the Co-Editors: Being in Relationship with Citizens, Communities, and Clients in Evaluation Practice

Issue 4 of Volume 44 marks the seventh and last issue with the two of us as Co-Editors-in-Chief. We embarked on the role in the wake of our prior editor ’ s untimely passing, not knowing each other and expecting to serve for perhaps an issue or two. During this time, we have discovered a rich partnership and also friendship. Although our predecessor George Julnes had an impact on each of us in his life through our relationships with him, it turns out that his posthumous impact is great as well — by his death bringing the two of us together. No control group needed: it is clear that the counterfactual would have been us not coming together in this role, and our professional and personal lives would have been much worse for that. This personal re fl ection also leads us to re fl ect on what we have contributed to the journal along with what we hope will come. In our time as co-editors, we have aimed to curate coherent issues of AJE that feed the intellects and souls of AJE ’ s readers. We have brought to publication important articles that re fl ect rigorous scholarship and thoughtful practice. We can take only a small bit of credit, however, with the authors and reviewers carrying the most weight for this accomplishment. After synthesizing the contributions of this issue, we close with our hopes for AJE ’ s future. This issue contains four articles, an In Memorium Section, and our annual acknowledgement of reviewers. Collectively, the articles offer insights on why and how evaluators are in relationships with citizens, communities, and clients. For example, the lead article, by Pirmin Bundi and Valérie Pattyn, offers a framework for understanding the role of the general public in evaluation, asking: What is the difference between citizens and those directly connected to or involved in the evaluation process? How do citizens contribute to evaluation? Citizens and Evaluation: A Review of Evaluation Models answers these and related questions. The study categories evaluation models, revealing the models that tend to promote public engagement. Although variations exist both within evaluation models and across different stages of the evaluation process, actor-oriented models (those focused on clients and participants)