ABSTRACT
Policy researchers occasionally have an opportunity to participate directly in the policy process by evaluating an explicitly experimental policy. This case study is the result of a pilot program or experiment mandated by the California state legislature. The case study illustrates that even under such laboratory-like conditions, policy researchers may find it difficult to assess the impact of public programs. Evaluation research for assessing the ignition interlock pilot program had to be designed to collect and analyze information based on an ongoing program implemented by local judges and court systems. The sheer number of agencies participating in the pilot program meant that data collection would be a cumbersome task. The interlock program itself was a temporary, experimental pilot project, political reality dictated that it must be built on the foundation of the existing criminal justice system. Quasi-experiments are typically less able to provide definitive information about the effectiveness of public programs.
