“Public Policy Analysis” involves in the evaluation of issues of public importance with objective of providing facts and statistics about extent and impact of different policies of Government. Nowadays, public policy analysis is undertaken by scholars from different applied physical and biological sciences (e.g. technology assessments, environmental impact studies, seismic risk analyses, etc.). Presently, the focus is on public policy analysis as it is conducted within the social and behavioural sciences, mainly Political Science, Sociology and Economics. Generally, the public policy addresses real or sensed problems, so the public policy analysis is mostly devoted to defining or clarifying the problems and assessing the needs. Main objective of public policy analysis is to assess the degree to which policies are meeting their aims. Policy analysis plays an important role to define and outline the aims of a proposed policy, and also has role to identify the similarities and differences in expected outcomes and estimated costs with competing the alternative policies. Several public policies are formulated to solve both the current and future problems, and so the policy analysis attempts to forecast future requirements based on present concomitant with the past conditions. A large number of works in the field of public policy analysis involves for the development of the conceptual schemes or typologies which help to sort out different types of policies, or analyses of policies. Many literatures on public policy analysis, and especially on impact evaluation are chiefly methodological in character; indeed, many recent innovations in research procedure have been developed by research scholars working on applied problems. Many texts in ‘evaluation research’ recommend an assessment of the ‘evaluability’ of the programme prior to initiate the evaluation itself. ‘Implementation analysis’ is an essential component of all capable policy evaluations. ‘Utilisation’ is an ongoing problem in the field of evaluation research. Evaluation results affect the public policy by serving as the impetus for public discourse and debate which form social policy, rather than through extensive programme termination or reform.

Keywords: Evaluation research, Implementation analysis, Outcome analysis, Public policy analysis, Utilisation.

Chambers, K., Wedel, K.R. and Rodwell, M.K. (1992). Evaluating Social Programs. Allyn and Bacon, Boston.

Cook, T. and Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-Experimentation. Rand MacNally, Chicago.

Dubnick, M. and Bardes, B. (1983). Thinking about Public Policy: A Problem Solving Approach. John Wiley, New York.

Gueron, J.M. (1997). Learning about welfare reform: Lessons from state-based evaluations. Rog, D. and Fournier, D. (eds.). New Directions for Evaluation, 76: 79-94.

Haveman, R. (1977). A Decade of Federal Antipoverty Programs: Achievements, Failures and Lessons. Academic, New York.

Johnson, D., Meiller, L., Miller, L. and Summers, G. (1987). Needs Assessment: Theory and Methods. Iowa State University Press, Ames.

Judd, C. and Kenny, D. (1981). Estimating the Effects of Social Interventions. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Levin, H. (1975). Cost-effectiveness analysis in evaluation research. In: Handbook of Evaluation Research, Guttentag, M. and Struening, E. (eds.). Sage, Newbury Park, California.

Levitan, S. (1985). Programs in Aid of the Poor. Baltimore, Md. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Lipsey, M.W. (1997). What can you build with thousands of bricks? Musings on the cumulation of knowledge in program evaluation. Rog, D. and Fournier, D. (eds.). New Directions for Evaluation, 76: 7-24.

Loftin, C. and McDowell, D. (1981). One with a gun gets you two: Mandatory sentencing and firearms violence in detroit. Annals Amer. Aca. Pol. Soc. Sci., 455: 150-168.

MacRae, D. (1985). Policy Indicators: Links between Social Science and Public Debate. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, N.C.

Marmor, T. (1970). The Politics of Medicare. Aldine, New York.

Moynihan, D. (1973). The Politics of a Guaranteed Annual Income: The Nixon Administration and the Family Assistance Plan. Vintage, New York.

Nagel, S. (1984). Contemporary Public Policy Analysis. University of Alabama Press, Birmingham.

Rogers, J. (1989). Social Science disciplines and policy research: The case of Political Science. Policy Studies Review, 9: 13-28.

Rossi, P., Freeman, H. and Lipsey, M. (1998). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach, 6th Edn. Sage, Newbury Park, California.

Rossi, P. and Lyall, K. (1976). Reforming Public Welfare. Russell Sage, New York.

Shadish, W.R., Jr., Cook, T.D. and Leviton, L.C. (1991). Foundations of Program Evaluation. Sage, Newbury Park, California.

Simon, C.A. (2017). Public Policy: Preferences and Outcomes (Ebook, ISBN- 9781315474458), 3rd Edn. Taylor & Francis Group, New York, USA.

StateUniversity.com (2022). Public Policy Analysis- Major Students, Policies and Analysis//https://education. stateuniversity.com/pages.

Sussman, B. (1988). What Americans Really Think and Why Our Politicians Pay No Attention. Pantheon, New York.

Verba, S. and Nie, N. (1975). Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. Harper and Row, New York, USA.

Weiss, C.H. (1972). Evaluation Research: Methods for Assessing Program Effectiveness. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

Weiss, C.H. (1988). Evaluation for decisions: Is anybody there? Does anybody care? Evaluation Practice, 9: 15-28.

Wholey, J.S. (1997). Clarifying goals, reporting results. Rog, D. and Fournier, D. (eds.). New Directions for Evaluation, 76: 95-106.

Wikipedia (2022a). Centre for Policy Research.

Wikipedia (2022b). Centre for Public Policy Research.

Wikipedia (2022c). Indian School of Public Policy.

Yates, B.T. (1996). Analyzing Costs, Procedures, Processes and Outcomes in Human Services. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, California.