It has been two years since the Evaluation Research Society (ERS) published its Standards for Program Evaluation. The standards have influenced professional activities, such as panel discussions, and have been useful in training evaluators. However, the question arises as to whether the standards have been consulted by practicing evaluators or persons hiring evaluators. The ERS standards were sponsored by wealthy organizations with large staffs, and reflect that bias. Careful adherence to the standards requires more resources than are often available. Moreover, the standards suggest that evaluators should be extraordinarily capable, and possess many skills: (1) scientist/researcher/clinician; (2) administrator/manager; (3) contractor/business partner; (4) humanist; and (5) communicator/action agent. The standards need to be made more widely applicable for institutions with a small budget as well as for wealthy organizations. Principles are needed which address the following issues: choices faced by evaluators; ethical considerations betwen the evaluator and the client; and context, costs, and control. Considerations of these principles could result in a set of standards which is even better than a merger of the ERS standards and the Joint Committee standards. The standards stimulate reexamination of the practice of evaluation. (GDC)