In the original paper, it was argued that while there is an array of methods and methodologies available, their use is delimited by the culture of accountability that prevails in public sector institutions, a fact that is particularly problematic given the complexity and diversity of evaluation contexts today. This short rejoinder, to responses made by J.G. Carmen and L.-E. Datta to "The Case for Participatory Evaluation in an Era of Accountability" (both, this issue), argues further that given the prevalence and widespread use of evaluation "technologies" as formal mechanisms for decision making, monitoring, reporting, and controlling the activities and expenditures within public sector institutions, we have a responsibility to consciously and conscientiously explore some of the taken-for-granted assumptions that guide evaluation practice. Three main points are advanced: 1) evaluation as institutionalized practice, 2) evaluation as influencing and shaping public perception, and 3) evaluation as a reflection of certain values.