As evaluators, we are often asked to determine whether policies and programs provide value for the resources invested. Addressing that question can be a quandary, and, in some cases, evaluators question whether cost–benefit analysis is fit for this purpose. With increased interest globally in social enterprise, impact investing, and social impact bonds, the search is on to find valid, credible, useful ways to determine the impact and value of social investments. This article argues that when addressing an evaluative question about an economic problem (the merit, worth, or significance of resource use), economic analysis can enhance evaluation but is usually insufficient to fully answer the evaluative question and that a stronger approach would involve explicit evaluative reasoning, supported by judicious use of economic and other methods. An overarching theoretical framework is proposed, and implications for evaluation practice are discussed.