The study's purpose was to develop a valid instrument for evaluating residential outdoor education centres in Canada. Using published and unpublished literature, a preliminary instrument consisting of 206 criteria was constructed. Twenty-five recognized Canadian experts in residential outdoor education were randomly selected from 3 subsample areas (the Maritimes, Quebec-Ontario, and Western Canada); these were asked to act as jurors. To validate the preliminary instrument, the jurors were sent a copy of the instrument with instructions to rate each criterion on a 7-point scale: essential, very desirable, desirable, acceptable, questionable, unacceptable, not feasible, and an eighth scale, not applicable. Twenty jurors (80 percent of the total number) responded. Of the 206 criteria, 3 were excluded because their average ratings were lower than the required 4.0 and 1 because of the jurors' comments. The overall average rating of the 202 criteria retained in the instrument was 6.0 or very desirable. The final instrument was given a 6-point scale which included: met completely, great degree, moderate degree, small degree, not met to any degree, and not applicable. In addition, the average rating received from jurors for each criterion was included immediately following that criterion in the body of the instrument. (Author/NQ)