clearness would increase clients ’ confidence H u m a n i t i e s

Respond each colleague by doing all of the following:

• Identify the stage or stages of the program to which your colleague’s selected question relates.
• Suggest an additional question or concern that stakeholders may have about program evaluation.
• Recommend an alternative model for the evaluation.

Shalea – first colleague

The
program I selected for this discussion is a support coordination agency
that coordinates services for both adults and children with
developmental disabilities. This program coordinates, advocates and
assist families with program needs and appoints providers to help
program participants be able to improve developmental disabilities or
function in society with them. The program evaluation I would recommend
for agency would be a client satisfaction study. The clients are at the
center of the program and are the reason why the program is in place.
Dudley (2014) states that client satisfaction studies are especially
important when evaluating the implementation of an intervention. By
using a questionnaire, it will help evaluate various dimensions of the
program. The questionnaire would be given to a number people on support
coordinators case load and the providers that work with clients as well.

The
results from client satisfaction questionnaire will provide helpful
insight and other ideas about improving the program or clearing up
client’s misconception of program (Dudley, 2014). If will also be able
to provide insight clients feelings and views of different topics
regarding the program itself. Using this type of program will help
stakeholders examine data about program and their outcomes so that
better decisions can be made about program design or intervention to
address social problem (Logan, et. al., 2010). By using client
satisfaction studies such as the one mentioned, there can be concerns by
stakeholders such as clients being bias. Clients may not be able to be
objective about the providers that are servicing them and can easily
blame the providers for their problems which are more of their own
(Dudley, 2014). Another concern is the accuracy of their responses. Some
clients might put they are more satisfied than they really are. These
concerns are valid but the questionnaires themselves can still give
great insight to what is working and what is not. One way to address
concerns is to give questionnaires out twice a year or when clients
leave the program. It can help it be more reliable and accurate in
regards to client’s views if the intervention is working.

References

Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.

Logan, T. K. & Royse, D. (2010). Program evaluation studies. In B Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2^nd ed., pp. 221-240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (PDF).

2) Andreas – second colleague

Program Summary

The
program I have selected for this project is the In-Circle Program, part
of the Mississippi Department Protective Services. The program is
designed for in-home services to prevent removing children from their
family home and/or advancing the reuniting process with their family.
The central goal of the program is family preservation and reunification
solutions. The primary recipients served by the agency are those
children and pregnant adolescents who are at potential risk of being
removed from their family home and entering into State custody. The
program offers critical intervention (e.g., family-focused team
meetings, case management, and service coordination, one-on-one and
family therapy, trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy, active
parent, and life skills training, among many other vital services).

Recommendation for Program Evaluation

The
possible recommendation for the program would include an outcome-based
evaluation. The In-Circle Program gives direct accountability to the
Department of Child Protective Services and the Canopy Children’s
Solution. The focus program evaluation would be on these families
receiving in-home services directly from the In-Circle Program (Family
Preservation and Reunification., 2018). For example, one might start
working with internal employees who are directly involved with the
families receiving the services; this way, the evaluation would be more
effective since the internal employees would be amicable with the
families, staff, and the actual program (Logan & Royce, 2010). The
program outcomes would reflect on the families being served ultimately
if the program is successful reuniting the family, which is a successful
indication. It might be beneficial to have a face-to-face interview
with the recipients and/or give them a questionnaire that would ask
their opinions on the services they have received. If possible, it might
be necessary to review the documents utilized by the works directly
going into the homes and offering family services. As indicated above,
the program evaluation would essentially show if the program is being
effective or ineffective with its plan.

Concerns of Stakeholders About Proposed Evaluation

An identified stakeholder are those families who are currently
receiving the services. One possible concern with the families is if
their personal private information is being shared with other agencies,
which is a concern. Some of these families may not want to share any of
their information with other organizations or people, especially that
they are the recipients of in-home services. It would be essential to
clarify to these families that it is the social worker’s responsibility
to ensure the confidentiality of all data gathered throughout the
services provided. Social workers should be transparent with clients
informing them, to the degree conceivable, about the release of
classified information and the possible outcomes, when practical before
the exposure is made (Ethics & English 2017). Such clearness would
increase clients’ confidence in the program, being aware that their
information is confidential. Another potential concern is the soundness
of the financial responsibilities of the program evaluation. One would
need to ensure sufficient funds to direct these program assessments,
just as working with child protection services and Canopy Children’s
Solutions. Depending on the financial status, there may be a demand to
acquire grants and other potential available financial assistance for
the program assessment.

Stakeholders may question the accuracy of
the proposed program about the information that has been gathered for
this assessment. Thus, it is crucial to work and evaluate those families
who have finished their in-home services treatment plan. The program’s
accuracy would give an understanding that the services are indeed
useful, or perhaps may require modification in the way the services are
being delivered. This program examination provides a visual roadmap or
outcomes of the program for better decision-making about the
intervention’s execution essentially addressing the immediate social
problems (Logan & Royse, 2010). Another concern might be around the
timing of the measuring outcomes. It would be essential to measure six
months post-intervention and twelve months, post-intervention families.
Immediate results, or those measured at the end of each treatment, may
or may not have the same results as one would get later in six- or
twelve-month follow-up. Outcome effects are usually measured after
treatment or post-intervention (Logan & Royce, 2010).

References

Ethics, C. and English, C. (2017). Code of Ethics: English. [online] Socialworkers.org.

Family Preservation and Reunification. (2018). Retrieved October 06, 2020, from https://mycanopy.org/more-solutions/crisis-solutions/family-preservation-reunification/

Logan, T. K., & Royse, D. (2010). Program evaluation studies. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2^nd ed., pp. 221-240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (PDF).

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form