Robin Franklin Re: Discussion Week 9 Collapse Post

Robin Franklin Re Discussion Week 9c O L L A P S E Post A Descri

Robin Franklin Re Discussion Week 9c O L L A P S E Post A Descri Robin Franklin RE: Discussion - Week 9 C O L L A P S E Post a description of the process evaluation that you chose and explain why you selected this example. Implementation evaluation is primarily concerned with and investigates the procedures and processes established to carry out the program (Dudley, 2014). The process evaluation that I have chosen to assess is linking the intervention to be clients’ problems. An example of the logical link between the causes of a problem and the approach used by a program is the problem of child abuse (Dudley, 2014). Several known causes of child abuse have been identified, including intergenerational transmission (abuse being taught from generation to generation), inadequate parenting skills, stresses associated with poverty, and isolation from important social supports (Dudley, 2014).

Describe the stage of program implementation in which the evaluation occurred, the informants, the questions asked, and the results. Introducing the logic model at the implementation stage provides a framework for considering many ways to improve intervention, to correct its course if needed, and to maintain its quality (Dudley, 2014). The logic model helps identify the client’s unmet needs and focus on the anticipated outcomes or accomplishments. The implementation of the intervention should prioritize the client achieving, said outcomes. According to Dudley (2014), the questions asked should be: 1. Does the program’s approach seem to be directly linked to the clients’ problems? 2. What are the mechanisms for change triggered by the program? 3. How do these mechanisms counteract the existing social processes? 4. What is the evidence that these mechanisms are effective? Based upon your comparison of the case study and the program evaluation report that you chose, improve upon the information presented in the case study by identifying gaps in information. The case study and program evaluation that I have chosen have some similarities. However, the case study focused on individuals of different agencies that would collaborate to identify more multidisciplinary services for clients.

The gaps of the case study were what questions were being asked, where the information is coming from (which agency and who the informants are, such as what position within the agency), is this information coming from the stakeholders or they are coming from individuals who are directly working with the clients. I would like to know what county and the accessibility of the resources for the clients. Resources Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books. Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen S. (Eds.). (2014b). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing. [Vital Source e-reader]. “Social Work Research: Qualitative Groups” (pp. 68–69).

Paper For Above instruction

Program evaluation plays a crucial role in assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of social work interventions. Among various types, process evaluation specifically focuses on examining the procedures, implementation strategies, and mechanisms through which a program achieves its targeted outcomes. The evaluation I have chosen centers on linking interventions to clients’ actual problems, exemplified through a program addressing child abuse. Child abuse is a complex social issue with multifaceted causes, including intergenerational cycles of abuse, inadequate parenting skills, socio-economic stresses, and social isolation. It is essential to evaluate whether the program’s procedures successfully connect these root causes with the intervention strategies employed.

The stage of program implementation during which this evaluation is conducted is pivotal. Typically, evaluation occurs during the implementation phase when the program is operational but still adaptable for modifications. This allows evaluators to identify gaps, strengths, and areas for improvement in real-time. In such a stage, informants often include social workers, program staff, clients, and community stakeholders—individuals directly involved in or affected by the program. The questions asked generally aim to explore the alignment between the intervention approach and the identified problems, mechanisms of change, and evidence of effectiveness. For example, evaluators might ask: Does the program’s approach directly address the causes of child abuse? What mechanisms facilitate change? How do these mechanisms challenge or modify social processes contributing to abuse?

The results of such an evaluation typically reveal whether the intervention’s design is logically connected to the problem, based on data collected from various informants and sources. If gaps are identified, adjustments can be made to strengthen the intervention strategy. For instance, if evaluators find that certain causes like poverty or social isolation are insufficiently addressed, the program can incorporate additional supports or modify its approach.

In comparing the case study and the program evaluation report, several similarities are evident. Both emphasize the importance of understanding the underlying causes of issues such as child abuse and ensuring program strategies are aligned accordingly. However, the case study falls short in providing details about the specific questions asked during evaluation, sources of information, and the roles of informants. This lack of clarity limits the ability to assess the validity and scope of the findings. Furthermore, knowledge about the geographic location—such as the county—and the availability of resources for clients remains unclear, which hampers contextual understanding and resource planning.

To improve upon the case study, I would recommend clarifying the nature of questions posed to informants, specifying whether data was collected from stakeholders or directly from those working with clients. It is also vital to identify the agencies involved, their roles, and their geographic jurisdiction, as this information influences resource accessibility and service delivery. Understanding regional context, such as county-specific issues, is necessary to tailor interventions effectively. These enhancements would provide a more comprehensive and actionable evaluation framework, ensuring programs are more responsive and targeted to the needs of vulnerable populations.

References

• Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.
• Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. (2014). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing.
• Friedman, M. (2011). Logic models and evaluation design. Evaluation and Program Planning, 34(3), 213-222.
• Chen, H. T. (2015). Practical program evaluation: Assessing and improving planning, implementation, and effectiveness. Sage Publications.
• Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Program evaluation: Principles and practice. Sage.
• Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies. Prentice Hall.
• Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation Thesaurus. Sage Publications.
• Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Logic model development guide. W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
• Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation. Sage Publications.
• Chowdhury, Z. & Quinlan, M. (2016). Stakeholder involvement in social program evaluation. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 31(1), 18-29.