Introduction. Following The First Canadian Armed Forces

Better Essays

Following the first Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) deployments in Afghanistan between 2002 and 2004, the Ombudsman made the recommendation to the Departement of National Defence leadership to provide a reintegration and decompression program in support of the military personnel deploying on operations. In response to this recommendation, the Canadian Forces Health Services Group implemented the Third-Location Decompression (TLD) Program (CAF Surgeon General, 2014). All CAF members returning from deployment to Afghanistan must participate in the TLD program in Cyprus. The 5-day program consists of individual free time, structured recreational activities and mental health training program (CAF Surgeon General, 2014).
After a few …show more content…

The second mental health program is a canadian adaptation of the Battlemind, refered to as the “New” program in the article. In general, the training delivery changed from mainly delivered by clinicians, to a joint effort between clinician and non-clinician intructors. The training design was changed to uphold the group cohesion of the deployed team, and the training is more adaptable to different types of military operations (Zamorski, Guest, Bailey, & Garber, 2012).
Type of evaluation
In determining the type of evaluation used in this research, I supposed that the evaluation cannot be formative, because there is no recommendation based on the findings (Posovac, 2011). Then, I hesitated between the summative evaluation and the monitoring one. Firstly, the evaluation could be summative because of the comparison between the old and the new programs, there is no indication in the article stating that the evaluation’s findings will be used to decide amongst the two programs, and the findings could be used for accountability purposes (Posovac, 2011). Secondly, because the new program is a refined program stemming from the quality improvement of the old one, this could be a monitoring evaluation, since the authors only gathered the feedback to confirm that the program was still effective (Posovac, 2011).
Purpose and focus of the evaluation
Since it is not stated in the article, I deduct that the Department of

Get Access