Program Planning and Evaluation Paper Hsm/270

Budgets and Planning. To begin with, the program, like the organization, fosters an open and collaborative environment for the process to take place. In this regard, it is, therefore, impossible for any one space or environment to be able to accommodate every conceivable project or application that is “thought up”. Therefore, certain perimeters and guidelines need to be established to assess costs with the program and help determine a course of action in future planning. As we are discussing costs, we assume there is a

Policy evaluation applies accepted social science research methods to public programs. The same research designs used in laboratory experiments are not always practicable in the field, but the same principles can guide the planning and execution of policy evaluation.

When an organization starts to make decision about the programs it will offer they have to start thinking about the processes and outcomes they want to use and achieve through their program. They need to find the best ways to run their program that follows their mission and produces outcomes that help support that same mission. Process and outcome evaluations in a human service setting help the organization to better understand the outcomes of their programs and the processes in which the outcomes came. (Yuen, Terao, 2003) This paper will walk you through an explanation and outline of a process and outcome evaluation plan for the PEACE Domestic Violence Agency. This process and outcome evaluation plan would be helpful in the organizations

Clegg and Smart (2010) noted that the term outcome measurement process is often interchangeable with achievement, goal, objective and indicator. Furthermore, Clegg and Smart (2010) went on to identify these terms, goals, outcomes present as essential elements to assist in identification of relevant data for program evaluation. Definitions of terms recognizes that goals are a broad statement of the ultimate aims of the program, outcomes are the changes in the lives of recipients, organization communities and those impacted by the program, and indicators indentifies specific, measurable information that can be collected or tracked to show that outcomes have occurred (Clegg & Smart, 2010).

According to Arthur Garrison (2009), Criminal justice policy research seeks to provide assessment and analysis of crime and provide strategies for its reduction. Policy making in criminal justice needs to utilize the formal evaluation process rather than decision-theoretic evaluation and pseudoevaluation. The reason that I chose this evaluation process model is that it is the only one of the three that monitors a policy through various stages of the life cycle of the policy, frequent and longer cycles; summative and formative. Policies cannot just be implemented and monitored in criminal justice. Formal evaluations bring a check and balances system to the evaluation process through developmental evaluation, retrospective process evaluation, experimental evaluation and retrospective evaluation. These policies that are implemented need to be monitored and subject to a vigorous

Increasing the role of evaluation and research in criminal justice policy would require a multifaceted approach and the cooperation of policymakers and criminal justice agencies. First jurisdictions would be required to assess their current crime problems to determine their need for certain policies. Then agencies need to be required to allocate a certain amount of their budget to evaluation of their current policies. A major hindrance in evaluating policy is the lack of resources to do so. If agencies were federally mandated to spend a certain amount of funding on evaluation and research then it is possible that policymakers could create more informed and effective policy. In addition a certain amount of funding would also have to be allocated to full implementation of polices. When policies rooted in theory are created they are expected to be successful, but they often falter due to their incorrect or lack of implementation (Mears, 2007). Although increasing the amount of funds spent on research and evaluation may seem problematic it has the potential to help avoid the

Health promotion program evaluation is a process of judging the worth of the activity or the program. The evaluation process could be influenced by many factors. These factors as undefined program goals and outcome measures or objectives, lack of the program plan or logical model, lack of accurate documentation, the interest and concerns of the program’s stakeholders, the program complexity, the available resources for evaluation, method of measuring, etc. (Public Health Ontario, 2016)

The scope and purpose helps to determine the design of the process and which evaluation measures will work best for the organization and situation. Determining the scope and purpose lays the foundation for the evaluation. There are three variables that need to be addressed when figuring out the scope and purpose. The first variable is to determine the resources and expertise available for use in evaluations. The second variable is to determine the purposes for the evaluations results. The third variable is orientations and philosophies guiding the agency decision makers. Specific to the Greenby Community Mental Health Center concerning the first variable: the department is already in place, the funding is already in place, and there are already employees in this department. The purpose for the evaluation is to determine if the Consultation and Education Department

Program evaluation is a system that determines a program’s effectiveness and efficiency. This means whatever the programs expectations are must be kept. Efficiency is measured by the outcomes that are achieved with effort, limited time and additional resources. Excellent program evaluation includes subjective or objective information based on many different options. Human Services programs are important to evaluate for numerous reasons. The program can save time by finding out what works or doesn’t work for them. Making the community more aware of the program and how it benefits participants. The ability to prove the program’s effectiveness can help raise additional funding. The staff of the agency will be able to identify strengths and weakness. Also, bring more awareness to the Human Services field by educating other programs how to get started.

According to Mertens and Wilson, program evaluation is a systematic method for collecting, analyzing, and using information to answer questions about projects, policies and programs, particularly about their effectiveness and efficiency. Stakeholders often want to know whether the programs they are funding and supporting are effective. While program evaluation first focuses on the effectiveness of the program, other important factors to take into consideration is cost of the program, improvements that could be made, outcomes of the program, and usefulness of the program. Evaluators help to answer these questions, and stakeholders have to work with the evaluators in order to come to the best conclusion about the effectiveness of a program so that all aspects are taken into consideration. Program evaluations can involve both quantitative and qualitative methods of research. People who do program evaluation come from many different backgrounds, such as sociology, psychology, economics, social work, and public policy. Some graduate schools also have specific training programs for program evaluation.

Melinda Moore is the owner of M K Associates, a program evaluation and research firm. Formerly, Ms. Moore was a Senior Associate of bother the URSA Institute, and Polaris Research and Development. She has over twenty years of consulting experience in San Francisco, CA and Washington, DC. She is skilled in survey research, program development and design, quantitative and qualitative data analyses, evaluation, organizational analysis, and training and technical assistance to public and private agencies. Ms. Moore is experienced in the design and conduct of program evaluation and public policy research. She has served as Principal Investigator and Project Director for a variety of state, local, and national contracts in such diverse fields as

Program evaluation is an important tool to show that the health interventions have been effective and they also intend to improve the health of the target population. Evaluation helps define the worth of a program. It is imperative to conduct program evaluation in order to provide feedback to improve the effectiveness of the program. Evaluation plans should be developed at the beginning of the health program interventions. The CDC framework for program evaluation is comprised of the following steps:1) Engage stakeholders; 2) Describe the program; 3) Focus on evaluation design; 4) Gather credible evidence; 5) Justify conclusions; 6) Ensure use and share lessons learned. Also listed are the four standards for assessing the quality of evaluation activities: utility, feasibility, propriety, and accuracy (CDC, 2013). According to an article

Implementation evaluation can be used if a new program is being started or if it is determined that an existing program initial goal is not being met (Mertens & Wilson, 2012). Utilizing implementation evaluation encompasses the following; responsive, monitoring, developmental, formulation participatory, and process (Mertens & Wilson, 2012). Furthermore, implementation evaluations asks questions such as; did the program fall in alignment with the plan or there any changes that need to be made in administrative or participant screening (Mertens & Wilson, 2012)?

In community nursing, nurses function in much the same way as they would with one client when promoting health and preventing disease, except they must think on a larger scale. Nurses can have a more immediate interaction and feedback with one client in a health care setting. In a community setting, there needs to be additional time for planning and evaluation before the community can utilize the feedback.

The first hurdle that has to be taken is to convince a senior leadership team to pursue the program, knowing very well that some of them are sceptical and do not take the program very seriously, since they think that the program that will lose interest very soon. In order to convince this team one could show them studies that investigated the results of the program. If this program produced impressive positive results in other facilities, there would be a couple of studies that supported this conclusion. One could also evaluate the population of the facility and seeing that it was similar to the populations that benefitted from the new program, would argue that it is applicable to this specific facility. Further, one could also look at the recidivism rates of those offenders that completed the program. If the recidivism decreased it could be argued that this program would help re-socialise inmates and prevent them from returning to the system. The program could also affect the inmate 's