Discussion 1: Reporting a Process Evaluation

Discussion 1: Reporting a Process Evaluation

Permalink: https://collepals.com/discussion-1-rep…ocess-evaluation/ ‎

SOCW 6311 & 6070 Wk 9 Discussions

Discussion 1: Reporting a Process Evaluation

Discussion 1: Reporting a Process Evaluation

Just as in needs assessments, interviews and focus groups are common tools for obtaining information about the processes involved in the implementation of programs. Process evaluation should include specifics about purpose, questions which the evaluation will address, and methods that social workers will use to conduct evaluations.

Review the many examples of process evaluation results described in Chapter 8 of Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books, or in the optional resources. Select an example of a process evaluation that produced valuable information. Compare the description of those results with the Social Work Research Qualitative Groups case study located in this week’s resources.

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL, A-LEVEL NURSING ASSIGNMENT PAPER AT A 5% DISCOUNT!!! Discussion 1: Reporting a Process Evaluation

· Post a description of the process evaluation that you chose and explain why you selected this example. 

· Describe the stage of program implementation in which the evaluation occurred, the informants, the questions asked, and the results.

· 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.

· Fill in these gaps as if you were the facilitator of the focus group. Clearly identify the purpose of the process evaluation and the questions asked.

References (use 3 or more)

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

Chapter 8, “Improving How Programs and Practice Work” (pp. 167–207)

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].

Read the following section:

“Social Work Research: Qualitative Groups” (pp. 68–69)

Document: Bliss, M. J., & Emshoff, J. G. (2002). Workbook for designing a process evaluation. Retrieved from http://beta.roadsafetyevaluation.com/evaluationguides/info/workbook-for-designing-a-process-evaluation.pdf (PDF)

Georgia Department of Human Resources, Division of Public Health.

Example of Process Evaluation

Boyce, C., & Neale, P. (2006). Conducting in-depth interviews: A guide for designing and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input. Pathfinder International Tool Series: Monitoring and Evaluation – 2. Retrieved from http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/training/materials/data-quality-portuguese/m_e_tool_series_indepth_interviews.pdf

Social Work Research: Qualitative Groups

A focus group was conducted to explore the application of a cross-system collaboration and its effect on service delivery outcomes among social service agencies in a large urban county on the West Coast. The focus group consisted of 10 social workers and was led by a facilitator from the local office of a major community support organization (the organization). Participants in the focus group had diverse experiences working with children, youth, adults, older adults, and families. They represented agencies that addressed child welfare, family services, and community mental health issues. The group included five males and five females from diverse ethnicities.

The focus group was conducted in a conference room at the organization’s headquarters. The organization was interested in exploring options for greater collaboration and less fragmentation of social services in the local area. Participants in the group were recruited from local agencies that were either already receiving or were applying for funding from the organization. The 2-hour focus group was recorded.

The facilitator explained the objective of the focus group and encouraged each participant to share personal experiences and perspectives regarding cross-system collaboration. Eight questions were asked that explored local examples of cross-system collaboration and the strengths and barriers found in using the model. The facilitator tried to achieve maximum participation by reflecting the answers back to the participants and maintaining eye contact.

To analyze the data, the researchers carefully transcribed the entire recorded discussion and utilized a qualitative data analysis software package issued by StatPac, which offers a product called Verbatim Blaster. This software focuses on content coding and word counting to identify the most salient themes and patterns.

The focus group was seen by the sponsoring entity as successful because every participant eventually provided feedback to the facilitator about cross-system collaboration. It was also seen as a success because the facilitator remained engaged and nonjudgmental and strived to have each participant share their experiences.

In terms of outcomes, the facilitator said that the feedback obtained was useful in exploring new ways of delivering services and encouraging greater cooperation. As a result of this process, the organization decided to add a component to all agency annual plans and reports that asked them to describe what types of cross-agency collaboration were occurring and what additional efforts were planned.

(Plummer 68-69)

Plummer, Sara-Beth, Sara Makris, Sally Brocksen. Social Work Case Studies: Concentration Year. Laureate Publishing, 10/21/13. VitalBook file.

Discussion 2: Social Work Agency Budgeting

Human services organizations cannot work in isolation because of the breadth and depth of social issues they address in their mission to provide services. By partnering with other organizations in the community, human services organizations can expand their service delivery. These community partners can complement the work of the social work agency and help raise additional funds for services. Strategic partnerships are not limited to nonprofit organizations; human services organizations may also work with local businesses. When considering community partners, administrators and leaders should keep an open mind and think about unique partnerships that will benefit the community.

For this Discussion, search for examples in your local community of partnerships between human services organizations and local businesses and/or nonprofits. (You may review the partnership example described at the top of page 306 in Understanding Your Social Agency, 3rd ed.) Consider how the human services organizations, nonprofits, businesses, and community benefit from these partnerships. Also consider limitations to these collaborative endeavors.

· Post a description of examples in your local community of partnerships between human services organizations and local businesses and/or nonprofits that benefit the community.

· Analyze the collaboration to identify aspects that provide benefits that go beyond the initial collaborative effort. 

· Explain how these aspects may benefit the human services organization.

· In addition, identify aspects of the collaboration that may lead to challenges, and explain how they may challenge the human services organization.

References (use 3 or more)

Lauffer, A. (2011). Understanding your social agency (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Sage.

Chapter 9, “Fundraising and Development” (pp. 285–320)

Bowman, W. (2011). Financial capacity and sustainability of ordinary nonprofits. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 22(1), 37–51.

LeRoux, K. (2009). Managing stakeholder demands: Balancing responsiveness to clients and funding agents in nonprofit social service organizations. Administration & Society, 41(2), 158–184.

Discussion 3: Financial Capacity and Sustainability in Human Services

Receiving funding from a grant or other source of funds is a great accomplishment. Once the funding is received, the human services organization must be able to manage the funds effectively. The organization must also develop a plan to sustain the program after the funding period ends or the potential for change from the funded program may be limited. One way to determine an organization’s capacity for fundraising and/or financial management is to assess its strengths and weaknesses in these areas and consider ways to improve. This type of assessment should be undertaken before the organization begins to actively seek funds.

For this Discussion, you will evaluate an aspect of financial management or fundraising efforts in a human services organization with which you are familiar. Refer to the inventory tool on page 319 of Understanding Your Social Agency, 3rd ed., for ideas on how to evaluate an organization’s fundraising efforts.

· Post your brief description of an organization with which you are familiar (e.g., a field placement, a previous employer) and evaluate one area of the organization’s financial management or fundraising that needs improving, and explain why. 

· Explain three strategies the organization could implement to improve its financial management or fundraising situation.

· Explain how each strategy supports improvement.

References (use 3 or more)

Lauffer, A. (2011). Understanding your social agency (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Sage.

Chapter 9, “Fundraising and Development” (pp. 285–320)

Bowman, W. (2011). Financial capacity and sustainability of ordinary nonprofits. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 22(1), 37–51.

LeRoux, K. (2009). Managing stakeholder demands: Balancing responsiveness to clients and funding agents in nonprofit social service organizations. Administration & Society, 41(2), 158–184. Discussion 1: Reporting a Process Evaluation