and reach thousands of daily visitors
22 OCTOBER
No 1233
Program evaluation
Program evaluation is an essential component for the improvement, development, and implementation of residential services (Moore & Easton,1987). The information gained through these evaluation procedures can serve to guide policy development, to provide accountability, and to facilitate decision making (Kettner & Daley,1988). The use of residential care facilities has heightened the importance of issues concerning service accountability, quality of care and treatment effectiveness (Ameen & Tobin, 1989; Thomas, 1989). Yet, little information is available on the current trends of evaluation practices in both centre-based and community-based youth care residential settings.
Central to evaluation efforts in youth care settings is the methods used to evaluate the implementation and the impact of these programs (Tobin, 1989). Whittaker, Overstreet, Grasso, Tripodi and Boylan (1988) note that the program evaluation methods vary from facility to facility. The methods are usually based on the approach to intervention rather than on standardized techniques. For example, some youth care agencies may adopt an approach that focuses on process evaluation which monitors quality of care. Process evaluations may include measures, such as percentage of intake, rates of acting out behaviours, and family contacts. Others may use an approach which focuses on product evaluation with an emphasis on program effectiveness (Ameen & Mitchell, 1988). Product evaluations focus on impact and may include measures such as, length of stay, skills acquired, percentage of treatment goals completed, referral source and client satisfaction, and absence of recidivism. Few studies, however, have identified the most prevalent methods used to assess the strengths and weaknesses of these programs across settings.
Indeed, the identification of present evaluation trends across residential youth care settings could lead to the identification and elaboration of standardized assessment procedures. In turn, the use of standardized measures could lead to the development of performance standards to assess program effectiveness in these settings. In addition, this process could render comparative studies across residential settings more feasible.
PAUL BOURQUE, DOUG BRADSHAW AND MAURICE LEBLANC
Bourque, P., Bradshaw, D. and Leblanc, M. A pilot study of evaluation practices in Canadian residential youth care settings. Journal of Child and Youth Care, 10, 1. pp. 33-34.
REFERENCES
Ameen, C., & Mitchell, M. (1988). "Whole days, whole lives: Building competence in child care environment": How do you know when your programs are working? Journal of Child Care (Special Issue Spring), 59-67.
Ameen, C.A., & Tobin, C.L. (1989). Preparing an agency for program evaluation: An administrative perspective. The Child and Youth Care Administrator, 2, 66-72.
Kettner, P.M., & Daley, J.M. (1988). Designing effective programs. Child Welfare, 67,99-111.
Moore, P., & Easton, D. (1987). A blueprint for residential services. Children's Mental Health, 3-5.
Thomas, G. (1989). Keep children's needs paramount: A new era of accountability and opportunity for group residential services. Child and Youth Care Quarterly, 18, 81-92.
Tobin, B. (1989). A model for Child and Youth Care treatment planning. The Child and Youth Care Administrator, 2, 54-77.
Whittaker, J., Overstreet, J., Grasso, A., Tripodi, T. &
Boylan, F. (1988). Multiple indicators of success in residential youth
care and treatment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 58,
143-147.
