PROCESS EVALUATION PURPOSE AND TIMING The steps for process evaluation are very

PROCESS EVALUATION PURPOSE AND TIMING
The steps for process evaluation are very similar to those for other types of evaluation; in fact, the purpose and timing of a process evaluation are the elements that most distinguish it. A process evaluation is conducted during the implementation phase of the program to evaluate whether it is being implemented as intended and how delivery can be improved. A process evaluation can also be useful in supporting an outcome evaluation by helping to determine the reason behind program outcomes.
In this Discussion, you review a process evaluation research study and look closely at its timing within the implementation phase, considering whether a different timing would have led to different information.
Required Readings
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.Chapter 8, “Improving How Programs and Practice Work”Read “Implement the Intervention as Proposed” (pp. 175–179).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Types of evaluationLinks to an external site.. https://www.cdc.gov/std/program/pupestd/types%20of…
TSNE. (2018, June 14). Process evaluation vs. outcome evaluationLinks to an external site.. https://www.tsne.org/blog/process-evaluation-vs-ou…
Process Evaluation Studies
Lachman, J. M., Kelly, J., Cluver, L., Ward, C. L., Hutchings, J., & Gardner, F. (2018). Process evaluation of a parenting program for low-income families in South AfricaLinks to an external site.. Research on Social Work Practice, 28(2), 188–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731516645665Vil, C. S., & Angel, A. (2018). A study of a cross-age peer mentoring program on educationally disconnected young adultsLinks to an external site.. Social Work, 63(4), 327–336. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swy033
TO PREPARE
Review the text chapter and informational websites about process evaluation in the Learning Resources.
Review the research articles focusing on process evaluation in the Learning Resources. Select one that produced valuable information and that you would like to analyze for this Discussion.
BY DAY 3
Identify the process evaluation article that you chose and explain why you selected this example.
Describe the purpose of the evaluation, the informants, the questions asked, and the results of the evaluation.
Identify the stage of program implementation in which the evaluation was conducted.
Consider why the researchers chose to evaluate at that stage of program implementation. What kind of information would they have received if they had conducted the evaluation earlier or later?
If you were to replicate the study, would you adjust it in any way for more optimal results?
BY DAY 6
Respond to at least two colleagues who chose a different process evaluation than you did. Respectfully agree or disagree with their analysis of the timing of the process evaluation and their proposal for adjustments.
Response 1 to SJR
The process evaluation article chosen by this researcher is A Study of a Cross-age Peer Mentoring Program on Educationally Disconnected Young Adults by C. S. Vil and A. Angel (2018). This process evaluation was chosen due to this researcher’s interest in the subject of reaching disconnected teenagers or young adults. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine the effectiveness of a program involving cross-age peer monitoring (CAPM) that focuses on high school age students (the mentors) working with students in the 7th grade or below (the mentees). Vil and Angel (2018) note that the focus is not so much on academic deficiencies but more on improving youth development in general. The CAPM program emphasizes the development of both ages of youth groups simultaneously (Vil & Angel, 2018). The informants in this case are the eleven mentors in the program. The questioned asked sought to identify how the program benefitted the mentors and affected, among other things, their worldview (Vil & Angel, 2018). The questions were associated with what the mentors felt they got out of the program, which they identified as being able to give back to the community (Vil & Angel, 2018). Additionally, the program made them feel as if they had something to do that was productive and instilled in the mentors a strong sense of community (Vil & Angel, 2018). The evaluation was done at the end of the program to best determine what kind of effect the program had on the mentor participants. If the study had been conducted earlier, the impact on the mentors might not have been as profound. The only change this researcher would make in the study would be to utilize larger size samples of participants.Resource:Vil, C. S., & Angel, A. (2018). A study of a cross-age peer mentoring program on educationally disconnected young adultsLinks to an external site.Links to an external site.. Social Work, 63(4), 327–336. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swy033
Response 2 to CMF
Process Evaluation ArticleThe article chosen for analysis for this week’s discussion that I chose is the Process Evaluation of a Parenting Program for Low-Income Families in South Africa (Lachman et al., 2018). This article was chosen due to the subject of the study and the relevance to this writer’s career choice in social work practice.Purpose and Details of EvaluationThe evaluation of parenting programs in the low-income community of Cape Town, South Africa was performed to determine if the presence of an evidence-based program developed in a high-income country would be utilized and successful with children in low-income countries to meet the intended goal of reducing child maltreatment (Lachman et al., 2018). The informants were 68 parents in Khayelitsha. Questions asked in the evaluation were “What is the level of participant involvement, implementation, and acceptability of an evidence-informed, group-based parenting program delivered by community facilitators to low-income parents with children aged 3-8 years?, What are the barriers and enablers to program implementation and participant involvement in a low-resource context as perceived by community facilitators and low-income parents?, and how Do South African facilitators and parents perceive the acceptability of a parenting program derived from evidence-based principles and approaches?” (Lachman et al., 2018). The evaluation results concluded that a program developed within a high-income country could be implemented, utilized, and successful in low-income countries (Lachman et al., 2018). Stage of Program EvaluationThe program evaluation occurred during the study, at the formative stage, to determine the program’s feasibility and then at the conclusion with a self-reported satisfaction survey by the participants (Lachman et al., 2018). The researchers evaluated the program at this stage to determine if the program plans were being implemented as intended, if there were any barriers, and if the program was effective (Centers for Disease Control, n.d.). If the researchers had chosen to evaluate the program later, there might be more data on the longevity of the effects of the program implementation on families that participated. Suggested AdjustmentsTo further enhance the successful results of the program, it would be beneficial to contact parents who missed sessions to strengthen the parental support network and engagement in the program. The parents who missed a weekly session were likelier to refrain from engaging in the assigned activities for the in-home practices (Lachman et al., 2018). Ensuring that participants could make up missed sessions that same week could increase participant engagement resulting in a successful programming experience, positively affecting the community. Another area that could be revisited would be supplying all participants with cell phones during the program to create equitable practice within the study to allow all participants to receive weekly text messages to support the required in-home activities of the program (Lachman et al., 2018). References:Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Types of evaluation. https://www.cdc.gov/std/program/pupestd/types%20of%20evaluation.pdfLinks to an external site.Lachman, J. M., Kelly, J., Cluver, L., Ward, C. L., Hutchings, J., & Gardner, F. (2018). Process evaluation of a parenting program for low-income families in South Africa. Research on Social Work Practice, 28(2), 188–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731516645665Links to an external site.