If this was the first run of Maritza’s program, and you conducted a formative evaluation, what would you expect the evaluation to reveal? How would this help Maritza for the future of her program?
A formative evaluation is a process for measuring the results of a program. The evaluation involves a follow-up process for the women who finish the program to establish whether they live according to the set goals. The evaluation process is done over at least three months whereby women and other members of the community are interviewed to establish the nature of social acceptance. In Maritza’s program, the evaluation process would reveal various problems such as social stigma, depression, and parental problems (Royse, Thyer, & Padgett, 2010).
This assertion holds because the program takes a short time, and thus it does not allow a complete change process for the affected women. The women feel neglected after being released from prison, and thus they take a long time to adapt to the program. Therefore, they finish the program while still overwhelmed by the change process. Women often feel depressed by the demands of parenthood whereby they have to take care of their children. Unfortunately, they do not know whether the children are ready to welcome them after incarceration (Mouton, 2009).
The results of the evaluation indicate the need for the extension of Maritza’s program to allow for Prochaska’s or trans-theoretical model of change. The model mentioned above has six stages that require at least six months for the achievement of successful change (McDavid, Huse, & Hawthorn, 2012). Additionally, the model with other stress management and behavioral change techniques will be used. This move will help Maritza because the program will have high chances of producing the desired results, which include helping women overcome social stigma and becoming entrepreneurial as well as being accepted by both the community and members of the family.
If you were to conduct a process evaluation of Maritza’s program, what would your overarching goal(s) be and why?
In conducting a process evaluation, I would consider the primary goals of the program and evaluate the processes used to determine whether they are capable of producing the desired results. The primary goal of Maritza’s program is the creation of self-esteem amongst the affected women for them to face challenges that could arise from society after release from prison. Hence, the processes used in the program should be designed in a way that women are counseled and introduced into activities that enhance self-confidence and ability to take negative responses from the members of the community positively (Mertens & Wilson, 2012).
Additionally, I would focus on the ability of program processes to enable women to build strong characters before they are released into the community. For these women to become good members of society, the program should be designed in a way that they are encouraged to build strong personal characters. Hence, the processes used in the program should incorporate these overarching goals to produce the desired results once the women complete the program (Royse et al., 2010).
Think about some of the objectives of this program. Follow the text’s examples to write two or three effective objectives for this program. If an outcome evaluation were done on those objectives, what would you expect the results to show? How would you know the program is effective in achieving those objectives for their clients?
The primary goal of the program is to produce women who have high self-esteem and ready to continue with their lives once they get back to the community. Moreover, the program aims at helping women become socially responsible by ensuring that they are taught skills that would help them become entrepreneurial to help them get jobs easily that would keep them occupied. If an outcome evaluation were done, I would expect the results to vary from what the program expects them to be since the program takes a short period to accomplish what is intended (Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2010).
First, it would be found that some women suffer the social stigma because the program is too short for them, and they are naturally slow learners. Additionally, the program process does not involve key members of society to encourage them to accept the released women. Second, the program does not enable women to develop personal characters that would help them become socially responsible and fully independent to reduce the chances of them interfering with other members of society. I would know that the program is effective if the evaluation process produced results that indicate that released women are wholly accepted by the community, and they are entrepreneurial-minded.
References
Fitzpatrick, J., Sanders, J., & Worthen, B. (2010). Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines. New York, NY: Pearson.
McDavid, J., Huse, I., & Hawthorn, L. (2012). Program Evaluation and Performance Measurement: An introduction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Mertens, D., & Wilson, A. (2012). Program Evaluation Theory and Practice: A Comprehensive Guide. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Mouton, J. (2009). Assessing the impact of complex social interventions. Journal of Public Administration, 44(4), 849-865.
Royse, D., Thyer, B., & Padgett, D. (2010). Program Evaluation: An Introduction to an Evidence-Based Approach. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.