Program Theory and Logic Model

Program_Evaluation_for_Social_Workers_Foundations_..._----_Cover1.pdf

Home >Social Science homework help >Program Theory and Logic Model

141

C h a p t e r

THE PROGR AM

W ith the background of the previous six chap- ters in mind, you’re now in an excellent posi- tion to see how social work programs are

actually designed. Remember, your evaluation will be done within a program so you have no other alterna- tive but to understand how your evaluation will be influenced by its design.

We begin this chapter with the immediate envi- ronment of your program—the larger organization that it’s housed within, commonly referred to as a social service agency.

THE AGENCY

A social service agency is an organization that exists to fill a legitimate social purpose such as:

• To protect children from physical, sexual, and emotional harm

• To enhance quality of life for developmentally delayed adolescents

• To improve nutritional health for housebound senior citizens

Agencies can be public and funded entirely by the state and/or federal government or private and funded by private funds, deriving some monies from govern- mental sources and some from client fees, charitable bodies, private donations, fund-raising activities, and so forth. It’s common for agencies to be funded by many different types of funding sources. When sev- eral sources of funding are provided to an agency, the agency’s funds (in their totality) are called “blended

funds.” Regardless of the funding source(s), agencies obtain their unique identities by their:

• Mission statements • Goals

Mission Statements

All agencies have mission statements that provide the unique written philosophical perspective of what they are all about and make explicit the reasons for their existence. Mission statements sometimes are called philosophical statements or simply an agency’s philos- ophy. Whatever it’s called, a mission statement articu- lates a common vision for the agency in that it provides a point of reference for all major planning decisions.

You cannot do a meaningful evaluation of a social work program without first knowing how the program has been designed around its mission statement.

A mission statement is like a lighthouse in that it exists to provide a general direction. It not only pro- vides clarity of purpose to persons within the agency but also helps them to gain an understanding and support from the stakeholders outside the agency who are unquestionably influential to the agency’s overall success (see Chapter 1).

Mission statements are usually given formal approval and sanction by legislators for public agen- cies or by executive boards for private ones. They can range from one sentence to 10 pages or more and are as varied as the agencies they represent such as,

7 A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.

~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

Grinnell, R. M., Gabor, P. A., & Unrau, Y. A. (2015). Program evaluation for social workers : Foundations of evidence-based programs. Oxford University Press, Incorporated. Created from capella on 2023-01-30 18:20:46.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

142 Par t II: Designing Programs

• This agency strives to provide a variety of support services to families and children in need, while in the process maintaining their rights, their safety, and their human dignity.

• The mission of this agency is to promote and protect the mental health of the elderly people residing in this state by offering quality and timely programs that will deliver these services.

• The mission of this agency is to treat clients as partners in their therapy, and all services should be short-term, intensive, and focus on problems in day-to-day life and work.

• The mission of this agency is to protect and promote the physical and social well-being of this city by ensuring the development and delivery of culturally competent services that encourage and support individual, family, and community independence, self-reliance, and civic responsibility to the greatest degree possible.

In short, an agency’s mission statement lays the overall conceptual foundation for all of the programs housed within it because each program (soon to be discussed) must be logically connected to the over- arching intent of the agency as declared by its mission statement. Note that mission statements capture the general type of clients to be served as well as com- municate the essence of the services they offer their clients. Creating mission statements is a process of bringing interested stakeholders together to agree on the overall direction and tone of the agency.

A mission statement articulates a common vision for the agency in that it provides a point of reference for all major planning decisions.

The process of creating mission statements is affected by available words in a language as well as the meaning given to those words by individual stakeholders. Because mission statements express the broad intention of an agency, they set the stage for all program planning within the agency and are essential to the development of the agency’s goal.

Goals

As should be evident by now, social service agencies are established in an effort to reduce gaps between the current and the desired state of a social problem for a specific client population. Mission statements can be lofty and include several philosophical declarations, but the agency goal is more concise; there is only one goal per agency. An agency’s goal is always defined at a conceptual level, and it’s never measured directly. Its main ambition is to guide us toward effective and accountable service delivery.

Requirements for Goals

It’s essential that an agency’s goal reflects the agency’s mandate and is guided by its mission state- ment. This is achieved by forming a goal with the fol- lowing four components:

1. The nature of the current social problem to be tackled

2. The client population to be served 3. The general direction of anticipated client

change (desired state) 4. The means by which the change is supposed

to be brought about

Agency goals can be broad or narrow. Let’s look at two generic examples:

• Agency Goal—National: The goal of this agency is to enhance the quality of life of this nation’s families (client population to be served) who depend on public funds for day-to-day living (social problem to be tackled). The agency supports reducing long-term dependence on public funds (general direction of anticipated client change) by offering innovative programs that increase the self-sufficiency and employability of welfare-dependent citizens (means by which the change is supposed to be brought about).

• Agency Goal—Local: The goal of this agency is to help youth from low socioeconomic households in this city (client population to be served) who are dropping out of school (current social problem to be tackled) to stay

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Chapter 7: The Program 143

in school (general direction of anticipated client change) by providing mentorship and tutoring programs in local neighborhoods (means by which the change is supposed to be brought about).

As discussed in Chapter 1, national agencies, for example, are clearly broader in boundary and size than local ones. Additionally, more complex agencies such as those serving multiple client populations or addressing multiple social problems will capture a more expansive population or problem area in their goal statements.

An agency’s goal statement must be broad enough to encompass all of its programs; that is, each program within an agency must have a direct and logical connection to the agency that governs it.

However small or large, an agency functions as a single entity and the agency’s goal statement serves to unify all of its programs.

THE PROGRAM

Whatever the current social problem, the desired future state of the problem, or the population that the agency wishes to serve, an agency sets up programs to help work toward its intended result—the agency’s goal. There are as many ways to organize social service programs as there are people willing to be involved in the task. And just about everyone has an opinion on how agencies should structure the programs housed within them.

Mapping out the relationship among programs is a process that is often obscured by the fact that the term program can be used to refer the different lev- els of service delivery within an agency (e.g., Figures 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3, ). In other words, some programs can be seen as subcomponents of larger ones; for exam- ple, in Figure 7.3, “Public Awareness Services” falls under the “Nonresidential Program” for the Women’s Emergency Shelter.

Figure 7.1 presents a simple structure of a fam- ily service agency serving families and children. Each program included in the Family Service Agency is expected to have some connection to serving fami- lies. The Family Support Program and the Family Counseling Program have an obvious connection, given their titles. The Group Home Program, how- ever, has no obvious connection; its title reveals noth- ing about who resides in the group home or for what purpose.

Because the Group Home Program operates under the auspices of “family services,” it’s likely that it temporarily houses children and youth who even- tually will return to their families. Most important, the agency does not offer programs that are geared toward other target groups such as the elderly, veter- ans, refugees, or the homeless.

By glancing at Figure 7.1, it can be easily seen that this particular family service agency has five pro- grams within it that deal with families and children,

Family Service Agency

Group Home Program

Family Counseling Program

Adoption Program

Treatment Foster Care Progam

Family Support Program

Figure 7.1: Simple organizational chart of a family service agency.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

144 Par t II: Designing Programs

the agency’s target population: a group home program for children, a family counseling program, a child adoption program, a treatment foster care program, and a family support program.

Figure 7.2 provides another example of an agency that also deals with families and children. This agency (Richmond Family Services) has only two pro- grams, a Behavioral Adaptation Treatment Program and a Receiving and Assessment Family Home Program. The latter is further broken down into two components—a Family Support Component and a Receiving and Assessment Component. In addition, the Receiving and Assessment Component is further broken down into Crisis Support Services, Child Care Services, and Family Home Provider Services.

How many programs are there in Figure 7.2? The answer is two—however, we need to note that this agency conceptualized its service delivery much more thoroughly than did the agency outlined in Figure 7.1. Richmond Family Services has conceptu- alized the Receiving and Assessment Component of its Receiving and Assessment Family Home Program into three separate subcomponents: Crisis Support

Services, Child Care Services, and Family Home Provider Services. In short, Figure 7.2 is more detailed in how it delivers its services than is the agency rep- resented in Figure 7.1. Programs that are more clearly defined are generally easier to implement, operate, and evaluate.

Another example of how programs can be orga- nized under an agency is presented in Figure 7.3. This agency, the Women’s Emergency Shelter, has a Residential Program and a Nonresidential Program. Its Residential Program has Crisis Counseling Services and Children’s Support Services, and the Nonresidential Program has Crisis Counseling Services and Public Awareness Services. This agency distinguishes the services it provides between the women who stay within the shelter (its Residential Program) and those who come and go (its Nonresidential Program). The agency could have conceptualized the services it offers in a number of different ways.

A final example of how an agency can map out its services is presented in Figure 7.4. As can be seen, the agency’s Child Welfare Program is broken down

Richmond Family Services

Behavioral Adaption Treatment Program

Receiving and Assessment Family Home Program

Family Support Component Receiving and Assessment Component

Crisis Support Services

Child Care Services

Family Home Provider Services

Figure 7.2: Organizational chart of a family service agency (highlighting the Receiving and Assessment Family Home Program).

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Chapter 7: The Program 145

into three services, and the Native Child Protection Services is further subdivided into four compo- nents: an Investigation Component, a Family Service Child in Parental Care Component, a Family Services Child in Temporary Alternate Care Component, and a Permanent Guardianship Component.

The general rule of ensuring that programs within an agency are logically linked together may seem simple enough that you might be wondering why we are emphasizing this point. The reality is that way too many programs are added to agencies on a haphazard, chaotic, and disorganized basis. This is because new programs spring out of last-minute funding opportunities that come available for new, but totally dissimilar, programs (to the agency’s goal, that is). While a social service administrator must constantly seek new resources to provide better and/ or additional services within the agency’s programs, it’s important that new and additional programs do not compromise existing ones.

By simply glancing at Figures 7.1–7.4 it can be seen that how an agency labels its programs and sub- programs is arbitrary. For example, the agency that represents Figure 7.2 labels its subprograms as com- ponents and its sub-subprograms as services. The agency that represents Figure 7.3 simply labels its subprograms as services. The main point is that an

agency must design its programs, components, and services in a logical way that makes the most sense in view of the agency’s overall goal, which is guided by its mission statement and mandate.

Naming Programs

There is no standard approach to naming programs in the social services, but there are themes that may assist with organizing an agency’s programs. We pres- ent four themes and suggest, as a general rule, that you pick only one (or one combination) to systemati- cally name all of its programs:

• Function, such as Adoption Program or Family Support Program

• Setting, such as Group Home Program or Residential Program

• Target population, such as Services for the Handicapped Program

• Social problem, such as Child Sexual Abuse Program or Behavioral Adaptation Treatment Program

Program names can include acronyms such as P.E.T. (Parent Effectiveness Training), IY (Incredible Years: A Parent Training Program), or catchy titles such as Incredible Edibles (a nutritional program for children). The appeal of such program names is that

Women's Emergency Shelter

Residential Program

Crisis Counseling Services

Children's Support Services

Nonresidential Program

Crisis Counseling Services

Public Awareness Services

Figure 7.3: Organizational chart of a women’s emergency shelter.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

146 Par t II: Designing Programs

they are endearing to the program’s staff and clients alike who only are familiar with the program’s ser- vices in the first place. Other’s will not have clue to what the program is all about. However, unless the chic acronym (the program’s name) is accompanied by a substantial marketing strategy, the program will go unnoticed by the general public, other social service providers, potential funders, and potential clients alike.

Therefore, the primary purpose of a program should be reflected in the program’s name. Including the target social problem (or the main client need) in the program’s name simplifies communication of a program’s purpose. In this way, a program’s name is linked to its goal, and there is less confusion about what services it offers.

Nondescript program names can lead to con- fusion in understanding a program’s purpose. The Group Home Program in Figure 7.1, for example, sug- gests that this program aims to provide a residence for clients. In fact, all clients residing in the group home

are there to fulfill a specific purpose. Depending on the goal of the program, the primary purpose could be to offer shelter and safety for teenage runaways. Or the program’s aim might be the enhanced function- ing of adolescents with developmental disabilities, for example.

An Agency Versus a Program

What’s the difference between an agency and a pro- gram? Like an agency, a program is an organization that also exists to fulfill a social purpose. There is one main difference, however: a program has a nar- rower, better defined purpose and is always nested within an agency. Nevertheless, sometimes an agency may itself have a narrow, well-defined pur- pose. The sole purpose of a counseling agency, for example, may be to serve couples who struggle with a sexual dysfunction.

In this case, the agency comprises only one pro- gram, and the terms agency and program refer to the same thing. If the clientele happens to include a high

Social Services (Region A)

Income Security Program

Child Welfare Program

Child Protection Services

Native Child Protection Services

Investigation Component

Family Service Child in Paretnal Care Component

Family Service Child in Temporary Alternate Care Component

Permanent Guardianship Component

Placement & Counseling Services

Services for the Handicapped Program

Figure 7.4: Organizational chart of a state’s social service delivery system (highlighting the Native Child Protection Services).

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Chapter 7: The Program 147

proportion of couples who are infertile, for example, it may later be decided that some staff members should specialize in infertility counseling (with a physician as a co-counselor) while other workers continue to deal with all other aspects of sexual dysfunction.

In this case, there would then be two distinct sets of social work staff (or the same staff who provide two distinct independent interventions), each focusing on a different goal, and two separate types of clients; that is, there would be two programs (one geared toward infertility counseling and the other toward sexual dysfunction). Creating programs that target specific problems and populations facilitates the develop- ment of evidence-based knowledge because workers can hone the focus of their professional development on specialized knowledge and skills. However, the agency, with its board, its senior administrator (exec- utive director), and its administrative policies and procedures, would remain as a single entity.

DESIGNING PROGRAMS

Building or creating a social work program involves general and specific thinking about a program. The process begins by articulating a program’s general intentions for solving identified social problems—the conceptualization or idea of the program’s purpose. It also involves setting specific plans for how the pro- gram is to accomplish what it sets out to do.

A program for children who are sexually aggres- sive, for example, may aim to reduce the deviant sex- ual behavior of its young clients (i.e., the intention) by providing individual counseling (i.e., the plan for achieving the intention). A major purpose of a pro- gram’s design is to easily communicate a model of service delivery to interested stakeholders. A pro- gram’s design, via the use of a logic model, provides a blueprint for implementing its services, monitoring its activities, and evaluating both its operations and achievements.

Program designs present plausible and logical plans for how programs aim to produce change for their cli- ents. Therefore, implicit in every program logic model

is the idea of theory—an explanation for how client change is suppose to be brought about (to be discussed in depth in the following chapter). The program for chil- dren who are sexually aggressive, for example, suggests that such children will reduce their sexual perpetration by gaining understanding or insight through sessions with an individual counselor. Programs that articulate a specific theoretical approach, such as psychoanalytic or behavior counseling, make their program theory more explicit. And, the more explicit, the better.

Figure 7.5 displays the four major components that are used to describe how programs deliver their services.

Box 7.1 displays a concise example of how the logic of Figure 7.5 is actually carried out within an evidence-based family support program. Included are:

• Program’s goal • Mission statement • Three of the program’s objectives (with

literary support) • Workers’ sample activities to meet program

objectives

Evidence-Based Programs

The knowledge we need to evaluate our programs is generally derived from your social work courses. There are many evidence-based interventions, or pro- grams, in use today. All of them have been evaluated, to various degrees. Some have been evaluated in a rigorous manner—some less so. Some are very effec- tive (e.g., Incredible Years) and some are downright dreadful (e.g., Scared Straight). The point is, however, that they all have been evaluated and have provided evidence of their degree of effectiveness. Go to the following websites to get a flavor of what social work programs are about and how they have been evaluated to be labeled “evidence based:”

• The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s Model Programs Guide http://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg

• National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

http://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg

http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov

148 Par t II: Designing Programs

• Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints

• Center for the Study of Social Policy http://www.cssp.org

• Promising Practices Network on Children, Families, and Communities http://www.promisingpractices.net/ programs.asp

• Social Programs That Work http://evidencebasedprograms.org

• Social Development Research Group http://www.sdrg.org/rhcsummary.asp#6

• The Campbell Collaboration: C2-Ripe Library http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/ selected_presentations/index.php

• The Cochrane Library http://www.thecochranelibrary.com/view/0/ index.html

• National Prevention Dropout Center http://www.dropoutprevention.org

• What Works Clearinghouse http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc

• Performance Well http://www.performwell.org

• Center for AIDS Prevention Studies (CAPS) http://caps.ucsf.edu

• Positive Behavior Supports and Interventions http://www.pbisworld.com

• Expectant and Parenting Youth in Foster Care: A Resource Guide 2014 http://www.cssp.org/reform/child-welfare/ pregnant-and-parenting-youth/Expectant- and-Parenting-Youth-in-Foster-Care_A- Resource-Guide.pdf

Selecting an Evidence-Based Program

As you can see from that preceding websites, there are hundreds of evidenced-based social work programs that you can implement within your agency. We suggest that all agencies should consider imple- menting evidence-based programs whenever possible. The following are 23 criteria that you need to consider when selecting one to implement within your local community’s social service delivery system:

Program match 1. How well do the program’s goals and

objectives reflect what your agency hopes to achieve?

2. How well do the program’s goals match those of your intended participants?

3. Is the program of sufficient length and intensity (i.e., “strong enough”) to be effective with your particular group of participants?

Program Goal and Mission

Statement

Pr og

ra m

Le ve

Se rv

ic e

Co nc

ep tu

al iza

tio n

Ca se

Le ve

Program Objectives (including measurements)

Practice Activities

Practice Objectives

Figure 7.5: How a program’s services are conceptualized from the case level to the program level.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints

http://www.cssp.org

http://www.promisingpractices.net/programs.asp

http://evidencebasedprograms.org

http://www.sdrg.org/rhcsummary.asp#6

http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/selected_presentations/index.php

http://www.thecochranelibrary.com/view/0/index.html

http://www.dropoutprevention.org

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc

http://www.performwell.org

http://caps.ucsf.edu

http://www.pbisworld.com

http://www.cssp.org/reform/child-welfare/pregnant-and-parenting-youth/Expectant-and-Parenting-Youth-in-Foster-Care_A-Resource-Guide.pdf

Chapter 7: The Program 149

4. Are your potential participants willing and able to make the time commitment required by the program?

5. Has the program demonstrated effectiveness with a target population similar to yours?

6. To what extent might you need to adapt this program to fit the needs of your local community? How might such adaptations affect the effectiveness of the program?

7. Does the program allow for adaptation? 8. How well does the program complement

current programming both in your orga- nization and in your local community?

Program quality 9. Has this program been shown to be

effective? What is the quality of this evidence?

10. Is the level of evidence sufficient for your organization?

11. Is the program listed on any respected evidence‐based program registries? What rating has it received on those registries?

12. For what audiences has the program been found to work?

13. Is there information available about what adaptations are acceptable if you

BOX 7.1 EXAMPLE OF AN EVIDENCE-BASED FAMILY SUPPORT INTERVENTION (FROM FIGURE 7.5)

Program Goal

The goal of the Family Support Program is to help children who are at risk for out-of-home placement due to physical abuse (current social problem to be tackled) by providing intensive home-based services (means by which the change is supposed to be brought about) that will strengthen the interpersonal functioning (desired state) of all family members (client population to be served)

Mission Statement

This program strives to provide a variety of support services to families and children in need while also maintaining their rights, their safety, and their human dignity.

Program Objectives

1. Increase positive social support for parents by the end of the fourth week after the start of the intervention.

• Literary Support: A lack of positive social support has been repeatedly linked to higher risk for child abuse. Studies show that parents with greater social support and less stress report more pleasure in their parenting roles. • Sample of Activities: Refer to support groups;

evaluate criteria for positive support; introduce to community services; reconnect clients with friends and family. • Measuring Instrument: Social Support Scale.

2. Increase problem-solving skills for family members by the end of the eighth week after the start of the intervention.

• Literary Support: Problem-solving is a tool for breaking difficult dilemmas into manageable pieces. Enhancing individuals’ skills in systematically addressing problems increases the likelihood that they will successfully tackle new problems as they arise. Increasing problem-solving skills for parents and children equips family members to handle current problems, anticipate and prevent future ones, and advance their social functioning. • Sample of Activities: Teach steps to

problem-solving; role play problem-solving scenarios; use supportive counseling. • Measuring Instrument: The Problem-Solving

Inventory. 3. Increase parents’ use of noncorporal child management

strategies by the end of the intervention.

• Literary Support: Research studies suggest that deficiency in parenting skills is associated with higher recurrence of abuse. Many parents who abuse their children have a limited repertoire of ways to discipline their children. • Sample of Activities: Teach noncorporal discipline

strategies; inform parents about the criminal implications of child abuse; assess parenting strengths; and provide reading material about behavior management.

• Measuring Instrument: Checklist of Discipline Strategies.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

150 Par t II: Designing Programs

do not implement this program exactly as designed? Is adaptation assistance available from the program’s developer?

14. What is the extent and quality of training offered by the program’s developers?

15. Do the program’s designers offer technical assistance? Is there a charge for this assistance?

16. What is the opinion and experience of others who have used the program?

Organizational resources 17. What are the training, curriculum, and

implementation costs of the program? 18. Can your organization afford to implement

this program now and in the long term? 19. Do you have staff capable of

implementing this program? Do they have the qualifications recommended (or required) to facilitate the program?

20. Would your staff be enthusiastic about a program of this kind, and are they willing to make the necessary time commitment?

21. Can this program be implemented in the time available?

22. What’s the likelihood that this program will be sustained in the future?

23. Are your stakeholders supportive of your implementation of this program?

WRITING PROGRAM GOALS

A program goal has much in common with an agency goal, which was discussed previously:

• Like an agency goal, a program goal must also be compatible with the agency’s mission statement as well as the agency goal and at least one agency objective. Program goals must logically flow from the agency as they are announcements of expected outcomes dealing with the social problem that the program is attempting to prevent, eradicate, or ameliorate.

• Like an agency goal, a program goal is not intended to be measurable; it simply provides a programmatic direction for the program to follow.

• A program goal must also possess four major characteristics: 1. It must identify a current social

problem area. 2. It must include a specific target population

within which the problem resides. 3. It must include the desired future state for

this population. 4. It must state how it plans to achieve the

desired state. • In addition to the aforementioned four major

criteria for writing program goals, there are seven additional minor criteria: 5. Easily understood—write it so the

rationale for the goal is apparent. 6. Declarative statement—provide a complete

sentence that describes a goal’s intended outcome.

7. Positive terms—frame the goal’s outcomes in positive terms.

8. Concise—get the complete idea of your goal across as simply and briefly as possible while leaving out unnecessary detail.

9. Jargon-free—use language that most “non–social work people” are likely to understand.

10. Short—use as few words as possible. 11. Avoid the use of double negatives.

In sum, a program goal reflects the intention of social workers within the program. For example, workers in a program may expect that they will “enable adolescents with developmental disabilities to lead full and productive lives.” The program goal phrase of “full and productive lives,” however, can mean different things to different people.

Some may believe that a full and productive life cannot be lived without integration into the commu- nity; they may, therefore, want to work toward plac- ing these youth in the mainstream school system,

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Chapter 7: The Program 151

enrolling them in community activities, and finally returning them to their parental homes, with a view to making them self-sufficient in adult life. Others may believe that a full and productive life for these adolescents means the security of institutional teach- ing and care and the companionship of children with similar needs. Still others may believe that institu- tional care combined with community contact is the best compromise.

Program goal statements are meant to be suffi- ciently elusive to allow for changes in service deliv- ery approach or clientele over time. Another reason that goals have intangible qualities is because we want enough flexibility in our programs to adjust program conceptualization and operation as needed. Indeed, by establishing a program design, we begin the pro- cess of crafting a theory of client change. By evalu- ating the program, we test the program’s theory—its plan for creating client change. Much more will be said about this in the next chapter.

Preparing for Unintended Consequences

Working toward a program’s goal may result in a number of unintended results that emerge in the immediate environment that surrounds the program. For example, a group home for adolescents with developmental disabilities may strive to enable resi- dents to achieve self-sufficiency in a safe and support- ive environment. This is the intended result, or goal. Incidentally, however, the very presence of the group home may produce organized resistance from local neighbors—a negative unintended result.

The resistance may draw the attention of the media, which in turn draws a sympathetic response from the general public about the difficulties associ- ated with finding a suitable location for homes caring for youth with special needs—a positive unintended result.

On occasion, the unintended result can thwart progress toward the program’s goal; that is, youth with developmental disabilities would not feel safe or supported if neighbors act in unkind or unsupportive ways. This condition would almost certainly hamper the youths’ ability to achieve self-sufficiency in the community.

PROGRAM GOALS VERSUS AGENCY GOALS

Perhaps the group home mentioned earlier is run by an agency that has a number of other homes for ado- lescents with developmental disabilities (see Figure 7.6). It’s unlikely that all of the children in these homes will be capable of self-sufficiency as adults; some may have reached their full potential when they have learned to feed or bathe themselves.

The goal of self-sufficiency will, therefore, not be appropriate for the agency as a whole, although it might do very well for Group Home X, which serves children who function at higher levels. The agency’s goal must be broader to encompass a wider range of situations—and because it’s broader, it will probably be more vague.

To begin, the agency may decide that its goal is “to enable adolescents with developmental dis- abilities to reach their full potential” as outlined in Figure 7.6:

• Group Home X, one of the programs within the agency, can then interpret “full potential” to mean self-sufficiency and can formulate a program goal based on this interpretation.

• Group Home Y, another program within the agency serving children who function at lower levels, may decide that it can realistically do no more than provide a caring environment for the children and emotional support for their families. It may translate this decision into another program goal: “To enable adolescents with developmental disabilities to experience security and happiness.”

• Group Home Z, a third program within the agency, may set as its program goal “To enable adolescents with developmental disabilities to acquire the social and vocational skills necessary for satisfying and productive lives.”

In short, Figure 7.6 illustrates the relationship among the individual goal of each of the three homes to the single goal of the agency. Note how logical and consistent the goals of the three programs are

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

152 Par t II: Designing Programs

with the agency’s single overall goal. This example illustrates three key points about the character of a program goal:

• A program goal simplifies the reason for the program to exist and provides direction for its workers.

• Program goals of different but related programs within the same agency may differ, but they must all be linked to the agency’s overall goal. They must all reflect both their individual purpose and the purpose of the agency of which they are a part.

• Program goals are not measurable. Consider the individual goals of the three group homes in Figure 7.6; none of them are measurable in their present form.

Concepts such as happiness, security, self- sufficiency, and full potential mean different things to different people and cannot be measured until they have been clearly defined. Many social work goals are phrased in this way, putting forth more of an elusive intent than a definite, definable, measur- able purpose. Nor is this a flaw; it’s simply what a goal is, a statement of an intended result that must be clarified before it can be measured. As we will see

next, program goals are clarified by the objectives they formulate.

PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

A program’s objectives are derived from its goal. As you will see shortly, program objectives are measur- able indicators of the program’s goal; they articulate the specific client outcomes that the program wishes to achieve; stated clearly and precisely, they make it possible to tell to what degree the program’s results have been achieved.

All program objectives must be client-centered; they must be formulated to help a client in relation to the social problem articulated by the program’s goal. Programs often are designed to change client systems in three nonmutually exclusive areas:

• Knowledge • Affects • Behaviors

Knowledge-Based Objectives

Knowledge-based program objectives are commonly found within educational programs, where the aim

Agency Goal

To enable adolescents with developmental disabilities to

reach their full potentialreach their full potential

Program X's Goal

To enable adolescents with developmental disabilities to

become self-sufficient adultsbecome self-sufficient adults

Program Y's Goal

To enable adolescents with developmental disabilities to

experience security and happiness

Program Z's Goal

To enable adolescents with developmental disabilities to

acquire the social and vocational skills necessary

for satisfying and productive lives

acquire the social and vocational skills necessary

for satisfying and productive lives

Figure 7.6: Organizational chart of an agency with three highly related programs.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Chapter 7: The Program 153

is to increase the client’s knowledge in some specific area. The words “to increase knowledge” are criti- cal here: They imply that the recipient of the educa- tion will have learned something, for example, “to increase teenage mother’s knowledge about the stages of child development between birth and 2 years.” The hoped-for increase in knowledge can then be mea- sured by assessing the mother’s knowledge levels before and after the program. The program objective is achieved when it can be demonstrated (via mea- surement) that learning has occurred.

Affect-Based Objectives

Affect-based program objectives focus on chang- ing either feelings about oneself or awareness about another person or thing. For example, a common affect-based program objective in social work is to raise a client’s self-esteem, or interventions are designed to decrease feelings of isolation, increase marital satisfaction, and decrease feelings of depres- sion. In addition, feelings or attitudes toward other people or things are the focus of many social work programs.

All program objectives are derived from its single goal.

To give just a few examples, programs may try to change negative views toward people of color, homo- sexuality, or gender roles. “Affects” here includes atti- tudes because attitudes are a way of looking at the world. It’s important to realize that, although particu- lar attitudes may be connected to certain behaviors, they are two separate constructs.

Behaviorally Based Objectives

Very often, a program objective is established to change the behavior of a person or group: for example, to reduce drug abuse among adolescents, to increase the use of community resources by seniors, or to reduce the number of hate crimes in a community. Sometimes knowledge or affect objectives are used as a means to this end. In other words, the expectation

is that a change in attitude or knowledge will lead to a change in behavior.

The social worker might assume that adolescents who know more about the effects of drugs will use or abuse them less, that seniors who know more about available community resources will use them more often, or that citizens that have more positive feelings toward each other will be less tolerant of prejudice and discrimination. Sometimes these assumptions are valid; sometimes they are not. In any case, when behaviorally based objectives are used, the program must verify that the desired behavior change has actually occurred.

WRITING PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

Whether program objectives are directed at knowl- edge levels, affects, or behaviors, they have to be SMART ones too; that is, they have to be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time phased. All evidence-based social work programs cannot exist without SMART program objectives.

SMART objectives

Specific

Measurable

Achievable

Realistic

Time-phased

Specific (S)

In addition to being meaningful and logically linked to the program’s goal (to be discussed shortly), program objectives must be specific. They must be complete and

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

154 Par t II: Designing Programs

clear in their wording. Following are two columns. The left column contains active verbs that your pro- gram objective can start out with. The column on the right contains examples of possible types of program objectives you could be trying to achieve.

You need to mix and match to form appropriate objec- tives. For example, you could write the following:

• Increase self-esteem levels • Decrease feelings of loneliness

Now that we know how to make a program objec- tive specific, we turn to its measurability, the second quality required of a SMART program objective. Simply put, just ask the question, “Is the objective measurable?” If it can’t be measured then it cannot be a program objective. As we know by now, the pur- pose of measurement is to gather data. A measure is usually thought of as a number: an amount of money in dollars, a numerical rating representing a level of intensity, or scores on simple self-administered stan- dardized measuring instruments.

Measurable (M)

The purpose of setting a program objective is to bring focus to the desired change, which, if obtained, will contribute to the obtainment of the program’s goal. One of the main purposes of making a measurement

is to define a perceived change, in terms of either numbers or clear words.

A measurement might show, for example, that the assertiveness of a woman who has been previ- ously abused has increased by 5 points on a stan- dardized measuring instrument (a program objective), or that a woman’s feelings of safety in her neighborhood have increased by 45 points (another program objective).

Learn more about how to measure program objectives in Tools L and M in the Evaluation Toolkit.

If the hoped-for change cannot be measured, then it’s not a SMART program objective—it’s miss- ing the “M.” Tools L and M present ways of mea- suring program objectives, but, for the time being, we turn to the third quality of a SMART program objective: achievability.

Achievable (A)

Not only must a program objective be specific and measureable, it must be achievable as well. Objectives should be achievable within a given time frame and with available current program resources and con- straints. There is nothing worse than creating an unrealistic program objective that cannot be realisti- cally reached by the client group it was written for. This unfortunately happens way more times than we wish to acknowledge. Just ask and answer the question, “Can the program’s objective be reached given: (1) the clients’ presenting problems, (2) the pro- gram’s current overall resources, (3) the skill level of the workers, and (4) the amount of time the interven- tion is suppose to take?”

Realistic (R)

In addition to being specific, measurable, and achiev- able, program objectives must also be realistic. Having realistic program objectives ties in heav- ily with having achievable ones (mentioned ear- lier). A program objective is realistic when it bears a

Examples of Active

Verbs

Examples of Measureable Program

Objectives

• Increase • Social skills

• Decrease • Feeling of depression

• Maintain • Feelings of loneliness

• Obtain • Attitudes toward authority

• Improve • Aggressiveness

• Access • Self-esteem levels

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Chapter 7: The Program 155

sensible relationship to the longer term result to be achieved—the program goal.

If a program’s goal is to promote self-sufficiency of teenagers living on the street, for example, improv- ing their ability to balance a monthly budget may be a realistic program objective; however, increasing their ability to recite the dates of the reigns of English mon- archs is not, because it bears no relation to the pro- gram’s goal of self-sufficiency.

The point here—and a point that will be stressed over and over in this text—is that an effective evidence-based program must demonstrate realistic and meaningful linkages among its overall goal (its reason for being) and its programs’ objectives.

Time Phased (T)

Program objectives need to provide a time frame indicating when the objective will be measured or a time by which the objective will be met. Box 7.2 pres- ents how the three program objectives in our Family Support Program illustrated in Box 7.1 were mea- sured with SMART objectives. Notice that the three program objectives indirectly measure the program’s goal; that is, the goal is achieved by the success of the three program’s objectives.

INDICATORS

An indicator is a measurable gauge that shows (or indicates) the progress made toward achieving a SMART program objective. Some indicators include participation rates, income levels, poverty rates, atti- tudes, beliefs, behaviors, community norms, policies, health status, and incidence and prevalence rates. In the simplest of terms, indicators ultimately are used to measure your program objectives.

Sometimes these program objectives are called dependent variables, outcome variables, or criterion variables. The most important thing to remember is that your indicators must be based off your program’s logic model (to be discussed shortly). A program objective can be measured with only one indicator, such as the following:

And at other times, a program objective can be measured with more than one indicator, such as the following:

PRACTICE OBJECTIVES

Program objectives can be thought of as formal state- ments of a declaration of desired change for all clients served by a program. In contrast, practice objectives refer to the personal objectives of an individual client, whether that client is a community, couple, group, individual, or institution. Practice objectives are also commonly referred to as treatment objectives,

Program Objective Single Indicator

Client obtains

more stable

housing

A. Percentage of clients

who move to a

transitional shelter,

long-term housing,

rehabilitative setting, or

the home of a friend or

family member.

Increase

self-esteem

A. Hudson’s Index of

Self-Esteem (see Figure

L.1 in Tool L)

Program Objective Multiple Indicators

Clients accesses

needed services

A. Percentage of clients

who agree to a

recovery/treatment

service plan by the end

of their 30th day of

shelter at that site.

B. Percentage of clients

who, as a result of their

service plan, connected

with supportive

services within 30 days

of the start of case

management.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

BOX 7.2 GRID FOR SMART PROGRAM OBJECTIVES (FROM BOX 7.1)

SPECIFIC MEASURABLE ACHIEVABLE REALISTIC TIME PHASED

Program objectives It says

exactly

what you

are going to

do. It can’t

be too broad

or vague.

There is a way of

measuring the

objective. It must

be able to produce

indicators.

The program objective can

be actually achieved with

your given resources and

constraints.

The program

objective is directly

related to your

program’s goal.

The objective

must have a

date for its

achievement.

To increase positive

social support for

parents by the end

of the fourth week

after the start of

the intervention

This

program

objective

is very

specific. It is

not vague.

This objective can

produce a number of

indicators. We have

chosen two:

(1) client logs, and

(2) The Provision

of Social Relations

Scale.

This program objective

can be easily achieved

by the end of the first

four weeks after the

intervention starts given

our resources and the

skill levels of the social

workers.

This program

objective is directly

related to the

program’s goal, which

is to support family

units where children

are at risk for out-of-

home placement

due to problems with

physical abuse.

“By the end of the

fourth week after

the intervention

starts” is very

specific in

reference to time

frames.

To increase

problem-solving

skills for family

members by the

end of the eighth

week after the start

of the intervention

This

program

objective

is very

specific. It is

not vague.

This objective can

produce a number

of indicators.

We have chosen

one: The Problem

Solving Inventory.

This program objective

can be easily achieved by

the end of the eighth week

after the intervention

starts given our resources

and the skill levels of the

social workers. We also

believe that the clients

have the motivation and

capacity for the desired

change to occur.

This program

objective is directly

related to the

program’s goal, which

is to support family

units where children

are at risk for out-of-

home placement

due to problems with

physical abuse.

“By the end of the

eighth week after

the intervention

starts” is very

specific in

reference to time

frames.

G rinnell, R

. M ., G

abor, P . A

., & U

nrau, Y . A

. (2015). P rogram

evaluation for social w orkers : F

oundations of evidence-based program s. O

xford U niversity P

ress, Incorporated. C

reated from capella on 2023-01-30 18:20:46.

To increase

parent’s use of

noncorporal child

management

strategies by

the end of the

intervention

This

program

objective

is very

specific. It is

not vague.

This objective can

produce a number

of indicators.

We have chosen

two: (1) Goal

Attainment Scaling

and (2) Checklist

of Discipline

Strategies.

This program objective

can be easily achieved by

the end of the intervention

given our resources and

the skill levels of the social

workers. We also believe

that the clients have the

motivation and capacity

for the desired change to

occur.

This program

objective is directly

related to the

program’s goal, which

is to support family

units where children

are at risk for out-of-

home placement

due to problems with

physical abuse.

“By the end of the

intervention” is

very specific in

reference to time

frames.

BOX 7.2 CONTINUED

G rinnell, R

. M ., G

abor, P . A

., & U

nrau, Y . A

. (2015). P rogram

evaluation for social w orkers : F

oundations of evidence-based program s. O

xford U niversity P

ress, Incorporated. C

reated from capella on 2023-01-30 18:20:46.

158 Par t II: Designing Programs

individual objectives, therapeutic objectives, client objectives, client goals, and client target problems.

All practice objectives formulated by the social worker and the client must be logically related to the program’s objectives, which are linked to the pro- gram’s goal. In other words, all practice objectives for all clients must be delineated in such a way that they are logically linked to one or more of the program’s objectives. If not, then it’s unlikely that the clients’ needs will be met by the program.

If a social worker formulates a practice objective with a client that does not logically link to one or more of the program’s objectives, the social worker may be doing some good for the client but without program sanction or support. In fact, why would a program hire a social worker to do something the worker was not employed to do?

At the risk of sounding redundant, a program is always evaluated on its program objectives. Thus we must fully understand that it’s these objectives that we must strive to attain—all of our “practice” efforts must be directly linked to them.

Example: Bob’s Self-Sufficiency

Let’s put the concept of a practice objective into con- crete terms. Following is a simple diagram of how three practice objectives, if met, lead to increased life skills, which in turn leads to self-sufficiency. Is the diagram logical to you? If so, why? If not, why not?

These three interrelated practice objectives for Bob demonstrate a definite link with the program’s objective, which in turn is linked to the program’s goal. It should be evident by now that defining a practice objective is a matter of stating what is to be changed. This provides an indication of the client’s current state, or where the client is. Unfortunately, knowing this is not the same thing as knowing where one wants to go. Sometimes the destination is appar- ent, but in other cases it may be much less clear.

PRACTICE ACTIVITIES

So far we have focused on the kinds of goals and objec- tives that social workers hope to achieve as a result of their work. The question now arises: What is that work? What do social workers do in order to help cli- ents achieve the program’s objectives such as obtain- ing knowledge (e.g., knowing how to make nutritional meals), feelings (feeling less anxious), or behaviors (reduce the number of truancies per school year)?

The question remains: What practice activities do social workers engage in to meet a program’s objectives? The answer, of course, is that they do many different things. They show films, facilitate group discussions, hold therapy sessions, teach classes, and conduct indi- vidual interviews. They attend staff meetings, do paper- work, consult with colleagues, and advocate for clients.

The important point about all such activities is that they are undertaken to move clients forward on one or more of the program’s objectives. All of evidence-based programs have SMART program objectives where each objective has practice activities associated with it.

A social worker who teaches a class on nutrition, for example, hopes that class participants will learn certain specific facts about nutrition. If this learn- ing is to take place, the facts to be learned must be included in the material presented. In other words, our practice activities must be directly related to our client’s practice objectives which are directly related to our program’s objectives. It’s critically important that social workers engage in practice activities that have the best chance to create positive client change.

Defining practice activities is an essential ingre- dient to understanding what interventions work. The list of practice activities is endless and dynamic in that workers can add, drop, and modify them to suit the needs of individual clients. Reviewing a list of practice activities with stakeholder groups gives them

Three Pracitice Objectives for Bob

1. Increase personal self-management skills

2. Increase general social skills

3. Increase drug resistance skills

Program Objective

Increase life skills

Program Goal

Become self- sufficient adults

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Chapter 7: The Program 159

an idea of the nature of client service delivery offered by the program. Above is a diagram that presents the preceding discussion in graphic form.

LOGIC MODELS

Your program must have a logic model if it’s to have any creditability. As you briefly saw in Chapter 3 and will see in depth in the following chapter, logic models are tools that help people physically see the interrelations among the various components of your program. A logic model is nothing more than a con- cept map that visually describes the logic of how your program is supposed to work.

Positions Your Program for Success

The W. K. Kellogg Foundation (2004) suggests that use of the logic model is an effective way to ensure a pro- gram’s success. This would be a good time to review Figures 3.2 and 3.3 in Chapter 3. Using a logic model throughout the design and implementation of your program helps organize and systematize your program planning, management, and evaluation functions:

• In Program Design and Planning, a logic model serves as a planning tool to develop program strategy and enhance your ability to clearly explain and illustrate program concepts and approach for key stakeholders, including funders. Logic models can help craft structure and organization for program design and build in self-evaluation based on shared understanding of what is to take place. During the planning phase, developing a logic model requires stakeholders to examine

best-practice research and practitioner experience in light of the strategies and activities selected to achieve results.

• In Program Implementation, a logic model forms the core for a focused management plan that helps you identify and collect the data needed to monitor and improve programming. Using the logic model during program implementation and management requires you to focus energies on achieving and documenting results. Logic models help you to consider and prioritize the program aspects most critical for tracking and reporting and make adjustments as necessary.

• For Program Evaluation and Strategic Reporting, a logic model presents program information and progress toward goals in ways that inform, advocate for a particular program approach, and teach program stakeholders.

We all know the importance of reporting results to funders and to community stakeholders alike. Communication is a key component of a program’s success and sustainability. Logic models can help strategic marketing efforts in three primary ways:

1. Describing programs in language clear and specific enough to be understood and evaluated.

2. Focusing attention and resources on priority program operations and key results for the purposes of learning and program improvement.

3. Developing targeted communication and marketing strategies.

Social worker engages in practice activities in order to meet...

the client's practice

objective(s) in order to meet...

the program's objective(s)

in order to meet...

the program's goal.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

160 Par t II: Designing Programs

Simple and Straightforward Pictures

A picture is worth a thousand words. The point of developing a logic model is to come up with a relatively simple image that reflects how and why your program will work. Doing this as a group brings the power of consensus and group examination of values and beliefs about change processes and program results.

Reflect Group Process and Shared Understanding

A logic model developed by all of a program’s stake- holders produces a useful tool and refines the pro- gram’s concepts and plans during the process. We recommend that a logic model be developed collab- oratively in an inclusive, collegial process that engages as many key stakeholders as possible.

Change Over Time

Like programs, logic models change over time. Thus as a program grows and develops, so does its logic

model. A program logic model is merely a snap- shot of a program at one point in time. It’s a work in progress—a working draft—that can be refined as your program develops.

SUMMARY

This chapter briefly discussed what a social work agency is all about and how programs fit within them. It touched on the fundamentals of evidence-based programs and presented a few criteria for selecting one out of the many that exist. We discussed how to construct program goals, objectives, indicators, prac- tice objectives, and practice activities. The chapter ended with a brief rational of why evidence-based programs need to have logic models which is explored in-depth in the following chapter.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Study Questions Chapter 7 The goal of this chapter is to provide you with a beginning knowledge base for you to feel comfortable in answering the

below questions. AFTER you have read the chapter, indicate how comfortable you feel you are in answering each

of the following questions on a 5-point scale where

1 Very

uncomfortable

2 Somewhat

uncomfortable

3 Neutral

4 Somewhat

comfortable

5 Very

comfortable

If you rated any question between 1–3, reread the section of the chapter where the information for the question is

found. If you still feel that you’re uncomfortable in answering the question, then talk with your instructor and/or your

classmates for more clarification.

Questions Degree of comfort? (Circle one number)

1 Discuss how mission statements are used within agencies. 1 2 3 4 5

2 Discuss how goals are used within agencies. 1 2 3 4 5

3 Discuss the differences between an agency’s mission statement and its goal.

Provide a social work example throughout your discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

4 List and then discuss the four requirements of an agency’s goal. Provide an example

of one using your field placement (or work) setting. 1 2 3 4 5

5 What’s an agency? What’s a program? Discuss the differences between the two? 1 2 3 4 5

List and then discuss the four themes that you can use in naming social work

programs. Rename the program that you are housed within in reference to your field

(or work) setting using the criteria presented in the book.

1 2 3 4 5

What are evidence-based programs? Select one from the websites presented in the

book and discuss what the program is all about and how it was evaluated to become

“evidence-based.”

1 2 3 4 5

8 Discuss each one of the 23 criteria that need to be addressed when you select an

evidence-based program to implement within your community. 1 2 3 4 5

9 List and then discuss the 11 criteria that need to be considered when writing a

program goal. 1 2 3 4 5

10 Discuss the differences between an agency’s goal and a program’s goal. 1 2 3 4 5

continued

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

11 What are program objectives? Provide a social work example throughout your

discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

12 What are knowledge-based objectives? Provide a social work example throughout

your discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

13 What are affect-based objectives? Provide a social work example throughout your

discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

14 What are behaviourally based objectives? Provide a social work example throughout

your discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

15 What are SMART objectives? Provide a social work example throughout your

discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

16 What are indicators of a program objective? Provide a social work example

throughout your discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

17 What are practice objectives? Provide a social work example throughout your

discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

18 What are practice activities? Provide a social work example throughout your

discussion. 1 2 3 4 5

19 What are logic models? Why are they useful to social work programs.? 1 2 3 4 5

Study Questions for Chapter 7 Continued

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Chapter 7 Assessing Your Self-Efficacy

AFTER you have read this chapter AND have completed all of the study questions, indicate how knowledgeable you feel you

are for each of the following concepts on a 5-point scale where

1 Not knowledgeable

at all

2 Somewhat

unknowledgeable

3 Neutral

4 Somewhat

knowledgeable

5 Very

knowledgeable

Concepts Knowledge Level? (Circle one number)

1 The differences between agencies and programs 1 2 3 4 5

2 Agency and program mission statements 1 2 3 4 5

3 Agency and program goals 1 2 3 4 5

4 Requirements for agency and program goals 1 2 3 4 5

5 Constructing program names 1 2 3 4 5

6 Designing social work programs 1 2 3 4 5

7 Evidence-based programs 1 2 3 4 5

8 Criteria for selecting evidence-based programs 1 2 3 4 5

9 Writing program goals 1 2 3 4 5

10 Writing program objectives 1 2 3 4 5

11 Selecting indicators for program objectives 1 2 3 4 5

12 Formulating practice objectives 1 2 3 4 5

13 Formulating practice activities 1 2 3 4 5

14 Logic models 1 2 3 4 5

Add up your scores (minimum = 14, maximum = 70) Your total score =

A 66–70 = Professional evaluator in the making

A– 63–65 = Senior evaluator

B+ 59–62 = Junior evaluator

B 56–58 = Assistant evaluator

B– 14–55 = Reread the chapter and redo the study questions

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

CHAPTER OUTLINE

MODELS AND MODELING Concept Maps

Two Types of Models: One Logic

Examples

LOGIC MODELS AND EVALUATION DESIGN Limitations

Models Begin With Results

Logic Models and Effectiveness

BASIC PROGRAM LOGIC MODELS Assumptions Matter

Key Elements of Program Logic Models

Nonlinear Program Logic Models

Hidden Assumptions and Dose

BUILDING A LOGIC MODEL From Strategy to Activities

Action Steps for a Program Logic Model

Creating Your Program Logic Model

SUMMARY

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

5. O

xf or

d U

ni ve

rs ity

P re

ss , I

nc or

po ra

te d.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .