PE Week 1 Discussion 2
Ms90
ProgramEvaluationRequestsforProposal.zipRFP 1 - Anti-Bullying HO.docx
RFP#1
Program Evaluation Request for Proposal
Anti-Bullying
Scope of Service
The Redford Public School System (RPSS) is soliciting proposals to evaluate the fidelity of the first year of implementation of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP; Olweus & Limber, 2010) for all 9th graders in one of the two district high schools.
The evaluation of the implementation process of the high school program will have the following main objectives for information and evaluation:
· What components of the OBPP were implemented during the first year and why (planned, actual)?
· Who delivered the components of the program and how often (planned, actual)?
· To what extent was the program implemented as planned (planned, actual)?
· How well prepared were the staff who implemented the program (actual, perceived)?
· How was the program received by the target group (students), other school staff (teachers, administrators, other support staff), parents, and other relevant community groups?
· What were the key barriers to program delivery (planned, actual)?
Program Model and Goals
The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP) was selected as the core bullying prevention model for implementation in one of the two district high schools. The selection of the high school was arbitrary, as both high schools had similar problems with bullying among 9th-grade students, and administrators of both schools volunteered to be considered.
Recommended components of the implementation of the OBPP are as follows:
School-Level Components
• Establish a Bullying Prevention Coordinating Committee.
• Conduct committee and staff training.
• Administer the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire schoolwide.
• Hold staff discussion group meetings.
• Introduce the school rules against bullying.
• Review and refine the school’s supervisory system.
• Hold a school kick-off event to launch the program.
• Involve parents.
Classroom-Level Components
• Post and enforce schoolwide rules against bullying.
• Hold regular class meetings.
• Hold meetings with students’ parents.
Individual-Level Components
• Supervise students’ activities.
• Ensure that all staff intervene on the spot when bullying occurs.
• Conduct serious talks with students involved in bullying.
• Conduct serious talks with parents of involved students.
• Develop individual intervention plans for involved students.
Community-Level Components
• Involve community members on the Bullying Prevention Coordinating Committee.
• Develop partnerships with community members to support your school’s program.
• Help to spread anti-bullying messages and principles of best practice in the community. (Olweus & Limber, 2010, p. 380)
Additional information about the OBPP may be found at https://www.blueprintsprograms.org/factsheet/olweus-bullying-prevention-program
Conditions of Contract
Budget for contractual evaluation and consultation set at maximum of $50,000. Report must be delivered no later than 6 months from the date of initiation.
Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2010). The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: Implementation and evaluation over two decades. In S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), The handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 377–401). New York: Routledge.
RFP 2 - Prevention - Opioid Use HO.docx
RFP #2
Topic: Prevention – Opioid Addiction
Program Evaluation Request for Proposal
Needs Assessment and Recommendations for Planning
Problem
The Merryville Public School System (MPSS) is soliciting proposals for a systematic evaluation of whether there is a need to offer preventive programs in their elementary grades to address opioid addiction.
Community health officials have reported increased opioid use and dependence among adults, including those who are parents of younger school-age children. Last year, the county health department began to provide informational posters and brochures for use in the district’s high school (grades 7–12, 160 students). Brochures also were made available to the parents of the high school students and through local businesses and religious organizations. However, it is unknown whether this method has been effective in general or among families with younger school-age children. To date, no direct discussions or education and prevention activities have been planned or developed for use within the district’s elementary school (K–6, 214 students).
Purpose of Evaluation
(1) Needs assessment: Before a prevention activity can be considered and planned, it is necessary to identify whether key stakeholders believe there is a need to offer activities to these younger students to address opioid addiction. Are these children actually confronted with opioid use/addiction within their homes? What are the views of school administrators, teachers, counselors, and other school personnel? Parents? Other key stakeholders in the community? What are their recommendations?
(2) Justification of cost: Is the need sufficient to justify the cost of developing such a program, training staff, and possible changes in school curriculum, policies, and other related aspects of implementation?
(3) Recommendations for planning: If there are identified needs, what models and goals do other school prevention programs like this address?1 Would they match this school’s needs, etc.? How are these kinds of programs implemented? What are steps to build into planning (e.g., who does what, training, staffing, other resources to implement)? What are the outcomes of similar programs and their impacts on communities? Are these feasible for this community?
Conditions of Contract
Budget for contractual evaluation and consultation set at maximum of $25,000. Report must be delivered no later than 6 months from the date of initiation.
Demographics Provided with the RFP
The MPSS serves a small rural community. There is only one high school and one elementary/middle school.
Student-teacher ratio across both schools is 14.9%. There are 25 classroom teachers (FTE). Currently, 31 students have active IEPs. For the elementary school, there are 9 classroom teachers (FTE), with a student-teacher ratio of 23.3%. For the high school: 16 classroom teachers, 10.0% student-teacher ratio).
The community demographics are as follows:
Gender: 57% male
Median age: 42.4 years (state median = 56.1 years)
Median household income (2017): $32,433 (down from $42,320 in 2014) (state median = $65,145)
Racial distribution: White = 94.0%, Hispanic = 3.1%, Black = 0.8%, Asian American = 0.5%, American Indian = 0.1%, two or more races = 0.6%, unknown = 0.8%
Educational attainment (those over 25) : high school graduate or lower: 46.3%; some college/associate degree: 38.4%; bachelor’s degree: 12.2%; graduate degree: 3.1%
Unemployment rate: 12.4% (state = 4.2%) (rate up from 8.2% in 2014)
Religious affiliation (self-reported): 82% Christian, 2% Jewish, 4% other religious groups, 12% no religious affiliation
Recent estimates from the county health department:
Substance abuse rates (12 or older)
Alcohol use by youths aged 12–20 37.8%
Binge alcohol use by youths aged 12–17 5.5%
during previous month
Cigarette smoking 28.5%
Smokeless tobacco use 8.5%
Marijuana 11.2%
Illicit drug use 14.2%
Misuse of opioids 5.1%
Cocaine 1.1%
Crack 0.2%
Methamphetamine 0.9%
The county health department has more detailed data related to demographics of opioid use, treatment, etc.
1 Supplementary Resources
Operation Prevention. (2017). Classroom resources . https://www.operationprevention.com/classroom
Prevention First. (n.d.). Opioid education resources . Retrieved February 25, 2019, from https://www.prevention.org/Professional-Resources/Opioid-Education-Resources/
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Combating the opioid crisis: Schools, students, families. Retrieved February 25, 2019, from https://www.ed.gov/opioids
Sample Programs
Business Wire. (2018, September 13). D.A.R.E. launches new curricula for preventing opioid and prescription drug abuse. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180913005257/en/D.A.R.E.-Launches-New-Curricula-Preventing-Opioid-Prescription
Overdose Lifeline Inc. (n.d.). Home page. Retrieved February 25, 2019, from https://www.overdose-lifeline.org/opioid-heroin-prevention-education-program.html
RFP 3 - PMT Intervention HO.docx
RFP #3
Topic: PMT Intervention – Program experiences
Program Evaluation Request for Proposals
Program Experiences
Problem
As Skin, Forster, Sundell, and Melin (2010) have noted, while Parent Management Training (PMT; Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders, 2019; Eyberg, 2003; Eyberg, Nelson, & Boggs, 2008) has strong theoretical and empirical support for early prevention of problematic behaviors, few families with children with conduct disorders receive help. This gap in care may be due to factors such as parents not being aware of this type of supportive intervention or, if aware, not having ready access to it. Also, it is not clear yet if procedures to increase parental/caretaker awareness and/or accessibility to PMT can enhance participation in PMT.
Background of Intervention Program
The XYZ Pediatric Care facility of an inner-city urban hospital instituted a program in 2018 to try to increase parental awareness and participation of PMT as an intervention for parents/caregivers when they have a child who is demonstrating problematic disruptive and aggressive behavior. First, they instituted training for medical and behavioral health staff members to increase their awareness of both risk factors and indications of problematic disruptive and aggressive behavior among children ages 3-10 years, and procedures to use to refer the family/caregiver to an onsite, free screening service. The screening protocol included evaluations using the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI), the Social Competence Scale-Parent (P-Comp), and the Parent Practices Interview (PPI). The results of the screening were shared with the family/caregiver, with referral to and information about the PMT program (at the same hospital location). The family/caregiver’s pediatrician and other medical and behavioral health members of the child’s/family care team also received this information, including information about the referral to the PMT program. Another care team member also was asked to contact the family/caretaker to provide further support/encouragement for follow up with the referral to the PMT program. In addition, the care team members were asked to continue to track the relevant identified behaviors in their ongoing visits with the child and family/caretaker.
For the past year, 84 children, ages 3-10 years, were identified through screening to demonstrate problematic disruptive and aggressive behaviors. The screener talked with the family/caretaker and presented them with a referral to the PMT. Of these, 61 families/caretakers voluntarily contacted and entered the PMT program; 5 of these families/caretakers completed some of the 11-week PMT program and 56 completed the full program. At the end of the 1-weeks, the family/caregiver again was assessed by the same screener and with the same measures as used in the original screening. Families/caretakers received additional information and referrals, as needed, in relation to the results of their post-screening. These data are on file, as well as notes that were kept by care team members who were able to do so (both for children/families who did or did not complete the PMT program). Only 3 of the families who dropped out of PMT were available for follow up assessment. Contact information is available for many of the families/caretakers who did not follow through at all with the referral to the PMT program.
Purpose of the Proposed Evaluation
We are looking to gain further information about the experiences of staff and families/caretakers who participated in this new process. Did this process increase their awareness and willingness to participate in a PMT Program?
We want to know how families/caretakers experienced the screening and referral services? From their perspectives, do they feel they learned something new, had a better understanding of their child’s behavior? Did they trust the feedback they received about their child? Did it match their beliefs, experiences with the child? How did they feel about receiving the referral to the PMT Program? Did the process influence their interest in, willingness to, participate in a PMT program? Were there reasons they decided to participate or not participate in the PMT program? Would other kinds of support have been helpful to them? Do they have other observations and suggestions?
Conditions of Contract
Budget for contractual evaluation and consultation set at maximum of $30,000. Report must be delivered no later than 6 months from the date of initiation.
References
Eyberg, S. M. (2003). Parent-child interaction therapy. In T. H. Ollendick & C. S. Schroeder (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Clinical Child and Pediatric Psychology (pp. 446–447). New York: Plenum.
Eyberg, S. M., Nelson, M. M., & Boggs, S. R. (2008). Evidence-based psychosocial treatments for
children and adolescents with disruptive behavior. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent
Psychology, 37, 215–237. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Kling, A., Forster, M., Sundell, K., & Melin, L. (2010). A randomized controlled effectiveness trial of
parent management training with varying degrees of therapist support. Behavior Therapy, 41,
530–542. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Parent management training. (2019). In Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. Retrieved from
http://www.minddisorders.com/Ob-Ps/Parent-management-training.html
RFP 4 - PMT Effectiveness HO.docx
RFP #4
Topic: PMT Effectiveness
Program Evaluation Request for Proposal
Problem
As Kling, Forster, Sundell, and Melin (2010) have noted, while Parent Management Training (PMT; Parent management training, 2019; Eyberg, 2003; Eyberg, Nelson, & Boggs, 2008) has strong theoretical and empirical support for early prevention of problematic behaviors, few families with children with conduct disorders receive help. This gap in care may be due to factors such as parents not being aware of this type of supportive intervention or, if aware, not having ready access to it. Also, it is not clear yet if procedures to increase parental/caregiver awareness and/or accessibility to PMT can enhance participation in PMT. Further, more research is needed to explore whether PMT is effective as an intervention for this particular type of disruptive and aggressive behavior pattern.
Background of Intervention Program
The XYZ Pediatric Care Facility of an inner-city urban hospital instituted a program in 2018 to try to increase parental awareness of and participation in PMT as an intervention for parents/caregivers when they have a child who is demonstrating problematic disruptive and aggressive behavior. First, XYZ instituted training for medical and behavioral health staff members to increase their awareness of both risk factors and indications of problematic disruptive and aggressive behavior among children ages 3–10, and procedures to use to refer the family/caregiver to an onsite free screening service. The screening protocol included evaluations using the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI), the Social Competence Scale-Parent (P-Comp), and the Parent Practices Interview (PPI). The results of the screening were shared with the family/caregiver along with a referral to and information about the PMT program (at the same hospital location). The family/caregiver’s pediatrician and other medical and behavioral health providers on the care team also received this information, including information about the referral to the PMT program. Another care team member (case manager) was asked to contact the family/caregiver to provide further support/encouragement for follow-up with the referral to the PMT program. In addition, the care team members were asked to continue to track the relevant identified behaviors in their ongoing visits with the child and family/caregiver.
For the past year, 84 children ages 3–10 were identified through a screening to demonstrate problematic disruptive and aggressive behaviors. The screeners talked with the families/caregivers and presented them with a referral to the PMT. Of these, 61 families/caregivers voluntarily contacted and entered the PMT program; 5 of these families/caregivers completed some of the 11-week PMT program, and 56 completed the full program. At the end of the 11 weeks, each family/caregiver completers was reassessed by the same screener and with the same measures as used in the original screening. Families/caregivers received additional information and referrals as needed in relation to the results of their post-screening. These data are on file, as well as notes that were kept by care team members for children/families who completed the PMT program and those who did not. Only 3 of the families who dropped out of PMT were available for follow-up assessment. Contact information is available for many of the families/caregivers who did not follow through at all with the referral to the PMT program or began the program but did not finish.
Purpose of the Proposed Evaluation
Treatment effectiveness. Given the data that are on file, were there any changes in scores on the ECBI, the P-Comp, and the PPI after completion of the full 11-week program?
Conditions of Contract
Budget for contractual evaluation and consultation set at maximum of $30,000. Report must be delivered no later than 6 months from the date of initiation.
References
Eyberg, S. M. (2003). Parent-child interaction therapy. In T. H. Ollendick & C. S. Schroeder (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Clinical Child and Pediatric Psychology (pp. 446–447). New York: Plenum.
Eyberg, S. M., Nelson, M. M., & Boggs, S. R. (2008). Evidence-based psychosocial treatments for
children and adolescents with disruptive behavior. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent
Psychology, 37, 215–237. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Kling, A., Forster, M., Sundell, K., & Melin, L. (2010). A randomized controlled effectiveness trial of
parent management training with varying degrees of therapist support. Behavior Therapy, 41,
530–542. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Parent management training. (2019). In Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. Retrieved from
http://www.minddisorders.com/Ob-Ps/Parent-management-training.html
RFP 5 - Sexual Harassment HO.docx
RFP #5
Topic: Sexual Harassment in Academia
Program Evaluation Request for Proposal
Sexual Harassment in Academia
Requester: Office of the President of ABC University
ABC University is a private university located in a suburb of a medium-sized metropolitan area. It offers undergraduate and graduate degrees. Approximately 40% of undergraduates and 15% of graduate students live on campus. The remainder commute to campus, with approximately 60% commuting from nearby private housing facilities (e.g., student apartment complexes, homes). Each year, the university admits approximately 500 full-time and 200 part-time undergraduates (all programs, all levels for first admission), 200 full-time and 340 part-time master’s degree students (all programs, all levels for first admission), and 280 full-time and 250 part-time doctoral degree students (all programs, all levels for first admission). Current enrollment, all programs, is approximately 8,500 students.
Problem
Sexual harassment is a problem in academia, especially for women (Abrams, 2018; Cantalupo & Kidder, 2018). Women are 3.5 times more likely than men to experience sexual harassment throughout their academic careers; 64% of female and male trainees have described inappropriate sexual comments when on academic field placements (Clancy et al., 2014). Colleges and universities are required by law to have in place policies and procedures for protecting students from sexual harassment (e.g., training of staff, faculty, and students), reporting and investigating such events, and taking any appropriate follow-up actions (Cantalupo & Kidder, 2018). Victims of sexual harassment in academia continue to be reluctant to confront their harassers or to file formal reports of sexual harassment. These victims often look to peers for emotional and social support but may be revictimized by negative responses from their peers (Orchowski & Gidycz, 2015). Further, few peers who witness or learn about sexual harassment of a female student peer actually take any action to intervene directly to stop the harassment or to offer other, indirect help and support for the victim. Comment by Dianne Woo: Not in refs Comment by Dianne Woo: Not in refs
Purpose
For the past 5 years, ABC University has been offering face-to-face two-part training on sexual harassment to new-admission students who elect to participate. The training is offered through the university’s Counseling Center to small groups of 15–20. Part 2 of this training targets attitudes, beliefs, and norms that affect actions that can be taken by victims (similar to information offered in Abrams [2018] and Foster & Fullagar [2018]) and by observers (direct and indirect) of sexual harassment (based on the Bowes-Sperry & O’Leary-Kelly [2005] model of bystander intervention). The university’s Office of the President is seeking an evaluation of the impact of this training on the college community at large with regard to intervention by peers.
This project specifically will address the following questions:
1. Over the years since the expanded questions were introduced on the annual Campus Climate Survey, have there been changes in responses from the student community at large to questions on their experiences, as victim or observers, of sexual harassment? If so, what are the changes?
2. Are there differences in responses from the student community at large to these expanded questions before and after the implementation of the optional face-to-face two-part training on sexual harassment? If so, what are the differences?
3. Are there differences in responses to these expanded questions between students who completed the training and those who did not?
In addition to data from the university Campus Climate Survey, the Office of the President of ABC University will support approved follow-up requests for data and interviews with trainers and students who participated in the training program for further clarification on these students’ experiences, especially with respect to being in the role of observer (direct or indirect) of sexual harassment.
Evaluation Report – Recommendations
Based on the findings, the evaluator also will provide recommendations for possible modifications to enhance the training and outcomes related to peer support of victims of sexual harassment on campus.
Available Information (exclusively through the Office of the President of ABC University)
Report Statistics. University statistics are available on the numbers of formal complaints filed annually by students on sexual assault or sexual harassment on campus or involving another student, or staff or faculty member for the previous 15 years. Limited information on the status of those filings (of investigations and actions) also is available to an approved evaluator who meets security standards.
Annual Campus Climate Survey. Ten years ago, ABC University expanded its annual Campus Climate Survey to collect additional information on student experiences with sexual harassment or assault. The survey is requested of all students, but completion is voluntary; they are administered online and allow for complete anonymity of the student. Annual survey data of interest include the following:
Demographics. Age, gender/gender identity, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation/preferences, year entered ABC University, student classification (undergraduate, graduate, doctoral student), year admitted, college in which their program is offered (not the specific program in order to preserve anonymity), and whether the student completed the voluntary sexual harassment training at ABC University (if yes, year completed; if the student participated in the training more than once, how many times, giving the year completed).
Student’s understanding of university sexual harassment policies. Quiz with six questions based on information on campus policies presented in training and published in Student Handbook. Possible accuracy score: 0–6.
Student’s own experiences with sexual harassment as a student on campus during the past year. Yes–No–Not sure if experienced. Open-ended questions requesting narrative responses to the following: What happened? Who was involved? What did you do? Outcomes for you? Outcomes for harasser? Other outcomes? Other information you would like to share?
Student’s own experiences as an observer of sexual harassment on campus during the past year. Yes–No–Not sure if experienced. Open-ended questions requesting narrative responses to the following: What happened? Who was involved? What did you do? Outcomes for you? Outcomes for harasser? Outcomes for victim? Other outcomes? Other information you would like to share?
Conditions of Contract
Budget for contractual evaluation and consultation set at maximum of $85,000. Report must be delivered no later than 12 months from the date of initiation. The report will be confidential and provided only to the Office of the President of ABC University. No data or findings will be shared with any other internal university department or group or external entity (including professional groups and publications) without specific written authorization from the Office of the President of ABC University. The Office of the President will coordinate approved contacts with, and information from, other university divisions, offices, programs, personnel, students, or outside sources.
References and Resources
Abrams, Z. (2018). Sexual harassment on campus. Monitor on Psychology, 49(5), 68.
Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/monitor/2018/05/sexual-harassment.aspx
Bowes-Sperry, L., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (2005). To act or not to act: The dilemma faced by
sexual harassment observers. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 288–306. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Cantalupo, N. C., & Kidder, W. C. (2018). A systematic look at a serial problem: Sexual
harassment of students by university faculty. Utah Law Review, 2018(3), 671–786. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Clancy, K. B. H., Nelson, R. G., Rutherford, J. N., & Hinde, K. (2014). Survey of academic field experiences (SAFE): Trainees report harassment and assault. PLoS One, 9(7).
Foster, P. J., & Fullagar, C. J. (2018). Why don’t we report sexual harassment? An application
of planned behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 40(3), 148–160. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Wood, L., Sulley, C., Kammer-Kerwisk, M., Follingstad, D., & Busch-Armendariz, N. (2017).
Climate surveys: An inventory of understanding sexual assault and other crimes of interpersonal violence at institutions of higher education. Violence Against Women, 23(10), 1249–1267. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
RFP 6 - Family Empowerment HO.docx
RFP #6
Topic: Parent Empowerment
Program Evaluation Request for Proposal
Parent Empowerment
Requester: DCC Parents Supporting Parent Empowerment
DCC–Parents Supporting Parent Empowerment (DCC-PSPE) is a state-level nonprofit organization (hypothetically in a state such as Illinois). It was founded in 2012 by parents of children with disorders of the corpus callosum (DCC). Our support network has grown to include parents of children with DCC and other professionals, groups, governmental agencies, educational institutions, businesses, and individuals who share a dedication to our mission and vision.
Our mission is to empower parents of children with DCC to take a proactive role in the educational and personal development of their children (from childhood through adulthood).
Our visions are to support a world where
· children with DCC are respected, included, and allowed to grow to their capacities.
· their families can experience power, self-efficacy, hope, and action on behalf of themselves and their child.
Our board of directors/advisory board includes parents of children/adults with DCC, as well as representatives for various services and supportive businesses and organizations across the state.
Background
DCC actually may be underdiagnosed, as diagnostics require extensive neuroimaging through MRI and experienced professionals for recognition. Differential diagnoses are very important as symptoms of DCC may be similar to those of other conditions (e.g., ASD). For these reasons, families of children with this and other rare disorders often face challenges with limited support and understanding. National and international organizations such as the National Organization for Disorders of the Corpus Callosum are excellent resources ( https://nodcc.org/corpus-callosum-disorders/faq/).
In addition, we base our vision, priorities, and activities on empowerment of families of children with DCC. Based on work by Nachshen (2005) and Koren, DeChillo, and Friesen (1992), we envision empowerment as both a process and an outcome that may occur across a number of levels: family, service systems, and community/political.
Problem
We continue to need to address the problem of the underdiagnosing of DCC. This shortfall limits parents’ understanding, coping abilities, and options for becoming empowered on behalf of their children. We need to expand our outreach to parents as well as to medical, behavioral health, educational, and other services within the community to try to inform about DCC. Our goal is to increase parent and community knowledge of DCC and, in doing so, to increase empowered outreach by parents to obtain appropriate services for their children and for their own well-being.
One recent development is the Undiagnosed Diseases Network, an initiative of the National Institutes of Health. The initial network comprises thirteen institutions that will focus on expertise in “clinical diagnostics, translational research, and multiomics technologies to solve medical mysteries” (Reuter et al., 2018, p. 291).
Purpose
We are seeking a plan for development and evaluation of a plan of action for a state-level network:
1. Phase I: Begin the process of developing a state-level network to support diagnosis of DCC.
a. Working with members and the advisory council of the DCC-PSPE, identify and contact medical facilities and specialists, but also neuropsychological, behavioral, educational, and related services and professionals who can become “early warning” agents for identification of DCC and are willing to discuss this with parents and offer referrals for further diagnostics as needed.
b. Through interviews and possible surveys with these specialists and professionals, identify their interests, needs, and other considerations regarding the nature and functioning of network and/or their roles in the network.
c. Evaluate their current expertise in DCC and what kind of professional training/continuing education would be needed/requested by them for members of their group.
d. Prepare a report and evaluation of activities and information gathered in Phase I, with recommendations for Phase II.
2. Phase II:
a. Include any recommendations from Phase I that were approved by DCC-PSPE advisory council for Phase II.
b. Confirm members who have expressed interest in joining the network (and continue outreach to others); continue communicating with them.
c. Identify needs for further presentations about the network and about DCC to committed or potential members, staff, funders, and other relevant stakeholders.
d. Identify resources for continuing education/training for professionals on DCC and possible sources of such training, including service facilities, professional organizations, and similar outlets.
e. Prepare a report and evaluation of activities and information gathered in Phase II.
3. Phase III:
a. Prepare a plan for actual roll-out of network and training activities.
b. Prepare a plan to evaluate roll-out of network.
c. Prepare a plan to evaluate training activities.
Conditions of Contract
Budget for contractual evaluation and consultation set at maximum of $120,000 to cover contractual activities for 2 years.
At the completion of activities for Phases I–III, contract may be renewed to initiate Phase IV for implementation of plan and evaluation of roll-out activities.
References
Koren, P. E., DeChillo, N., & Friesen, B. J. (1992). Measuring empowerment in families whose children have emotional disabilities: A brief questionnaire. Rehabilitation Psychology, 37(4), 305–321.
Nachshen, J. S. (2005). Empowerment and families: Building bridges between parents and professionals, theory and research. Journal on Developmental Disabilities, 11(1), 67–75.
Reuter, C. M., Brimble, E., DeFilippo, C., Dries, A. M., Enns, G. M., Ashley, E. A.,…Wheeler, M. T. (2018). A new approach to rare diseases of children: The Undiagnosed Diseases Network. Journal of Pediatrics, 196, 291–297. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2017.12.029
