Need back in 1 hour from now

peer 1

While evaluating my findings of the program evaluations, there was an issue with my findings among the agency and the administrators. Posavac stated that, "Evaluators raise the chances of findings being utilized effectively when they have helped program personnel understand that nearly every evaluation brings both good and bad news, and that the important question is “What directions for program improvement are implied by the evaluation findings?” The goal is to improve and modify programs, not to enshrine or destroy them." (Posavac, 2010, p.268) This statement is a great example of what my program is dealing with. SCDJJ Training Program is successful, but will require certain improvements in order to reach its full potential. One of the issue that posed a problem was recognition of service provider’s needs. Most time the evaluators are conducting an assessment, but does not understand the needs of the stakeholders. The Training Program of SCDJJ seems to fall short within this a category. While conducting interviews, it was stated from the trainers and the participants that there seems to be a lack in efficient training equipment. Also, the administrators do not have a good idea of what training need to be updated to reflect what the officers are actually facing every day. Posavac states, "The best evaluators work closely with stakeholders and learn their professional language so as to recognize their needs and, ultimately, increase the utilization of findings, but yet maintain an objective posture toward the program." (Posavac, 2010, p.269) This will also build a sense of credibility to the stakeholders because the evaluator has a sense of understanding of the pressures included in their duties.  The second issue using the proper methodology. As stated by Posavac, “It is important to match the evaluation design to the needs of the agency seeking the evaluation.” (Posavac, 2010 p.260) This has been a big issue within the training program as SCDJJ. The reason for this is that administration finds it to be useful to just use outside sources without doing the research to figure how it will affect our agency/ program. This in hien sight makes it difficult for the evaluator to figure out exactly what methods to use while keeping a certain budget in mind.  “Often evaluators can help stakeholders by developing a method to track and verify implementation or by helping the staff to clarify their implicit impact model.” (Posavac, 2010 p.260) This can be changed if the proper research of data is conducted and the methodology that will be used is tailored specifically for this program.  REFERENCES: Posavac, E.J. (2010).  Program Evaluation Methods and Case Studies, 8th Edition.  (South University).  Retrieved from https://digitalbookshelf.southuniversity.edu/#/books/9781256507673/  

peer2

Evaluation presents how a program is monitored and evaluated, also giving recommendations of how the result can help shape the program improvement as well as decision making. As the final evaluation is done, it narrates the how, what and why this matters to the program and its improvement. The information acquired helps to support the program findings, creating awareness, show success and encouraging sustainability. "Effective communication and reporting facilities hearing among stakeholders and other audiences are very crucial in the evaluation process. (Torres et al, 2005 p2).

When evaluation findings are not well received there is definitely a cause for concern. An improvement plan to do better should be set in motion and needs to be taken seriously. Areas that need improvement should be given priority and direction to fix it. Different ways to handle things to yield different outcome is equally important. Being proactive can go an extra mile in making things right by consulting every group involved in the program finding out what went wrong and how to make it better. Always willing to listen with friendly welcoming positive approach no matter how bad things seem to be. This shows that the constructive criticism is appreciated. 

Bad evaluations are always a wakeup call and sometimes it turns into good luck in the end. Stakeholders or agency and its administrators sometimes put pressure on the evaluator to alter findings contributing to the problem. Evaluator may discover illegal unethical behavior but intimidated to speak up and sometimes deliberately modified prior to release. Politics in the other hand can undermine integrity of the evaluation, measuring one level but generalizing another. Politicians sometimes develop cozy relationships with the evaluator downplaying the importance of the problem or even denying that they exist.

They may go as far as criticizing the program and its evaluation claiming that it have been done differently just to meet their agenda. Using off the record information and allowing it into interpretation phase by ignoring the real findings of evaluations creates problem. As an evaluator, both personal and professional integrity must be maintained uncovering of any wrong doing should be discretely reported to the right group with due consideration for the principle. Balanced feedback needs to be given not just glossing over the strength and not the weakness and ensures accountability promotes growth and encourages sense of pride in all findings.

Baker, B. B. (n.d.). Home | Effectiveness Initiatives in Evaluative Thinking. Retrieved March 03, 2017, from http://evaluativethinking.org/