100 words about this paper

First thing, I want you to do before you comment on that paper. Read the paper I send you and follow those instructions. To support the 100 words comments you must base on those attachments readings I send to you or quote from the Vito, G. F. & Higgins, G. E. (2015). When you cite that 100 words send me in a separate page the exact page number you cited from the reading attachment I sent to you. I want to verify if what you write come from directly Vito, G. F. & Higgins, G. E. (2015). Required Reading: Vito, G. F. & Higgins, G. E. (2015). Practical Program Evaluation for Criminal Justice. Waltham, MA: Elsevier. Assignments must be written and typed following the guidelines in the Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (APA manual), and must be written at college level, with good sentence structure and good syntax. Students must also adhere to the professional guidelines for the use of copyrighted literature and commercially produced materials, as well as materials generated by colleagues and friends and information collected from conferences and presentations.
rodericada.docx

chapter09_lecture_slides.pptx

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
100 words about this paper
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

program_evaluation_book.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Rodericada
Ethics refers to how the evaluation research is conformed to professional standards of what is
“accurate and inaccurate”. In conducting ethical research. Its aim according to (Vito & Higgens,
2014) is to prevent harm to research subjects while promoting a research design to help inform
public policy with accurate and up to date results. There are five ethical principles implemented
by the American Association. These principles are to guide professional evaluators and provide
information to clients and the public on how ethical evaluators must follow and sustain. The five
principals provide an ethical framework within criminal justice program evaluation should be
conducted.
Principal A is Systematic Inquiry which means evaluators will conduct data-based and efficient
analysis. Evaluators should operate procedures that will have higher procedural ethics that are
appropriate to the questions and subjects to each evaluation given. The evaluators should answer
questions clearly and present their methods and analysis techniques in sufficient features to
permit concerns to allow others to construe and review their work. Principal B is Competence
which means the evaluators will discuss how knowledgeable the evaluator is in the procedures
operation. The evaluator should possess the practical skills, background, and education to
accomplish the research tasks that is required by the evaluation process. In addition, the
evaluator must be aware of cultural competence which means to be aware of their own
assumptions of their culture as well as understanding other cultures are diverse such as the
participants and stakeholders in the evaluation. Lastly, the evaluator must have knowledge in
appropriate evaluation methods when working in culturally diverse groups and other factors
relevant to the program evaluation.
Principal C refers to Evaluators display of integrity and honesty in their own personal behavior
and with their entire evaluation process as well. Evaluators should negotiate with clients and
stakeholders regarding the costs of the research, the tasks to be undertaken, the limitations of the
methods, the opportunity of the results attained, and the use of the data from the evaluation.
Before the research is commenced, evaluators should reveal all potential conflicts of interest they
may have with their role as evaluators. If any changes in the original negotiated plans are made,
evaluators should record why they were made and how they may be significantly affect the scope
and results of the research. Clients and stakeholders should be informed of these changes in a
timely fashion. No misrepresentation should be made in the methods or data findings of the
research, as well as attempting to prevent the misuse of their research by others. Finally,
evaluators must disclose the limitations of the research findings and the source of funding and of
the request for the evaluation.
Principal D refers to the evaluators respect for people and their self-worth of respondents,
program participants, and other evaluation stakeholders. Out of respect for people evaluators
must aware of the contextual factors that many influence the results of a study, including
geographic location, timing, political and social climate, economic conditions, and other relevant
activities occurring simultaneously. Evaluators must adhere to traditional social science ethical
principles regarding the protection of human subjects including anonymity, confidentiality and
disclosure. Lastly, Principal E refers to the responsibilities for general and public welfare:
Evaluators should eloquent and contemplate the diversity of general and public interest and
values that may be related to the evaluation.
References
Vito, F. G., & Higgens, E. G. (2014, June). Practical Program Evaluation for Criminal Justice.
Retrieved from Chegg.com: https://ereader.chegg.com/#/books/9781317521921/
Book
Cover
Here
Chapter 9
Reporting and Using Evaluations
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
1
Reporting and Using Evaluations
?
?
?
Report must be clearly and specifically
communicated
Information must be given to those who
can use it
The aim of the report must be to provide
information and advice on what should be
done and which alternatives are worth
consideration
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
2
Abstract or Program Summary
?
Present the purpose of the program, how
the evaluation was conducted, and a
summary of research findings
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
3
Presenting the Theory Supporting
the Program
?
Identify and describe theory that will serve
as the basis for the program and the
expectation that it will have the desired
impact
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
4
Presenting the Process Evaluation
?
?
?
?
Emphasis is on how the host organization
served as the basis for the implementation
of the program
The evaluator should describe program
implementation
Describe program destruction and delivery
in detail
Provide a description of how services were
delivered
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
5
Presenting the Process Evaluation
?
The process evaluation should include:
?
?
?
?
?
?
Relevant description on program operations
Consider the management of the program
Describe and assess how the desired service
was provided by the program
Must tap the opinions of program staff and
clients
Describe the nature of the client population
Identify and frankly present management
issues
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
6
Presenting the Process Evaluation
?
The process evaluation should include:
?
?
How implementation issues affect service
delivery
Assessing service delivery inovlves observing
and describing how it was delivered by
program staff
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
7
Presenting the Impact Evaluation
?
?
?
This is the meat of the evaluation
Conclusions are reached and supporting
data are presented
The summary is a crucial aspect of the
report because it is the first section
consulted by readers
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
8
Factors Influencing the Use of
Program Evaluation Results
?
?
?
?
Researchers focus on analysis to
determine “what works” in criminal justice
Practitioners are looking for language to
tell them how to do it
Criminology needs to get both data and
information into the hands of policy makers
and administrators
Must identify stakeholders in the process
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
9
Factors Influencing the Use of
Program Evaluation Results
?
“Collaborative Evaluation” assumes that
active ongoing engagement between
evaluators and program staff will result in
stronger evaluation designs, enhanced
data collection and analysis, and results
that stakeholders understand and use
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
10
Table 9.1 Focus of Process and
Impact Evaluations
Process Evaluation Focus
Inputs
Results
Personnel
Arrests
Equipment
People trained
Expenditures
Barriers installed
Other resources
Other tasks accomplished
Impact Evaluation Focus
Outcomes
Crimes reduced
Fear abated
Accidents reduced
Other reductions in problems
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
11
Table 9.2 Interpreting Results of
Process and Impact Evaluations
Process
Evaluation
Results
Impact
Evaluation
Results
Response
Implemented
as Planned
Problem
A. Evidence that
declined and no the response
other likely
caused the
cause
decline
Problem did not
decline
Response Not
Implemented
as Planned
C. Suggests that
the response
was accidentally
effective or that
other factors
may have
caused the
decline
B. Evidence that D. Little is
the response
learned
was ineffective
Copyright © 2014, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved
12
GENNARO F. VITO & GEORGE E. HIGGINS
•
Examines major evaluation types (as well as the benefits, concerns, and constraints of each), including needs
evaluations, theory evaluations, process evaluations, outcome/impact evaluations, and cost-efficiency evaluations.
•
Defines the data points each evaluation type requires, and the manner in which these data can be collected.
•
Demonstrates how different types of evaluations can be used together to provide clear information regarding a
program’s overall performance level.
•
Cites and makes use of actual, real-world policy evaluations and vetted programs.
When closely examined, many of the most prominent criminal justice policies to emerge over the last 30 years are found wanting.
High rates of incarceration and recidivism reflect the flaws of many contemporary crime prevention approaches. It’s becoming
increasingly clear that policy need not just be executed, but properly evaluated. Practical Program Evaluation for Criminal
Justice describes applicable, step-by-step instructions on how to determine whether an initiative is truly necessary prior to its
adoption (thus eliminating the risk of wasting resources), as well as how to accurately gauge its effectiveness during initial rollout
stages. This is achieved through the gradual introduction of basic data analysis procedures and statistical techniques, which, once
mastered, can prove or disprove a program’s worth and make for an improved criminal justice system. Practical Program
Evaluation for Criminal Justice provides the knowledge and tools needed to successfully apply the principles of
fiscal responsibility, accountability, and evidence-based practice to criminal justice reform plans.
Gennaro F. Vito is a Distinguished University Scholar and professor in the Department of Justice Administration at the University
of Louisville, where he has a faculty appointment in the Administrative Officer’s Course of the Southern Police Institute. He holds a
Ph.D. in public administration from The Ohio State University. He is a past President and Fellow of the Academy of Criminal Justice
Sciences and received its Bruce Smith Sr. Award in 2012. His research interests are concerned with criminal justice policy analysis
and program evaluation and police management.
George E. Higgins is a Professor in the Department of Justice Administration at the University of Louisville where he also serves
as the Ph.D. Program Coordinator. He received his Ph.D. in Criminology from Indiana University of Pennsylvania in 2001. He has
published more than 100 journal articles and book chapters primarily in the areas of criminological theory testing, racial profiling,
and cybercrime. In 2009, he was awarded the Coramae Richey Mann Leadership Award, which is the top award from the Minority
and Women’s Section of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences for research and leadership in race and ethnicity research. He
is the past editor of the American Journal of Criminal Justice and the current editor of The Journal of Criminal Justice Education.
Criminal Justice | Public Policy
PRACTICAL PROGRAM EVALUATION FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
An applicable, step-by-step explanation of how to conduct credible criminal justice program evaluations
and improve the quality and effectiveness of the criminal justice system.
VITO • HIGGINS
PRACTICAL PROGRAM
EVALUATION FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
ISBN 978-1-4557-7770-9
9 781455 777709
Routledge
www.routledge.com
PRACTICAL PROGRAM
EVALUATION FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE
GENNARO F. VITO & GEORGE E. HIGGINS
PRACTICAL
PROGRAM
E VA L U AT I O N F O R
CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Page Intentionally Left Blank
PRACTICAL
PROGRAM
E VA L U AT I O N F O R
CRIMINAL JUSTICE
GENNARO F. VITO
GEORGE E. HIGGINS
First published 2015 by Anderson Publishing
Published 2015 by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
Copyright © 2015 Taylor & Francis. All rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any
infor mation storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from
the publishers.
Notices
No responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to
persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise,
or from any use of operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas
contained in the material herein.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and
knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or
experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should
be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for
whom they have a professional responsibility.
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and
are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as
may be noted herein).
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Application Submitted
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN-13: 978-1-4557-7770-9 (pbk)
Dedication
To the Vito and Higgins families.
Page Intentionally Left Blank
CONTENTS
Digital Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Chapter 1
Getting Started with Program Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Administrator and Evaluator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Strengths and Weaknesses of Program Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Evidence-Based Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Meta-Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Campbell Collaboration (Crime and Justice Group) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Discussion Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Chapter 2
Planning a Program Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Problem-Oriented Policing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Planning an Evaluation Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Logic Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Politics of Evaluation Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Ethical Issues in Evaluation Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Discussion Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Chapter 3
Needs Assessment Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
De?nition of Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Problems with Needs Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
vii
viii
CONTENTS
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Discussion Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Chapter 4
Theory-Driven Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Evaluability Assessment Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Describing and Producing Program Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Analyzing Program Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Discussion Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Additional Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Chapter 5
Process Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Process Evaluation: Program Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Process Evaluation: Monitoring Conduct of Evaluation
Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Process Evaluation: Use of Qualitative Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Process Evaluation Assessment: Evidence-Based
Correctional Program Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Discussion Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Chapter 6
Outcome Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Classic Experimental Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
To Experiment or not to Experiment? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Quasi-Experimental Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Before-and-After Design (One Group Pre-Test, Post-Test Design) . . . . 91
Question of Causation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
CONTENTS
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Discussion Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Chapter 7
Cost-ef?ciency Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Limits of C …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Order a unique copy of this paper
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency

Order your essay today and save 15% with the discount code DISCOUNT15