IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v35y2012i2p273-279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of a complex, multisite, multilevel grants initiative

Author

Listed:
  • Rollison, Julia
  • Hill, Gary
  • Yu, Ping
  • Murray, Stephen
  • Mannix, Danyelle
  • Mathews-Younes, Anne
  • Wells, Michael E.

Abstract

The Safe Schools/Healthy Students (SS/HS) national evaluation seeks to assess both the implementation process and the results of the SS/HS initiative, exploring factors that have contributed to or detracted from grantee success. Each site is required to forge partnerships with representatives from education, mental health, juvenile justice, and law enforcement, coordinating and integrating their efforts and working together to contribute to comparable outcomes (e.g., reduced violence and alcohol and drug use, improved mental health services). The evaluation uses multiple data collection techniques (archival data, surveys, site visits, interviews, and focus groups) from a variety of sources (project directors, community partners, schools, and students) over several years. Certain characteristics of the SS/HS initiative represent unique challenges for the evaluation, including the absence of common metrics for baseline, outcome data, and lack of comparison group. A unifying program theory was required to address these challenges and synthesize the large amounts of qualitative and quantitative information collected. This article stresses the role of program theory in guiding the evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • Rollison, Julia & Hill, Gary & Yu, Ping & Murray, Stephen & Mannix, Danyelle & Mathews-Younes, Anne & Wells, Michael E., 2012. "Evaluation of a complex, multisite, multilevel grants initiative," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 273-279.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:35:y:2012:i:2:p:273-279
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2011.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718911000966
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hill, Janice R. & Thies, Jeanie, 2010. "Program theory and logic model to address the co-occurrence of domestic violence and child maltreatment," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 356-364, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:35:y:2012:i:2:p:273-279. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.