Evaluation of a complex, multisite, multilevel grants initiative
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.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- 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.
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: (Zhang, Lei)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.