SOCW 6311 Social Work Research Assignment

SOCW 6311 Social Work Research Assignment

Table of Contents

Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457	Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5%	Writer Classification: PhD competent
Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago	Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours	Revision: Permitted
Sources: 4-6	Course Level: Masters/University College	Guarantee Status: 96-99%

Instructions

SOCW 6311 Social Work Research Assignment

SOCW 6311, Social Work, Research, Assignment

Please note that this is a master level course so master level work. Please check the grammar, use APA format and you have to use the reading that I have provided to you. You must answer all the questions that I post. Thank you. Please NOTE that my school is checking for plagiaries through Safe Assign

• Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.

Chapter 8, “Improving How Programs and Practice Work” (pp. 167–207)

• Becker, L. A. (1999). Statistical and clinical significance. Retrieved from https://www.uccs.edu/lbecker/clinsig
• Man-Son-Hing, M., Laupacis, A., O’Rourke, K., Molnar, F. J., Mahon, J., Chan, K. B., & Wells, G. (2002). Determination of the clinical importance of study results. Journal of general internal medicine, 17(6), 469–476. Retrieved from Walden Databases.
• Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen S. (Eds.). (2014b). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing. [Vital Source e- reader]. Read the following section:

o “Social Work Research: Qualitative Groups” (pp. 68–69)

• Bliss, M. J., & Emshoff, J. G. (2002). Workbook for designing a process evaluation. Georgia Department of Human Resources, Division of Public Health. Retrieved from http://beta.roadsafetyevaluation.com/evaluationguides/info/workbook-for-designing-a-process-evaluation.pdf.

Assignment: Drafting a Process Evaluation

The steps for process evaluation outlined by Bliss and Emshoff (2002) may seem very similar to those for conducting other types of evaluation that you have learned about in this course; in fact, it is the purpose and timing of a process evaluation that most distinguishes it from other types of evaluation. A process evaluation is conducted during the implementation of the program to evaluate whether the program has been implemented as intended and how the delivery of a program can be improved. A process evaluation can also be useful in supporting an outcome evaluation by helping to determine the reason behind program outcomes.

There are several reasons for conducting process evaluation throughout the implementation of a program. Chief among them is to compare the program that is being delivered to the original program plan, in order to identify gaps and make improvements. Therefore, documentation from the planning stage may prove useful when planning a process evaluation.

For this Assignment, you either build on the work that you completed in Weeks 6, 7, and 8 related to a support group for caregivers, or on your knowledge about a program with which you are familiar. Review the resource “Workbook for Designing a Process Evaluation”.

Week 6 assignment

Tobacco Control Program

A social worker needs to create a precise, thorough plan to verify the success of program evaluation. For instance, it should portray the description of the objective of the program evaluation, information required and the analysis and methods that will be used. Also, it should recognize and solve all the worries of the participants (Dudley, 2014). All the information should be presented in away all the partners will understand. All of these assist the public servant to get the provision required to conduct a practical assessment.

The Stakeholders and Their Role

These are persons who are affected by the consumption of tobacco, such as clients, public affiliates and elected officials. Secondly, they are individuals in management such as program directors and managers, the staff, associates, the subsidy organization and the political unions (Chapter 1). Also, they include the people who can be able to decide on the decisions of the project, for example; policymakers, associates, subsidy agencies, political parties, and the public.

The funders provide financial investments into the program. Also, the program staff brings changes to people’s lives as planned by the program. The program constituents participate by giving feedback on what way it is assisting them to achieve their objectives. Community leaders ensure that the program is making a difference in the community. They could also make changes to the executive team if the application is not working well (Chapter 3). The policymakers check if the program is supporting or opposing their views to help their stories and make their arguments more persuasive.

Concerns

The stakeholders had matters such as an appropriate manner of the financial statements, the influence of administration retirement and moral ways.

Purposes

This initiative uses the process of formative evaluation, which pursues to comprehend whether the approach or application is still carried out, asses the effort if it is marching the outcomes, recognizes firmness plus weakness of the energy and is crucial in communicating to accommodate the hard work (Dudley, 2014). Process evaluation contains four purposes associated with the field of tobacco control and the field of tobacco control: oversee the program, improving it, developing successful models and initiative liability.

This plan of action audit comprises the following, recording and brief contributions plus productivities of the program. For instance, the total amount of money used, turnouts of volunteers, or staff assimilated into events of the plan of action, the number of people reached and others. The improvement of the program to standards by comparing the inputs, activities, and outputs. Such as checking if we are entering the intended targets or if they have the required expertise (Chapter 6). Also, by creating powerful versions, it assesses how by identifying the most effective models the process is connected to conclusions.

Like it addresses the weaknesses and strengths in distinct mechanisms in a multiple-stage program or what is the best way for getting the precise outcome, such as attaining no-smoking directions accepted. Finally, program answerability demonstrates to financing in which the program’s assets are used well or if funds have been allocated efficiently (Chapter 4).

Questions Addressed

According to Dudley (2014), some of the questions asked to determine the organization’s evaluation capacity include; does the organization have leaders who are willing to take the risk, share their learning with funders, board members and staff? Does your organization provide funds for evaluation support? Does your evaluation have a culture of using data and knowledge? Does your organization share data across program locations and have a system or process for protecting the data? Does the organization have a staff that has some amount of time dedicated to providing evaluator or funder?

Type of Evaluation

This contains the formative process achievement measure. The evaluators also will assist in projecting partners to collect required data regarding Tobacco control measures. Formulating evaluating approaches leads to productiveness concerning the plan of action, performs and in ways of executing the plan considering the proposed timeline (Logan & Royse, 2010). Throughout the project, formative evaluation data will be shared with all the partners. The proposed schedule is three years to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of the project. Finally, the outcomes shall be encompassed in the findings semi-quarterly.

Addressing the Concerns

According to Dudley (2014), stakeholders should always be assured that their concerns will be discussed and clarified. The ethical dilemma is solved by identifying the problems and making sure they are honest and are founded on real proofs. All the given information must be verified, and it is crucial to determine if there is a conflict of values that should be discussed.

The financial concerns are addressed by assuring the stakeholders that the resources are used most efficiently to ensure the objectives are solved

Monitoring programs, building a successful initiative version, and show obligation are one of the essential parts in identifying ways to improve your program through process evaluation (W. K. Kellogg Foundation, 2017). Process assessment helps to focus your resources and time better to provide the most significant advantage when used in coordination with outcome evaluation. Overtime helps you modify activities and program components efficiently as required. This is as a result of the systematic collection of process information. This increases your capability in solving the health costs of drug usage and approval for funding the program.

References

Chapter 1, “Evaluation and Social Work: Making the Connection” (pp. 1–26)

Chapter 4, “Common Type of Evaluations” (pp. 71–89)

Chapter 4, “Overview of the Evaluation Process That Reflects Evaluation Thinking”

Chapter 5, “Focusing an Evaluation” (pp. 90–105)

Chapter 5, “Preparing for the Evaluation”

Chapter 6, “Determine Stakeholders and Engage Them in Evaluation”

Chapter 7, “Developing a Logic Model, Evaluation Questions, “Measurement Framework, and Evaluation Plan”

Chapter 8, “Data Collection and Analysis”

Chapter 9, “Summarize, Communicate and Reflection on Evaluation Findings”

Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.

Logan, T. K., & Royse, D. (2010). Program evaluation studies. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 221–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

1. K. Kellogg Foundation. (2017). The step-by-step guide to evaluation: How to become savvy evaluation consumers. Retrieved from https://www.wkkf.org/resource-directory/resource/2010/w-k-kellogg-foundation-evaluation-handbook

assignment:

Drafting a Process Evaluation

a 4- to 5-page plan for a process evaluation. Include the following minimal information:

• A description of the key program elements
• A description of the strategies that the program uses to produce change
• A description of the needs of the target population
• An explanation of why a process evaluation is important for the program
• A plan for building relationships with the staff and management
• Broad questions to be answered by the process evaluation
• Specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation
• A plan for gathering and analyzing the information

 

 

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow

 

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!