Research Plan

The stakeholders that are included in my study are the participants, staff, volunteers, and the non-profit that fund the program. The participants are the children and families who have a child or children in the public schools who are food insecure. The staff and volunteers selflessly put their heart and soul into ensuring that the program run smoothly and efficient. The non-profit organizations funded the program so that the needs of the participants were met.

 An improvement-focused approach relates to my study. I like this approach because improvements can be made in programs when discrepancies are noticed between what is observed and what was planned, projected, or needed. This type of evaluation is a good fit for my evaluation process because evaluators help program staff to discover discrepancies between program objectives and the unmet needs of the target population, between program implementation and program plans, between expectations of the target population and the services delivered, or between outcomes achieved and outcomes projected. Furthermore, if the point of the evaluation is to improve the program, which is nearly always the point, then discrepancies provide a place to seek to effect improvements. To learn how to improve a program, staff members need to discover what has occurred as planned and what has not.  The improvement-focused approach is said to best meets the criteria necessary for effective evaluation: serving the needs of stakeholders, providing valid information, and offering an alternative point of view to those doing the really hard work of serving program participants. My two evaluation questions are how effective is the program at meeting the participants needs? I think this question is important because the people for whom a service is designed frequently have no voice in the planning and implementation of programs. This means that the group which the program was developed is often the least consulted. However, participants are not unified, they seldom have spokespersons, and they do not hire evaluators. Among the ways evaluators can fulfill their responsibilities to participants is to compare the participants’ needs with the service offered, to help the staff and manager better understand those needs, and to structure recommendations around both needs and strengths. The interest of the manager and staff have sometimes taken precedence over those of the participants. There is no reason to assume that program participants know fully what they need, but that does not mean that their views can be ignored.

 How effectively does the program reach the potential participants or other potential stakeholders (donors) in the community? The needs of the staff are best served if the evaluation can provide practical guidance, improving the effectiveness with which they serve clients or consumers. If a staff is provided with viable alternatives to the current procedures, they may be well served by an evaluation. Most service agencies receive some of their financial support from local community residents through taxes and contributions, or indirectly through reductions in property taxes often enjoyed by nonprofit organizations. In some ways the local community is in a position like that of the people served. The advantages of greater numbers of people who fit specific populations that might have been difficult or even impossible to reach using more traditional methods is hard to overstate. The improvement-focused approach aligns with my two evaluation questions in many ways. One way is by allowing me to see if the needs are met of the participants and does staff members have the needed skills, and it will help improve the program. I’ll be able to provide valid information from the evaluation too. Another way, I’ll be able to find out what ways are the agency presenting the information out to the participants. Are the goods nutritional enough for the families and what could they add to help ensure food insecure for the families. Another thing that I could gather is what resources are available? Another question about the use of the program funding concerns whether the funds spent in a way compatible with the intention of the funding stakeholder.

The data collections methods that I would use is interviews, surveys, and observations. I choose these methods because managers of programs are going to pay close attention to evaluation reports when evaluators demonstrate that they recognize the strengths of program, not just the ways in which the program has fallen short and can be improved. After all, evaluators are to look for merit and worth in programs. Surveys and interviews are good ways for program participants to provide information that is available from other sources. Furthermore, this gives the participants a way to provide feedback about how the feel about the program. Written surveys and interviews are ways to gather information from participants such as open-ended questions in contrast to forced-choice or Liker-type questions. Observers who are not part of a program often provide perspectives that neither participants nor staff can. Observers could be experts  who are familiar with a wide range of similar programs or the needs the program is designed to meet, people especially trained to rate the variables that describe the process or outcomes of a program. For my evaluation a qualitative method would work better for me, to give me more options. All methods have its advantages and disadvantages in an evaluation. One of the major advantages of qualitative methods is its flexibility and appropriate use in innovative and novel settings. The goal of qualitative evaluation is to understand the program, procedure, or policy being studied; it is essential for the evaluator personally to observe the entity being evaluated. Qualitative evaluators seek to develop an understanding of how program operates; they do not seek to answer predefined questions. Qualitative interviewing is different from simply administering a written survey orally. Qualitative evaluators use open-ended unstructured questions to learn detailed information about programs. Interviewers want the respondents to use their own words, thought patterns, and values when answering the questions.

            This research method would work best in answering my evaluation question because, I want respondents to use their own words in answering questions without being prompted. I think the participants will be more willing to answer questions if they are able to tell how they feel about the program. One of the most crucial points in qualitative interviews is to avoid using questions that can be answered “Yes” or “No”. Open-ended questions encourage the respondents to talk and elaborate. Almost all work with stakeholders, such as trying to understand what information is most important to them, is part of the qualitative approach to program evaluation. I think this approach is more personal to so, I think this approach will benefit my evaluation process.

Reference:

Linfield, K. J., & Posavac, E. J. (2018a). Program Evaluation: Methods and Case Studies (9th ed.). Routledge.