X hits on this document

PDF document

Diane Rae Davis, PhD and Amber Cleverly, MSW - page 15 / 80

179 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

15 / 80

  • 1.

    Are parents in the PTP more likely to access and complete AODA treatment?

  • 2.

    Are children in the PTP more likely to be reunified safely with their parents, or able

to remain at home?

  • 3.

    Are families in the PTP less likely to experience subsequent maltreatment?

  • 4.

    Will the advent of the PTP positively affect the collaboration between the IDHW

and substance abuse treatment providers via the work of SALs?

Sources of Data. The evaluation of the PTP utilized multiple sources of data and multiple methods of data collection. Data pertaining to placement, permanence, and child safety came from the IDHW database. Substance abuse treatment data came from the statewide substance abuse treatment provider system (BPA) and IDHW. Demographic and Pre-Treatment service data came from forms completed by SALs and participants in each region. A final source of data came from interviews and surveys of clients, caseworkers, supervisors, managers, and substance abuse professionals

CHAPTER 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM START-UP AND IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

1. PROGRAM START-UP CHALLENGES

Program Elements

Evaluation. Although the original proposal was written and accepted with a minimum evalu- ation component (parents’ attitude changes and follow-through to substance abuse treatment, plus child safety and child permanency outcomes), it became clear by June 2003, that the demands of the local evaluation process were larger than the internal resources. An outside evaluator, Diane Davis, PhD, as well as a research assistant, Amber Cleverly, MSW, were hired through the Idaho Research and Training Center in July 2003. Subsequently, data col- lection instruments were redesigned and the project received approval through the Institu- tional Review Board (IRB) at Eastern Washington University. The implementation of the data collection system was delayed from June 2003 to October 2003, due to the need for an IRB review and the design of new data collection instruments.

In addition, it soon became clear that the baseline data collected by the earlier evaluation team was unreliable because of major inconsistencies regarding time periods, types of cases included, and types of data collected. To gauge effectiveness, two new evaluation methods were designed: 1) a comparison of treatment entry and completion rates and child safety and permanence results from parents who completed the PTP to other parents with substance abuse issues in the state and nationally, and 2) a comparison of the effectiveness rating of social workers and supervisors on elements such as motivating parents to enter treatment and treatment entry before and after implementation of the PTP.

Idaho Pre-Treatment Program

14

Document info
Document views179
Page views179
Page last viewedSun Dec 04 19:51:44 UTC 2016
Pages80
Paragraphs2133
Words26225

Comments