Summary of Process Evaluation
Results of the process evaluation indicate that 129 individual parents or caregivers (115 fami- lies) in Regions I, III, and IV participated in the PTP from October 2003 through November 2005. The typical client was female, white, 27 years of age, unemployed, and economically poor; has an 11th grade education and two young children; and uses methamphetamines. The children were referred primarily for neglect only (58%).
CHAPTER 4. OUTCOME EVALUATION
The outcomes of primary interest are substance abuse treatment entry, treatment completion, family reunification/permanency, and child safety. The outcomes presented in this report are based on comparisons between participants in the PTP and outcomes of other sources such as Idaho State and of similar projects in the literature. An intermediate outcome of program impacts on participants’ motivation to recognize their AODA problems and to initiate and maintain actions to change their AODA problems also is presented. This outcomes section moves beyond the Process Evaluation findings to investigate aspects of the program that might be improved.
1. CLIENT CHANGES DURING PARTICIPATION
In understanding changes participants made while in this program, one focus is on internal states. The evaluation question relating to program impact on participants’ internal states was “How did participants vary in their motivation to change while engaged in substance abuse liaison services?” The PTP theory of change (Weiss, 1995) posits that when SALs apply MI techniques (Miller & Rollnick, 2002) clients will experience increasing recognition of their AOD problems, and clients will initiate and maintain actions aimed toward changing their AOD use. These two program logic positions lead to the following two distinct hypotheses:
Participants will increasingly recognize that AODA use is problematic for them.
Participants will increasingly initiate and maintain actions aimed toward changing their
Data collected using SOCRATES (Miller & Rollnick, 1993) can help answer the evaluation question by testing these hypotheses. Specifically, SOCRATES returns two scale scores: one measuring an individual’s recognition of a problem and one measuring an individual’s tak- ing steps toward changing problem behaviors. These scales are referred to as the recognition and taking steps scales in this analysis. SOCRATES uses forms for alcohol use and drug use, and data from these two forms were analyzed separately for the recognition and taking steps scales. Almost all participants completed the SOCRATES drug form scales, and about half completed the SOCRATES alcohol form scales. Participants were given the instrument that coincided with their drug of choice; when both drugs and alcohol were equally problematic, participants completed both. Two participants had scores for neither.
Idaho Pre-Treatment Program