X hits on this document

Word document






9 / 19

and implementing the combined qualitative/quantitative evaluation, including selection and application of culturally appropriate standardized and design of new data collection instruments; supervising data collection by CMN staff; supervising design and maintenance of an ACCESS data base; analysis of evaluation data; training of CMN staff in evaluation processes, including qualitative analysis; design of a model for integrated services; preparation of reports based on the evaluation research. An important contribution of PRI’s role in this project was the conception and implementation – in conjunction with the CMN – of a DOJ-approved Institutional Review Board (IRB) at CMN, allowing the College to expand its capacity for behavioral research.  The IRB is now used by the Menominee Tribe to review all research involving tribal members residing on the reservation.  It serves as a model for IRBs at other tribal colleges and in other settings.  (2001- March 2003)

Deputy Project Director, Family Service Worker Credentialing, funded by Administration for Children and Families, under contract with the College of Menominee Nation (CMN), Wisconsin.  Responsible for designing and implementing the evaluation, including the training needs assessment, data collection instrument design and pilot testing, assuring quality of data collection, and analyzing results.  An important aspect of. Dr. Jillson’s role is training CMN staff in the design of training and program evaluation methods.  (2001-December 2002)

Project Director, Starting Early Starting Smart Data Coordinating Center, supported by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), under subcontract with EMT Associates.  Participated in designing and implementing a cross-site evaluation of 12 grantees that are providing and evaluating comprehensive services to high risk children and their caregivers, including: identification and review of standardized instruments for use with children and their caregivers; conceptualization and design of instruments related to evaluation of integrated services; conduct of site visits to grantees to collect baseline data and information; participation in deliberations of the Steering Committee and in the development and/or revision of data collection instruments; analysis of qualitative and quantitative data and information across sites; wrote draft sections of reports or completed reports on special topics and participating in revision of draft reports.  A major focus of PRI’s activities was the conceptual design and implementation of evaluation methods related to services and systems integration, including design of de novo data collection instruments and use of integrated qualitative and quantitative research methods. (1996-2002)

Project Director, Technical Support for the Development of the Center of Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) Knowledge Development and Application (KD&A) Program. Provide guidance and direction for this project, which entailed the use of policy delphi and other structured group process methods (including computer-based decision models) to engage experts in deliberating issues related to priority areas concerning substance abuse and related areas in health and social policy. (1998-1999)

Project Director, Cross-site Assessment of Comprehensive Service Grants, under contract to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.   The purpose of the project was to assess the impact and provide lessons learned from SAMHSA’s Integrated Children and Family Initiative: Responding to Unmet Needs.  PRI’s responsibilities included: designing and implementing a cross-site evaluation of the eight community-based substance abuse and mental health treatment and prevention programs that provided comprehensive health and social services for high risk children and their caregivers.  This entailed developing basic quarterly report formats and intaking and analyzing the quarterly report data; adapting a diagnostic assessment process used to describe the structure, populations served, nature of services, and other organizational and service delivery factors; conducting site visits to grantees and analyzing the results of the on-site data collection process; and conducting an assessment of this two-year demonstration of

Document info
Document views64
Page views64
Page last viewedMon Jan 23 03:20:45 UTC 2017