SWK 7402. Applied Practice
Evaluation
[Agency Name]
[Program/Division/Section Name]
[Student Name]
Spring 2013
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND
• Practice setting
• Problem(s)
• Intervention
• Theory
METHODS
• Clients
• Measures
• Design
• Data collection
• Analysis
RESULTS
• Summary of outcome
graphs
• Summary of goal
attainment data
DISCUSSION
• Level of support for
intervention
• Alternative explanations
of results
• Implications for clinical
practice
BACKGROUND: Practice Setting
• Description of agency
– [Public or private agency]
– [Services provided]
– [Service area]
– [Location of office(s)]
• Description of program/division/section
– [Population(s) served]
– [Service(s) provided]
BACKGROUND: Problem(s)
• [Primary problem facing agency/prog clients]
• [Secondary problem facing agency/prog clients]
• [Tertiary problem facing agency/prog clients]
---------―[Types]
―[Prevalence]
―[Causes]
―[Common treatment/intervention approaches]
BACKGROUND: Intervention
• [Intervention/advanced practice method being
evaluated]
–
–
–
–
[Voluntary vs. involuntary]
[Individ vs. family vs. group]
[Single session/crisis intervention vs. multiple session]
[At agency vs. in-home/community]
• Key elements
– [Element #1]
– [Element #2]
– [Etc.]
Figure 1. (Local) Intervention Theory
Increased
[faculty] social
support
Decreased
stress
Increased
well-being
Key intervention elements
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Express interest
Validate
feelings
Share thoughts,
suggestions
Encourage
contact with
field liaison
Improve
teaching, class
as-needed
1-5 rating of
overall wellbeing
BACKGROUND: Theory of Change
• [Theory(ies) supporting intervention]
• [Brief description]
• [Explanation of why/how theory key elements
of intervention]
Figure 2. C-CEP/Logic Model Elements
Condition
Targets
Intermediate Outcomes
Long-term Outcome
Problem
Objective 1
Objective 2
Goal
Financial
insolvency
• New job
• HH income
>300/wk
Decreased
psychological
stress
• Operational
measure?
Increased
sexual
satisfaction
• Operational
measure?
Increased wellbeing of
marriage
relationship
• Operational
measure?
Propositions & Theories
Assumptions
• [Specify theory(ies)]
Intervention-related activities
• [Specify intervention]
Inputs, Activities & Outputs
METHODS: Clients
• [Client/case #1]
• [Client/case #2]
• [Etc.]
---------―Alias/initials
―Demographics
―Presenting problem(s)
METHODS: Measures
• [Outcomes: outcome domains/concepts and
quantifiable measures to be graphed on y-axis]
– [Incl. measurement scale – e.g., 1-5, 0-30, yes/no]
• [Intervention: unit of time on x-axis]
• [Goal attainment (*) measure(s): overall
quantitative rating and/or qualitative
explanation]
METHODS: Design
• [Specify letters – e.g., “(A)B*”]
• [Describe, define each letter (one per bullet)
such that average helping professional, client,
family member etc. may understand]
METHODS: Data Collection
• [Overall description of logistical details for
collecting outcome measures data to be
graphed and goal attainment data]
– [Data source(s)]
– [Collection/compilation time points (e.g., at
beginning or end of each day, week in field]
– [Instrument(s): print log, Excel spreadsheet]
– [Data entry, updating of Excel file in Carmen…for
review and monitoring by instructor]
METHODS: Analysis
• [Analysis method(s) for client outcomes/graph
data (e.g., Trend Analysis for all + Nonoverlapping for those able to collect daily data]
• [Confirmatory reporting of goal attainment
data to help interpret graphed outcomes data]
Figure 3. Client Outcomes
General Well-being
Excellent
5.0
4.5
Good
4.0
3.9
3.3
3.5
Average
3.5
3.4
3.5
3
4
5
3.6
3.8
3.5
3.4
9
10
3.2
3.0
2.5
Fair
2.0
1.5
Poor
1.0
1
2
6
Week
7
8
RESULTS: Graphed Outcomes Data
• [“Story” told by trend lines (and nonoverlapping, if applicable) from Results graphs]
– [Possibly one bulleted summary per outcome]
RESULTS: Goal Attainment Data
• [Quantitative rating(s) (e.g., 1-5)]
– [Overall…and possibly specific areas/topics/issues]
• [Qualitative “themes”, reasons, etc. which
emerged from explanations of ratings provided
by clients while discussing graphed outcomes
vs. current life experience]
DISCUSSION: Support for Intervention
• [Overall level of support for intervention based
on results (e.g., none, weak, medium, strong)
• [Provision of specific facts/results supporting
overall level of support claim made above]
DISCUSSION: Alternative Explanations
• [1st alternative explanation of observed results]
• [2nd alternative explanation]
• [3rd alternative explanation]
---------―[Naturally occurring “regression to mean”, or
normal, after time of crisis, episode, etc.]
―[Invalid, possibly over simplistic, measures]
―[Insufficient time and/or intensity of intervention
to observe change within 10-week eval period]
―[Insufficient or unavail. baseline data to compare]
DISCUSSION: Implications for Practice
• [Lessons learned and/or questions raised for
your own professional practice from these
practice evaluation data]