1 / 19

Developmental Disabilities Program Independent Evaluation (DDPIE) Project

Developmental Disabilities Program Independent Evaluation (DDPIE) Project. Lynn Elinson, Ph.D. Project Director. Evaluation Standards*. Utility Feasibility Propriety Accuracy *Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. Purpose of the Independent Evaluation.

ivie
Download Presentation

Developmental Disabilities Program Independent Evaluation (DDPIE) Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Developmental Disabilities Program Independent Evaluation (DDPIE) Project Lynn Elinson, Ph.D. Project Director

  2. Evaluation Standards* • Utility • Feasibility • Propriety • Accuracy *Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation

  3. Purpose of the Independent Evaluation • Demonstrate impact of DD Network programs on: • Individuals • Families • Service providers • State systems • Provide feedback to ADD to help improve the effectiveness of its programs and policies • Promote accountability to the public

  4. Purpose for UCEDDs • Identification of accomplishments from external organization • Identification of areas that need improvement

  5. DDPIE Project • Independent evaluation • 2 phases • Phase 1 – development and testing of tools • Phase 2 – full-scale evaluation • Westat – contracted by ADD to implement Phase 1

  6. Evaluation Standards Indicators What do we hope to achieve? What do we observe (measurement of indicators)? Comparison Are there differences/discrepancies? What is the nature and extent of the differences? What action needs to be taken?

  7. Open Systems Model Effectiveness Structure (Input) Process Output (Product) Outcome Efficiency

  8. Basic Evaluation Approach • Performance-based approach • Development of standards and indicators • Measurement of indicators to determine level at which standards are being met • Development of measurement matrices that contain standards, indicators, and performance levels (not developed; limited development; adequate development) • Determination of overall performance at the national level

  9. Evaluation Tools • Measurement matrices - standards - indicators (structures, processes, outputs, outcomes) - performance levels • Data collection instruments

  10. INDEPENDENT EVALUATION DD Act Administered by ADD Programs DD Councils P&As UCEDDs Collaboration KEY FUNCTIONS FRAMEWORK OF INDICATORS STANDARDS PERFOR- MANCE LEVELS Standards will be used as benchmarks to evaluate the indicators, as measured. DD Councils Outreach Informing policymakers UCEDDs Training Comm. serv. Research Dissemination P&As Individual advocacy Outreach/public education Collab. Proj. develop. Proj. implement. • Structure • Process • Output • Outcome • Level • at which a • standard is • met. • Three • performance • levels for • each • standard. MEASUREMENT MATRICES Will be developed to organize each program’s key functions, framework of indicators, standards and corresponding indicators, and performance levels for each standard.

  11. Project Tasks and Timing October, 2005 – December, 2006 • Collect and review background information. • Establish Advisory Panel, Working Groups, and Validation Panels. • Develop draft performance standards, indicators, and data collection tools. • Work with Validation Panels to finalize matrices for pilot study. • Train pilot study staff. January, 2007 – September, 2007 • Conduct pilot study in up to 5 states. • Write report to ADD with recommendations.

  12. Advisory Panel • Self-advocates • Family members • Representatives from 3 programs - UCEDD: Richard Carroll from Arizona • Child/disability advocates • Evaluation expert • Federal representative (for PAIMI evaluation)

  13. Working Groups • 4 Working Groups (UCEDD, P&A, DD Council, Collaboration) • Role: To assist Westat in developing draft measurement matrices that will be reviewed and endorsed by Validation Panels • Process: In-person and telephone meetings; work offline

  14. Criteria for Selection of UCEDD Working Group Members • Director/Associate Director • At least one state/jurisdiction has more than one UCEDD program • Rural/urban • Geographic distribution • Reflects different types of UCEDDS (e.g., placement in medical school, school of education, standalone)

  15. Working Group Activities • Description of program • Discussion and identification of key functions • Identification of structures, processes, outputs, and outcomes for each key function • Discussion of standards for structures, processes, outputs, and outcomes

  16. What can UCEDDs do? • Stay informed • Open process - input welcome • Participation in pilot study – random selection

  17. UCEDD Working Group Members

  18. Westat Contact Information • Lynn Elinson - LynnElinson@westat.com - 412 421-8610 • Cynthia Thomas - CynthiaThomas@westat.com - 301 251-4364 • Priyanthi Silva - PriyanthiSilva@westat.com - 301 610-5162 • Bill Frey - FreyW1@westat.com - 301 610-5198

More Related