Program theory and logic model to address the co-occurrence of domestic violence and child maltreatment

Evaluation and Program Planning

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 356-364

  Hill, Janice R ^a   Thies, Jeanie ^b  

^a ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b LINDENWOOD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Child abuse; Comprehensive community initiative; Domestic violence; Greenbook Initiative; Logic model; Program theory

Indexed keywords

CHILD WELFARE; DOMESTIC WORK; LOCAL PARTICIPATION; NUMERICAL MODEL; PLANNING METHOD; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; SOCIAL WORK; STAKEHOLDER; THEORETICAL STUDY;

ARTICLE; CHILD ABUSE; CHILD WELFARE; COMMUNITY CARE; DOMESTIC VIOLENCE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; SOCIAL WORK; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; PROCEDURES; PROGRAM EVALUATION;

CHILD ABUSE; CHILD WELFARE; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; COMMUNITY NETWORKS; DOMESTIC VIOLENCE; HUMANS; MISSOURI; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PROGRAM EVALUATION; SOCIAL WORK;

MISSOURI; SAINT LOUIS COUNTY [MISSOURI]; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77954087950     PISSN: 01497189     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.03.001     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Adler M.A. The utility of modeling in evaluation planning: The case of the coordination of domestic violence services in Maryland. Evaluation and Program Planning 2002, 25(3):203-213.
2. Burt M.R., Harrell A.V., Newmark L.C., Aron L.Y., Jacobs L.K. Evaluation guidebook: Projects funded by S.T.O.P. Formula grants under the Violence Against Women Act 1997, Retrieved October 22, 2002, from. http://evaluationwebsite.org/bja/html/documents/stop1-4.html.
3. Caliber Associates, Education Development Center, & National Center for State Courts Greenbook process evaluation report phase I: Planning and goal setting 2002, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC.
4. Connell J.P., Kubisch A.C. Applying a theory of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives: Progress, prospects, and problems. New approaches to evaluating community initiatives, Volume 2: Theory, measurement, and analysis 1998, 15-44. The Aspen Institute, Washington, DC. K. Fulbright-Anderson, A.C. Kubisch, J.P. Connell (Eds.).
5. Cooksy L.J., Gill P., Kelly P.A. The program logic model as an integrative framework for a multimethod evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning 2000, 24(2):119-128.
6. Den Heyer M. The temporal logic model concept. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 2002, 17(2):27-47.
7. Funnell S. Program logic: An adaptable tool for designing and evaluating programs. Evaluation News & Comment 1997, 6(1):5-17.
8. Hernandez M. Using logic models and program theory to build outcome accountability. Education and Treatment of Children 2000, 23(1):24-40.
9. Kaplan S.A., Garrett K.E. The use of logic models by community-based initiatives. Evaluation and Program Planning 2005, 28(2):167-172.
10. Kellogg W.K., Foundation W.K. Kellogg Foundation logic model development guide 2004, W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Battle Creek, MI, Available at:. http://www.wkkf.org/.
11. Kubisch A.C., Weiss C.H., Schorr L.B., Connell J.P. Introduction. New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods, and contexts 1995, 1-21. The Aspen Institute, Washington, DC. J.P. Connell, A.C. Kubisch, L.B. Schorr, C.H. Weiss (Eds.).
12. McLaughlin J.A., Jordan G.B. Logic models: A tool for telling your program's performance story. Evaluation and Program Planning 1999, 22(1):65-72.
13. Petersen D.M. The potential of social capital measures in the evaluation of comprehensive community-based health initiatives. American Journal of Evaluation 2002, 23(1):55-64.
14. Schechter S., Edleson J.L. Effective intervention in domestic violence and child maltreatment cases: Guidelines for policy and practice 1999, The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges/Family Violence Department, Reno, NV.
15. Shadish W.R., Cook T.D., Campbell D.T. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference 2002, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA.
16. Steketee, M. W. (2001). National evaluation team site visit report. Unpublished internal report.
17. Sullivan C. Evaluating the outcomes of domestic violence service programs: Some practical considerations and strategies 2001, February, Retrieved March 31, 2007, from. http://www.vawnet.org/DomesticViolence/Research/VAWnetDocs/AR_evaldv.pdf.
18. United Way Outcome measurement: What and why? 1996, Retrieved October 5, 2006, from. http://national.unitedway.org/outcomes/resources/What/intro.cfm.
19. Weiss C.H. Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community-based initiatives for children and families. New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods and contexts 1995, 65-92. Aspen Institute, Washington, DC. J.P. Connell, A.C. Kubisch, L.B. Schorr, C.H. Weiss (Eds.).
20. Wholey J.S. Evaluability assessment: Developing program theory. Using program theory in evaluation. New directions for program evaluation 1987, vol. 33:77-92. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.