Homeless Program Reflection

This reflection paper is focus on the evaluation of programs using “social science research methods” and results to “determine whether a public program is worthwhile” (Holzer and Schwester, 2011, p. 260). As my group presented last week, performance measurement and program evaluation are “complementary activities” (MacDavid and Hawthorn, 2006). For example, performance measurement provides empirical evidence in the progress of Hawaii Homelessness Programs, whereas program evaluation provide meaning to the result of that homelessness performance measurement.

According to MacDavid and Hawthorn (2006), performance measurement sometimes can be referred to as ‘result-based management’ and information from program evaluations and performance measurement

This includes program impact theory in terms of how a program is going to impact a social condition, organizational plan in terms of resources and personal needed, and service delivery plan in terms of how the program services will be deliver to its targets. This can be represented in the logic model, to represent an overview of the program framework, in terms of inputs (resources), outputs (services) delivered, and outcomes (short and long term impact) it hopes to achieve (p.275).

Program process assessment evaluates whether the program really reaching its intended targets. This process should evaluate the coverage of the program in terms of the level of participation by the eligible targets, and biases that may arise when certain subgroups of the target population are participating with either greater or less frequency. Also, it should analyzed the number of targets served in a specified period, the proportion of the total number of eligible targets served in a specific time period, and the degree on which the target groups satisfied or dissatisfied with the program service