1 / 17

CRJS 4466 PROGRAM & POLICY EVALUATION ‘Goal Attainment Scaling’

CRJS 4466 PROGRAM & POLICY EVALUATION ‘Goal Attainment Scaling’. 1. Evaluation projects 2. Test #3 – November 23 3. Take-home exam November 30. 4. Goal Attainment Scaling the quantification of individualized goal sets with clients usually use of 5-point Likert scale

tuari
Télécharger la présentation

CRJS 4466 PROGRAM & POLICY EVALUATION ‘Goal Attainment Scaling’

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. CRJS 4466 PROGRAM & POLICY EVALUATION ‘Goal Attainment Scaling’ 1. Evaluation projects 2. Test #3 – November 23 3. Take-home exam November 30

  2. 4. Goal Attainment Scaling • the quantification of individualized goal sets with clients • usually use of 5-point Likert scale • measurement of progress toward goals is individualized • for each client • use of a ‘follow-up’ guide to chart progress toward goals • ‘success’ scores for individual clients/aggregated groups • can be compared across programs/agencies

  3. GAS Scoring Guide

  4. 4. Goal Attainment Scaling • used primarily in mental health field, but now branching • out into general health assessments, corrections, CAS, • etc. • use of GAS helps to clarify goals, expectations for • clients, to measure progress, plan interdisciplinary case • management strategies, compare effectiveness of • different programs

  5. 5. Steps in GAS • Selection of goals (at least three, well-defined, • individualized client goals, measurable) • Weighting goals (reflective differential importance of • goals) • Follow-up time selection (post-intervention) • Scaling (usually, using Likert format -2 through +2) • Specify other scale levels (e.g. less than expected/more) • Client assessment as per GAS

  6. 6. GAS and Evaluation • to use in evaluation, requires that program staff be taught • to write relevant, realistic, measurable goals • computation of average or summary scores across • clients - summing (simple index) versus true scaling • (weighted) versus conversion to t-scores (text)

  7. 7. Variations of Goal Attainment Scaling • can use alternate scoring systems (e.g. 0 to 100, or • a ‘percentage’ system related to how much progress has • been made toward the goal) • but note: criticism that goal attainment scaling is • inherently subjective – so how much measurement • refinement should we assume?

  8. 7. Problems with Goal Attainment Scaling • measurement validity and reliability • lack of control over selection of goals • confusion of goals with activities (e.g. attendance) • lack of staff training in use of GAS • cannot simply combine goal score statistically, as may • hide progress in particular areas (e.g. marks in courses)

More Related