CEBP Learning Institute Fall 2009 Evaluation Report

 
CEBP Learning Institute
Fall 2009
Evaluation Report
A collaborative Partnership between
Indiana Department of Corrections & Indiana University
November 13, 2009
 
Goal
Goal
 
Provide community corrections officials with
information and tools that will help them
implement evidence-based practice in their local
organizational context.
 
Feature Presentations
Feature Presentations
 
 
Thomas E. Feucht
Thomas E. Feucht
, 
Executive Senior Science Advisor at the National Institute of Justice
 
 
Discussed how empirical evidence collected by the IDOC may inform
 
routine practices in Indiana
s Community Corrections.
 
 
 
 
Thomas Sexton
Thomas Sexton
, 
Director of the Center for Adolescent and Family Studies.
 
 
Introduced the audience to the concept of evidence-based
 
practice and summarized the recent activities of the CEBP.
 
 
Workshops
Workshops
 
1.
Quality assurance principles and procedures
2.
The Indiana Risk Assessment project
3.
The intersection between research and practice
4.
Using and improving the CEBP
s clearinghouse and technical
assistance
5.
Lessons learned from past and current efforts to implement EBP in
Indiana
6.
Evidence-based programming for juvenile offenders.
 
specific topics related to the implementation of evidence-based practice
 
Town Hall & Reception
Town Hall & Reception
 
 
Provided the participants with the opportunity to:
 
 
ask questions about the information they had been introduced to during
the day
 
 
share their thoughts and ideas about the primary goals of improving
practice, outcome and accountability in community corrections.
 
Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute
Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute
 
 
Approximately 
80
 
people participated
in the first Learning Institute on
September 21
st
, 2009.
 
How Participants Learned About the Institute
How Participants Learned About the Institute
 
 
Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute
Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute
 
Table 1.1
 The Learning Institute: Participants’ perception of the organization and
relevance of the Learning Institute
 
 
Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute
Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute
 
P
articipants’ 
p
erceptions of the most and least beneficial
elements of the Learning Institute:
 
Most
 beneficial
 
Key notes were helpful, interesting, and concrete
 
Good explanation of the website and the attention directed pulling DOC and EBP together
The networking
Very knowledgeable speakers
The whole thing- from the comfort and hospitality to the expertise
The research being completed and the future goals for research
This training addressed issues relevant to the community corrections field. I appreciate
the website.  Accommodations were great, and the training was very well organized.  It also
allowed for information sharing, discussion and networking.
Setting for the training, review of the material
 
Least
 beneficial
 
Plenary Sessions- tables please
Lunch was too long
Need longer training time over several days
 
 
Participants’ suggestions to improve the Learning Institute:
 
Different national speaker (BORING) 
 Get DOC on board PRIOR to doing this Learning
Institute.  Too much was still 
up in the air
 
 
More info on the EBP
s being utilized
 
 
Encourage more probation departments to participate so working relationships between the
two agencies can improve
 
 
Include more specialized training, tools, etc.
 
 
Training over two days
 
Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute
Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute
 
 
Breakout Session I
Breakout Session I
 
 
Table 2.1
  Breakout Session I: Participants’ perception of the organization and
relevance of the workshops
 
Evaluation of the Breakout Session I
Evaluation of the Breakout Session I
 
 
Evaluation of the Breakout Session I
Evaluation of the Breakout Session I
 
Participants’ perception of the 
MOST
 beneficial aspects of
Breakout Session I :
 
The discussion on quality assurance
 
Explanation of how the contract is set up for QA
 
Understanding the overall impacts of effectively utilizing the LSI
 
Update on the task force results regarding status of universal risk assessmen
t
 
Better understanding of the how
s and why
s
 
The atmosphere- everyone had a chance to talk
 
The information as well as collaboration with peers
 
Engaging in discussion about this important topic
 
Covered the material that was stated with questions
 
Open talk to ask questions and get feedback
 
 
Evaluation of the Breakout Session I
Evaluation of the Breakout Session I
 
Participants’ suggestions to Improve Breakout Session I:
 
Participants’ perception of the 
LEAST
 beneficial aspects of
Breakout Session I :
 
Structure of the session
 
Multiple references to 
j
uvenile activities
 
Session was used as a tool for the presenter to gather information and not the dissemination of information
to participants
 
Unorganized
 
Spend more time explaining in detail how things need to be
 
Get DOC to commit PRIOR to having this meeting
 
Description was not same as presentation
 
Provide some working examples of how the research and practice are complimenting each other
 
More organization to the breakout
 
 
Breakout Session II
Breakout Session II
 
 
Evaluation of the Breakout Session II
Evaluation of the Breakout Session II
 
Table 3.1
: Participants’ perception of the organization and relevance of the workshops
 
 
Evaluation of the Breakout Session II
Evaluation of the Breakout Session II
 
Participants’ perception of the 
MOST
 beneficial aspects of
Breakout Session II :
 
Networking Opportunities
listening to colleagues and presenter
 
Listening to what other counties have done to get where they are
 
Discussion within the audience
 
Hearing experiences from those who have been implementing EBP
 
Session was well guided
 
Showing what the website did
 
The importance of the community leaders in implementing EBP
 
Speaking with current Directors
 
To learn what is working in other counties
 
Really listened to suggestions
 
Access to experienced colleagues, opportunities provided for discussion
 
Experts in the field were appreciated
 
 
Evaluation of the Breakout Session II
Evaluation of the Breakout Session II
 
Participants’ suggestions to improve Breakout Session II:
 
Participants’ perception of the 
LEAST 
beneficial aspects of
Breakout Session II :
 
Knowing the counties represented were 3 of the largest counties and therefore have more fund available to
Knowing the counties represented were 3 of the largest counties and therefore have more fund available to
them for the projects
them for the projects
Is DOC going to approve this for reports?
Is DOC going to approve this for reports?
A lot of issues and experiences shared in a small amount of time;  Information difficult for nonleadership
A lot of issues and experiences shared in a small amount of time;  Information difficult for nonleadership
staff to use/apply
staff to use/apply
A little overwhelming at time
A little overwhelming at time
Hard to admit your weaknesses to a large group
Hard to admit your weaknesses to a large group
 
Gain more funding
Gain more funding
More on the panel
More on the panel
Get DOC to approve website for reports
Get DOC to approve website for reports
Could include the bios of successful EBPs being utilized
Could include the bios of successful EBPs being utilized
Need more specifics and examples
Need more specifics and examples
Working programs are well established and need to address beginning strategies for counties who are not
Working programs are well established and need to address beginning strategies for counties who are not
using these practices
using these practices
This workshop would better serve directors or other policymakers in the early stages of planning.; Most of
This workshop would better serve directors or other policymakers in the early stages of planning.; Most of
the people in attendance were line staff
the people in attendance were line staff
Maybe some group work asking for an issue to solve
Maybe some group work asking for an issue to solve
Slide Note

©Functional Family Therapy Assoc.

Embed
Share

Evaluation report of the Fall 2009 CEBP Learning Institute, a collaborative partnership between Indiana Department of Corrections and Indiana University. The report highlights the goal of providing community corrections officials with tools to implement evidence-based practices. It includes feature presentations by senior advisors, workshops on various topics related to evidence-based practice implementation, and a town hall for participant interaction and feedback. The report also covers participant numbers, ways they learned about the institute, and their perceptions of the event's organization and relevance.


Uploaded on Oct 04, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. CEBP Learning Institute Fall 2009 Evaluation Report A collaborative Partnership between Indiana Department of Corrections & Indiana University November 13, 2009

  2. Goal Provide community corrections officials with information and tools that will help them implement evidence-based practice in their local organizational context.

  3. Feature Presentations Thomas E. Feucht, Executive Senior Science Advisor at the National Institute of Justice Discussed how empirical evidence collected by the IDOC may inform routine practices in Indiana s Community Corrections. Thomas Sexton, Director of the Center for Adolescent and Family Studies. Introduced the audience to the concept of evidence-based practice and summarized the recent activities of the CEBP.

  4. Workshops specific topics related to the implementation of evidence-based practice 1. Quality assurance principles and procedures 2. The Indiana Risk Assessment project 3. The intersection between research and practice 4. Using and improving the CEBP s clearinghouse and technical assistance 5. Lessons learned from past and current efforts to implement EBP in Indiana 6. Evidence-based programming for juvenile offenders.

  5. Town Hall & Reception Provided the participants with the opportunity to: ask questions about the information they had been introduced to during the day share their thoughts and ideas about the primary goals of improving practice, outcome and accountability in community corrections.

  6. Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute Approximately 80people participated in the first Learning Institute on September 21st, 2009.

  7. How Participants Learned About the Institute How participants learned about the Fall 2009 Learning Institute E-mail Announcement Brochure in mail Personal Contact 37% 66.70% 18.50%

  8. Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute Table 1.1 The Learning Institute: Participants perception of the organization and relevance of the Learning Institute Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree Responses Agree Undecided Disagree I was able to meet my goal(s) for attending the Learning Institute 23.1% (6) 69.2% (18) 7.7% (2) 0 0 Overall, the institute was well organized. 36% (9) 52% (13) 12% (3) 0 0 The themes and topics were relevant and helpful to my work. 23.1% (6) 76.9% (20) 0 0 0 Would you consider attending the Learning Institute in the future? 50% (13) 50% (13) 0 0 0

  9. Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute Participants perceptions of the most and least beneficial elements of the Learning Institute: Most beneficial Key notes were helpful, interesting, and concrete Good explanation of the website and the attention directed pulling DOC and EBP together The networking Very knowledgeable speakers The whole thing- from the comfort and hospitality to the expertise The research being completed and the future goals for research This training addressed issues relevant to the community corrections field. I appreciate the website. Accommodations were great, and the training was very well organized. It also allowed for information sharing, discussion and networking. Setting for the training, review of the material Least beneficial Plenary Sessions- tables please Lunch was too long Need longer training time over several days

  10. Evaluation of the Fall 2009 Learning Institute Participants suggestions to improve the Learning Institute: Different national speaker (BORING) Get DOC on board PRIOR to doing this Learning Institute. Too much was still up in the air More info on the EBP s being utilized Encourage more probation departments to participate so working relationships between the two agencies can improve Include more specialized training, tools, etc. Training over two days

  11. Breakout Session I Breakout Session I: Number of participants in each workshop Quality Assurance: What does it take to Implement EBP Effectively 18% Indiana Risk Assessment: Project Update 56% 26% Working at the Intersection Between Research & Practice

  12. Evaluation of the Breakout Session I Table 2.1 Breakout Session I: Participants perception of the organization and relevance of the workshops Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree Responses Agree Undecided Disagree I was able to meet my goal(s) for attending this breakout. 14.8% (4) 63% (17) 18.5% (5) 3.7% (1) 0 Overall, this breakout session was well organized. 18.5% (5) 59.3% (16) 11.1% (3) 11.1% (3) 0 The themes and topics were relevant and helpful to my work. 25.9% (7) 63% (17) 3.7% (2) 3.1% (1) 0

  13. Evaluation of the Breakout Session I Participants perception of the MOST beneficial aspects of Breakout Session I : The discussion on quality assurance Explanation of how the contract is set up for QA Understanding the overall impacts of effectively utilizing the LSI Update on the task force results regarding status of universal risk assessment Better understanding of the how s and why s The atmosphere- everyone had a chance to talk The information as well as collaboration with peers Engaging in discussion about this important topic Covered the material that was stated with questions Open talk to ask questions and get feedback

  14. Evaluation of the Breakout Session I Participants perception of the LEAST beneficial aspects of Breakout Session I : Structure of the session Multiple references to juvenile activities Session was used as a tool for the presenter to gather information and not the dissemination of information to participants Unorganized Participants suggestions to Improve Breakout Session I: Spend more time explaining in detail how things need to be Get DOC to commit PRIOR to having this meeting Description was not same as presentation Provide some working examples of how the research and practice are complimenting each other More organization to the breakout

  15. Breakout Session II Breakout Session II: Number of participants in each workshop 21% Technical Assistance: How can we help you? 29% Lessons Learned & Current EBP Efforts in Indiana At-risk youth: Programs that work for Juvenile Offenders 50%

  16. Evaluation of the Breakout Session II Table 3.1: Participants perception of the organization and relevance of the workshops Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree Responses Agree Undecided Disagree I was able to meet my goal(s) for attending this breakout. 21.7% (5) 73.9% (17) 4.3% (1) 0 0 Overall, this breakout session was well organized. 26.1% (6) 69.6% (16) 4.3% (1) 0 0 The themes and topics were relevant and helpful to my work. 22.7% (5) 68.2% (15) 9.1% (2) 0 0

  17. Evaluation of the Breakout Session II Participants perception of the MOST beneficial aspects of Breakout Session II : Networking Opportunities listening to colleagues and presenter Listening to what other counties have done to get where they are Discussion within the audience Hearing experiences from those who have been implementing EBP Session was well guided Showing what the website did The importance of the community leaders in implementing EBP Speaking with current Directors To learn what is working in other counties Really listened to suggestions Access to experienced colleagues, opportunities provided for discussion Experts in the field were appreciated

  18. Evaluation of the Breakout Session II Participants perception of the LEAST beneficial aspects of Breakout Session II : Knowing the counties represented were 3 of the largest counties and therefore have more fund available to them for the projects Is DOC going to approve this for reports? A lot of issues and experiences shared in a small amount of time; Information difficult for nonleadership staff to use/apply A little overwhelming at time Hard to admit your weaknesses to a large group Participants suggestions to improve Breakout Session II: Gain more funding More on the panel Get DOC to approve website for reports Could include the bios of successful EBPs being utilized Need more specifics and examples Working programs are well established and need to address beginning strategies for counties who are not using these practices This workshop would better serve directors or other policymakers in the early stages of planning.; Most of the people in attendance were line staff Maybe some group work asking for an issue to solve

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#