program evaluation: a model for evaluating group homes for

Portland State University Portland State University

PDXScholar PDXScholar

Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses

1978

Program evaluation: a model for evaluating group Program evaluation: a model for evaluating group

homes for the developmentally disabled homes for the developmentally disabled

Michael J. Maley Portland State University

Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds

Part of the Mental and Social Health Commons, and the Social Work Commons

Let us know how access to this document benefits you.

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Maley, Michael J., "Program evaluation: a model for evaluating group homes for the developmentally disabled" (1978). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 2761. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.2756

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected].

https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/

https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds

https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/etds

https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds?utm_source=pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu%2Fopen_access_etds%2F2761&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/709?utm_source=pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu%2Fopen_access_etds%2F2761&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/713?utm_source=pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu%2Fopen_access_etds%2F2761&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://library.pdx.edu/services/pdxscholar-services/pdxscholar-feedback/

https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.2756

mailto:[email protected]

PROGRAM EVALUATION: A MODEL FOR EVALUATING GROUP HOMES

FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

by

MICHAEL J. MALEY

A practicum submitted in partial fulfillment of the. requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK

Portland State University

1978

.. .

Practicum approved by:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank Nancy Koroloff for the.support and expert

advice she provided throughout the duratton of th[s project, A spectal ·

note of thanks also goes to Sister Mary Coleman, the skill trainer at the

Boundary Street group home. Without her efforts and contributions, the

evaluation system presented here could not have been completed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER

II

111

INTRODUCTION ......... .

OVERVIEW OF PROGRAM EVALUATION .

PROGRAM SETTING

General information about group homes for· the handicapped. . . .

The Boundary Street group home

IV EVALUATION PLANNING PROCESS

V DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS . AND PROCEDURES . . . . ·. . .

Description of the evaluation system

Chapter summary

VI CONCLUSION

ENDNOTES .. . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX

A Description of Resident Program Record .... B Mental Health Division standards for

training in group home care ...... . C Boundary Street data collection instruments •.

PAGE

i i i

v

GI 9

9

& 18

30

31

54

56

57

59

62

68 78

FIGURE

1.

2.

3.

4.

s. 6.

7.

LI ST OF FI GU RES

Prag ram Tracking Record . . . . . . . . .

·supplement: Program Tracking Record: ..

Implementation Review: Resident Program Plan .

Implementation Review: Summary

Resident Program Summary

Monthly Program Summary .

Group Home Program Summary

PAGE

33

36

38

43

44

48

51

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In recent years there has been an increase, on a nationwide basis,

in the esta~1tshment of group home programs that serve mentally retarded/

developmentally disabled indivi-duals. Despite the growing popularity of

this type of service, there is growing concern that group home programs

may not be developing properly or meeting their service potential ..

Because qu~stions about the ·effectiveness of these programs are beginning

to ~rise there ls a corresponding need to develop program evaluation

strategies that will aid in answering the concerns. It appears that the

development of program evaluation strategies to meet the particular needs

of group home programs is an appropriate activity since "there is at this

time a complete adsence of objective evaluation'' for this type of ser

vice. 1 This· need is magnified when coupled with the realization that

little effective program evaluation takes place in the social service

2 field as a whole.

The movement to increase the number of group home programs for the

mentally retarded/developmentally disabled is present in the state of

Oregon. The Boundary Street group home, located in Portland, was esta

b1 ished as a result of this.movement. As a rather typical group home

program, it is subject to many of the program concerns and evaluation

.needs experienced by similar services. This point represents the ulti

mate reason for this paper. The primary purpose will be to develop a

program evaluation .system that ·will be appropriate and beneficial in

meeting the. evaluation needs of the Boundary Street group home. Because

the Boundary Street group home is similar in principle and design to

other group homes in Oregon, a second purpose of this project will be to

2

develop an evaluation system that can be beneficial to other pr~grams.

In addition .to the stated purpose of this paper, there is also a

series of goals that will be important considerations in the development

of this evaluation system. These goals relate specifically to the impact

of the proposed evaluation procedures on the group home program. The

goals to be considered are:

1. To develop an evaluation system that will be beneficial in

meeting the most import-ant decision ... making needs of the group home.

2. To develop an evaluation system that wi 11 supplement, not

interfere with, the basic program efforts of the group home .

. 3. To develop an evaluation system that will be viewed by the

program staff as-usefu1 and.appropriate.

4. To develop an evaluation system that can be fully implemented

within the resource limitations and time constraints of the group home.

5. To-develop an evaluation system that will provide a stablj data

base for the future addition of more sophisticated evaluation stra

The contents of this paper·will fall into two broad sections.

Chapters I I and I I I will provide: evaluation as we11· as a· basic descrip-

tion of the program setting; The second section, beginning with Chapter

IV, will provide more detailed information about the development of the

specific evaluation system. These chapters will include a description of

the planning process, a description of the data collection instruments

and procedures, and an assessment of the proposed system.

· CHAPTER 11

OVERVIEW OF PROGRAM EVALUATION

The activity of evaluating social' service programs is not new. In

fact, virtually every program designed to·meet. the needs of people has

always been subject to some type of evaluation activity. Often the

evaluation of social programs takes place on an informa·l basis that may

be conducted by people either directly or indirectly involved with the

program. These informally made decisions about program operations are

frequently based on intuition, previous experiences, or casual observa-

tions. This informal method of evaluating programs is not necessarily an

invalid one. There is, however, another side to program evaluation that

must be examined. This view calls for a formal, often empirical,. design

that is implemented as an evaluation procedure to assist in answering

specific questions about a social program.

The demand that human service programs be evaluated on a formal

basis has grown in recent years. 3 It has become increasingly important

that operators of such programs heed these demands because, as Scott Briar

has noted, human services has entered in 11age ~f accountab i 1 i ty . 114 There.,/

are several reasons. why the. emphasis on program evaluation and accounta-

bility has grown. A primary reason is the increasing involvement of

government agencies in human service programs. This involvement mani-

fests not only in increased levels of public funds spent on programs but

also in the increased regulatory responsibilities of government agencies.

As a result of increased .government intervention, social programs are

more visfble to the general public and more subject to scrutiny.

Another major reason leading to increased demands for accountabi-

lity of services is the issue of personal rights and freedoms. In the

4

past decade there have been a number of landmark court decisions that \

have influenced the quality of human service programs. Many of these

court cases have been initiated by abuses in our social service system

that have infringed or igno~ed the personal rights of individuals. As an

example, recent court· decisions have led to such guaranteed freedoms as

the •,•right to appropriate treatment11 5 and the right to treatment in the

"least restricting environment" possible. 6 These court decisions and

others have led to certain quality of life concepts that become reflected

in our social policies. These policies, in turn, are implemented through

the development of human service programs. It therefore becomes necessary

to evaluate and determine if programs established· to improve the quality

of l if e of peep t.e a re achieving th·i s goal and doing so at an acceptab.1 e

level.

The discussion up to this point tends to view program evaluation as

~n activity conducted primarily to meet the needs of people or agencies

outside the realm of a· particular program. Although this is partly the

case, it is not the entire picture. Program ·evaluation can, and should,

be a tool used to benefit. those people directly involved in a program.

For example, data generated from a systematic program evaluation process

can assist ·in the development or improvement of a program by providing

vital, accurate information ta program managers and planners. Whatever

the intended purpose or use, it Is increasi.rigly evident that program

evaluation is be~om{~g an important activity in the management of human

service programs at all levels.

No definition of the term program evaluation, that wi 11 be used

specifically for this project, has been offered. The reason is that pro-

gram evaluation is a broad 1 elastic ·term applying to many situations and

having many.definitions. Each definition depends upon the purpose of

5

each evaluation activity and also upon the perspective of the people using

the evaluation result's. It is possible to provide a basic, working defi-

nition of program evaluation. One such definition is provided in

A Working Manual of Simple Program Evaluation Techniques for Community

Mental Health Centers. This definition describes program evaluation as:

A systematic set of data collection and analysis activities undertaken to determine the value of a program to aid management, program planning, staff training, public accountability and promotion. Evaluation activities make reasonahle judgements possible about the efforts, effectiveness~ adequacy, efficiency and comparative value of program options.I

The above definition serves to illustrate the basic concepts in-

valved in evaluating programs. It also demonstrates that program evalua-

tion encompasses many different aspects. Therefore, instead of

constructing a more narrow definition to be used specifically for this

project, a discussion about the basic concepts, intent, and activities of

program evaluation will be provided.

One way to conceptualize the broad ·term of program evaluation is to

view it as a series of activities that occupy a continuum. 8 This con-

tinuum of activities must also be viewed as multidimensional. To empha-

size this thought, it may be advantageous to consider the following

points. Program evaluation activities can:

1. Encompass a wide range of programs from the srnal lest non-profit

service agency to a program as large as the national socJal security

program.

2. Ut i 1 i ze techniques ranging from very i nforma·l methods of

collecting data to the use of sophisticated research designs.

3. Concentrate on evaluating the genetal process of program

activities or the final outsome.

4. Help determine whether a program should be modified or dis-

continued.

6

5~ Assist in choosing one program model or methodology over

another.

6. Produce results that are program specific or widely generali-

zable.

7. Be ~esigned tq provide information to program recipients and

personnel or- to national policy makers.

8. Be a "one-shot" activity or a continuously, ongoing process.

The above list of possible evaluation uses and activities is not

complete· by any means. It does, however, serve to point out the broad

range of possible evaluation events as well as some of the dimensions

involved.

Despite the obvious complexities in defining the term in a useful

way, there are some· basic concepts applicable to all forms of program

evaluation. Fi'rst,' as.implied earlier, program evaluation is a generic

term and can not be .. restricted to one- uniform definition. A single

definition that describes evaluation in terms of a specific procedure or

activity could not possibly be applied to. the total range of program

evaluation needs. As Carol.Weiss has stated, "no one model of evaluation

is suitable for all uses. 119 Designs for program evaluation activities

must, therefore, reflect the needs of the particular social program(s)

involved and must be exact in describing the processes and procedures

required to meet the purpose.

A second basic concept is that program evaluation is primarily an

aid for making program related decisions. It is a management tool that

is an integral part of an overall program ~anagement process. In short,

program evaluation has a definite role in providing a basis for more

accurate and reliable decision making in human service programs. Implied

within this decision. making context is that criteria relevant to program

7

objectives must be established as a standard of comparison for the data

generated from evaluation activities.

When describing the basic evaluation process, emphasis tends to

focus on the planning and implementation of the appropriate data collec

tion procedures.· But program evaluati.on does not stop merely with the

collection of pertinent data. Program evaluation is not complete unless

decisions and judgements about the program, based on the data, are made.

Evaluation activities are not truly warranted unless they have an impact

on decision making. Central goals of a particular evaluation project -

must be clear. According to Sarah M. Steele, 11a clear understanding of

why you're evaluating and what you want to accomplish by that evaluation

is essential. in effectively using evaluation as a management tool •1110

There are other basic issues regarding program evaluation that

should be mentioned. For instance, evaluation projects must be realistic

and feasible. Any evaluation design must be based on. accurate assump

tions about the pr~gram operations. ·It .is also important that the intent

or purpose of the evaluation is realistic and this is reflected by the

development. of goals that are achievable. It is neces.sary that these

goals are relevant to the actual needs of the program and can be attained

within the existing resources and constraints. Feasibility is also an

issue in the sense that evaluation procedures should require no more

expenses for implementation than ne~~ssary. In the end, it is hopeful

that the results of the evaluation will be worth more to the decision

makers than the resources,expended in the process.

A final consideration is that program evaluation activities have

political implications because there is always the risk of problems

occuring that are based on the results. The issue is that evaluation

activities can signal the potential for changes in a program. This

8

otential for change can be threatening to program personnel and can lead

kinds of friction. If program changes do actually occur, this

a source of debate and turmoil. These problems can be com-

~ounded by the fact that may individuals, both inside and outside a pro

dram, will have access to the evaluation results. Each of these

individuals can have· a different perspective or interpretation of the

data and what changes, if any, should result from the evaluation. The

point here is that data generated from evaluation activities can be a

powerful tool. As a tool it can be used to increase changes in programs

for many reasons. These reasons may refl~ct varfous motives because the

actual goals of program evaluation are not always overt or in the interest

f . . . d ff . 11 o promoting increase program e ect1veness.

CHAPTER 111

PROGRAM SETTING

This chapter will review the program .setting for which the evalua

tion model will be developed. The discussion will include a general

overview of.the history and development of group home programs for men-

ta 11 y ·retarded/ deve 1opmenta1 ly di sab 1 ed persons. . Al so included is

specific information about the Boundary Street group home. One purpose

of this chapter is to provide the reader with basic information about the

program setting. There is another major· reason for this chapter •. The

particular setting and characteristics of a program establish the para~

meters and constrai.nts of an evaluation effort. This consideration is

vital in the process of developing a specific program's evaluation system.

It is important, therefore, to examine fully all aspects of a program to

determine what variables might affect program evaluation activities and

must be accounted for in the evaluation design ..

GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUP HOMES FOR THE HANDICAPPED

A review of the history of mentally retarded/developmentally

disabled persons reveals that long term confinement to institutions has

been a primary means of meeting the residential needs of this population.

During the last decadet however, there has been a distinct movement to

end the institutionalization of handicapped individuals. This

"deinstitutional izatio.n 11 movement advocates the development of community

based residential programs as an alternative for people living in insti

tutions. A second provisi6n ~s to develop the programs necessary to

prevent future cases of institutionalization,

10

The deinstitutionalization movement is attributed to the efforts of

many professionals, parents, and handicapped individuals who are concerned

about the well being of the·mentally retarded/developmentally disabled.

In its initial stages; this movement wa~ also ~ssist~d greatly by a series

of important court decisions, legislative mandates, and presidential

directives. For example, the roots of the trend toward ·deinstitutionali-.

zation can be traced to the work of the Kennedy administration. A second

impetus for the founding of community based services is credited to the

1969 President's Committee on Mental Retardation for its emphasis on the

normalization principle as a national policy. 12

The normalization principle is defined as 11making available to all

mentally retarded .. people patterns of life and conditions of everyday

living which are as close to the regular circumstances and way of life

of society. 1113 Implementing the normalization principle means providing

the mentally retarded/developmentally disabled individual.with a setting

that allows for:

1. a normal rhythm of the day,

2. normal routines of activity where the places of work, recrea-

tion, and education are not the same as those where the retarded person

1 i ves,

3. a normal rhythm of the year,

4. an opportunity for normal developmental experiences through

periods of childhood, adolescence, and adulthood,

5. an opportunity for privacy and to make choices and decisions,

6. an opportunity to live in a home-like setting that is consi-

dered of normal ~ize, placed in the mainstream of society with all the

14 advantages of associating with non-mentally retarded peers.

11

The use of long term institutional care as a primary resi·dential

service for the handicapped does not meet the criteria of the normaliza-

tion principle. The current emphasis on "normalizing" residential ser

·vices represent a vi~w of the mentally ietarded/developmentally disabled

individual as a person capable of development, personal growth, and

learning. This view is a new and radical departure from previous ways of

perceiving handicapped ind.ividuals. Past vi·ews tended to visualize the

mentally retarded person as incapable of contrituting to our society.

When discussing residential services that are based in the community,

a variety of program types come ·to mind. For example, services may in

clude such options as residing with one 1 s ·parents, living in a foster

home, or living in a nursing home. By far, however, the major thrust for

residential services for the handicapped is the development of group home

programs. It i~ this type of program that is the subject of this paper.

Group home programs are defined as a "community-based residential faci-.

lity which operates twenty~four hours a day to provide services to a

small group of mentally retarded and/or otherwise developmentally dis

abled persons who are presently or potentially.capable of functioning

in the community with. some degree of independence. 1115

Group home programs have another component to their definition.

These programs utilize paid, professionally trained staff to provide

habilitative programs based on the individual needs of each gtoup home

resident. The ·genera 1 purpose of thes·e hab i 1 i tat ion programs is to

increase the adaptive behavior of group home residents by modifying the

rate and direction of their behavioral changes. 16 Adaptive behavior

refers mainly· to increasing an individual's ability to function indepen-

dently and to meet the 11culturally-imposed 11 demands placed on a member

of society~ The primary te.chn i ques used in increasing the adaptive

12

behavior of group homes residents involve teaching the individual the I

many skills necessary to live successfully in the community.

The.habilitation programs that are characterist1c of group home

services a re based on the previous 1 y stated v·i ew that menta 11 y retarded/

developmentally disabled persons are capable of growth, development, and

learning. This view is representative of an influential concept in the

services to handicapped persons known as the developmental model. 17 The

emphasis of the developmental model, as it relates .to group home programs,

is to provide services that will (a) increase the residents' control over

the environment, (b) increase the complexity of the individual's behavior,

and (c) maximize the handicapped individual's human qualities. 18

The heart cif a group home's habilitatJon program is the individual

.resident's pro~ram plan. A written program plan is developed for each

resident that details ·(a)· long-rahge goals for the resident, (b) sh~rt-

range objectives designed to meet the goals, and (c) specific training

activities and techniques used for meeting each objective. All phases

in the development of a resident's program ~lan must be based on an

accurate behavioral assessment or other types of 11 baseline 11 information

that will help to specify the exact needs of residents. Each step in a

resident's ·program plan must.also be measurable. For this reason, the

objectives and activities detailed in the plan are time-framed and

criterion-referenced. This procedure is used not only to aid in docu-

menting the accomplishments and progress on. the part of residents, but

also to serve as a reference point for the systematic review, update,

and improvement of the· program plans. Periodic reviews of each resi-

dent's ·pl~n are made throughout the course of implementation. These

reviews are conducted usually on a quarterly (three month) and annual

basis. Again, it is important to note' that the concepts and philosophies

13

identified with programs for the mentally retarded/developmentally disa-

bled, including group homes 1 emphasize the provision of services based

solely on the specific needs of the individual. Program goals and

services that are "stated for groups of residents, rathe·r than for

residents individually, are not acceptable. 1119

A review of this section reveals the major goals and· intent of

group home programs. These goals are:

1. To provide a normalized residential setting for developmentally

disabled persons. This involves a community based program allowing for

integration into the mainstream of society, the use of community resources,

and the insurance of personal rights of the ·resident.

2. To implement a habilitation program based on the principals of

tne .developmental model. This involves teaching residents the skills

necessary to increase their adaptive behavior.

3. To provide services that are appropriate to, and based upon,

the specific needs of the individuals in the program. Each individual

has unique needs and develops at his/her own rate. This concept is

firmly entrenched in residential programs.

The deinstitutionalization movement previously described has been

a major national thrust for the past ten years. This movement can be

d • 20 expecte to continue. Now that the trend toward community based resi-

dential services has been established and various programs have been im-

plemented, questions about the effectiveness of these programs are

beginning to arise. The concern for proper program evaluation techniques

is evident~ The situation is best described by Dr. Earl C. Butterfield

when he states:

Si nee 1969 an important trend has .begun, and ·it poses even mer~ difficult problems of evaluations ... I refer to the more

I I I

frequent pl~cement of previously institutionalized retarded people in non-institutional settings. The question must be asked "are those released people faring better outside than they were inside the institution?"

The easy response is: ''They ·must be; look how terribly our institutions have been run.' 1 But the fact that one kind of program was bad does not make another kind better, Nor does the popularity reliably signal quality. The trend to community placement presents an important challenge to our evaluation skills, and I am not optimistic that the challenge will be met.21

THE BOUNDARY STREET GROUP HOME

14

The Boundary Street group home is a typical offspring of the dein~

stitutional ization movement, This.group home shares the same basic

philosophies and has the common- goals of the many programs for the

handicapped that were started by this movement. Unfortunately, the

group home also shares some of the negative results of the movement

toward the normalization principle, Specifically, this program has· suf-

fered from the lack of emphasis on program development as well as an

absence of evaluation measures; The impact of these negative factors on

the design of the evaiuation model will be discussed in the next chapter.

The Boundary Street program was established in February, 1973. It

is one of f•ve programs for the developmentally disabled that is operated

by Westside School, Inc., a private nonprofit organization. The program

occupies a facility in a southwest Portland residential district. The

facility is a typical single-family dwelling. Some minor modifications

to the facility have.been.made to meet fire and safety standards, but·

these changes do.not detract from the facility's home-like atmosphere.

Boun.dary Street has. a service capacity of eight residents and

operates with an annual budget of approximately $60,000. Funds are pro-

vided from grants by the State Mental Health· Division· and the Adult and

Family Services Division of the Department of· Human Resources.

15

Operating funds also come from room and· board fees that are paid by resi-

dents. Money for these fees is usually provided by a resident's Supple-

mental Security Income payment. This funding structure is basic to the

group home programs operated in Oregon.

The group home program employs six staff members with a total full

time equivalency (F.T.E.) of 4.75. The program's staff ·includes three

group workers, one full time skill train~r,.one full time group home

administrator, and twenty-five persent of the time of corporation's

Executive Director. Naturally- the responsibilities of these positions

vary. The g~oup workers are responsible for the ongoing supervision of

the residents, the skill trainer is responsible for developing and im-

plementing the group homes habilitation program, and the administrator

is responsible for the day to day operations of the total .program. The

group home skill trainer and administrator have the authority to make

needed decisions, corrections, ot improvements to the program~ Because

of this authority, it is important that most of the information derived

from evaluation activities be directed to them.

The residents of the program are all developmentally disabled

adults, each having a primary disab~lity of mental retardation. Some

basic demographic characteristlci of the program's current residents is

provided-on the following table.

16

TABLE I

Characteristics of the Group Home 1s Current Residents

Number of Resident Age Sex months in Previous Level of

(Years) program Placement Retardation

State 1 62 M 10 Institution Moderate

2 39 F 60 Fam i 1 y Severe

State 3 29 M 60 Institution Severe

State 4 27 F 60 ·Institution Severe

State 5 31 M 24 . Institution Moderate

State 6 23 M 24 Institution Moderate

Adult 7 25 M 7 Foster Care Moderate

State 8 25 F 1 Institution Moderate

As is demonstrated on the chart, this program serves individuals who

are moderately or severe·ly retarded and have a history of institutionali

zation. By design, the program serves both sexes and has a broad age

range of residents. It is important to note the length of time the current

residents have been involved in the program. For this group of individuals

the average stay in the program is 2.6 years. In the past two years, only

three residents. have been released from the program. These facts indicate

that the group home basically provides long term care.

17

The Boundary Street group home ·is part of a statewide delivery

system designed to meet· the residential needs of' the state!s mentally

retarded/developmentally disabled citizens. As part of a statewide

system, the program is subject to regulation by a variety of governmental

agencies. For example; the State Health Division has adopted standards

for group homes that regulate the health and sani:tation aspects of pro

gram operations. Group home facilities are also subject to the State

Fire Marshall for fire safety codes and to all state and local bu.ilding

codes for structional requirements.

For program evaluation reasons, however, the most important regula

tions are those promulgated by·the State Mental Health Division. These

rules govern the habi~itation and training programs offered by group

homes. The importance of these rules is that they (a) establish the

basic program components that must exist in each home, (b) determine the

basic data and records that must be maintained, and (c) provide for using

the program evaluation instrument developed by the Mental Health Division.

The evaluation tool that must be administered by group homes is called

the Resident Program Record. This instrument is a standardized pre and

post~test designed to measure, on an. annual basis, the skills.acquired by

a resident while involved in the program. A brief description of the

Resident .Program Record is provided in Appendix A.

. I

CHAPTER IV

EVALUATION PLANNING PROCESS

In Chapter I I, program evaluation was described-as a generic process

that can not be limited to a uniform definition or singl~ procedure. By

describing. program evaluation as a generic process it. is possible to

identify some general steps that constitute the overall activty of eval-.

uating a program. Basically, the major steps involved in the evaluation

process are:

1. Describing the purpose of the evaluation.

2. Determining the decision(s) to be made at the end of the

evaluation process.

3. Establishing cri.teria for comparison of the data generated.

from the evaluation process.

·4. Determining the· basic procedures and instruments needed to

collect the data.

5. Collecting the da~a.

6. Analyzing the data.

7. Using the data to make decisions about the program.

As indicated by the steps above, designing an evaluation system for

a particular program involves a distinct· planning process. The first·

three steps represent the major planning phase of an evaluation project.

These planning activities must be completed before it is p~ssible to

develop the procedures and instruments necessary for collecting data.

During.this planning pro~ess it is often the role of the evaluator to help

clarify the information derived from these planning steps. One assumpti~n

underlying the planning process is that the people using the evaluation

data are those who requested or initiated the evaluation activities.

j

i· I

19

A second assumption is that the peep 1 e wanting the eva 1 uat ion have .some

idea about why they need the evaluation data and how they intend to use

it.

These two assumptions do not hold tr~e for this particular project.

The request to develop an evaluation system for ·the Boundary Street group

home was initiated by ~he author. Contact was first made with the

Executive Director of Westside School, Inc. and then to the staff of the

group home. Because the group _home, at the time of the request, had no

systematic data collection system and no formal means of evaluating the

program, there was consensus that an evaluation system designed specifi-

cally for this program woul~ be beneficial. At this point there was also

no consensus as to the specific purpose an evaluation system would serve.

Neither of the conditions just described create an ideal situation for

eva 1 uat i ng a program. In fact, some authors note that under these

conditions evaluation efforts may be unwarranted. 22

'.For two major· reaso_ns, the deve 1 opment and imp 1 ementat ion of a

systematic evaluation process for this program does seem warranted.

First, the group home had just experienced a number of personnel changes

in key program positions. Second, the group home was undergoing a

licensing process to expand the number of residents served in the program.

Permission to increase the number of.people served would also stabalize

the program's budget by increasing the monetary resources available. As

a result of these situations, the group home staff was beginning to plan

for what amounted be a new 'habilitation program. Because the staff was

developing a new program, the corresponding development of an evaluation

system seemed appropriate. - As has been noted, the development of an

evaluation system is a legitimate part of the overall planning and 2 ~

management component of a program. 3 -

20

Under ~he circumstances described, although less than ideal for

evaluation purposes, it was still necessary to carefully plan the evalua

tion project. Without adequate planning the utility of the system as a

management tool would be reduced~ To accomplish the necessary planning

activities weekly meetings were held with the program· staff, In addition,

an extensive literature review was conducted to secure information about

evaluation attempts and models in similar programs.

The initial planning activity for this project was to determine the

primary purpose or. intent of the proposed evaluation system. The com

pletion of this activity involved several steps, the first being the

identification of the Boundary Street group home's program goals and

objectives. This endeavor proved to be the first major obstacle encoun

tered during this project. Discussions with the group home staff and an

examination of. the records revealed that there were no formalized goals

or objectives for the program. The lack of formalized goals was, however.,.

s'f"mptomatic of a larger issue. Speci.fically, the Boundary Street group

home had no formal, ldentif)able habilitation program in operation. No

systematic planning or intervention methods ·existed and no consistent

program policies or procedures were being applied. Program activities

designed to meet the needs of residents did, of course, take place but

these activities were conducted in an informal and inconsistent basis.

The absence of a formalized habilitation program resulted in the lack of

a· general framework to aid in the· developme·nt· of the program. These

conditions provide support for·the expressed need of the group home staff

to improve programming efforts by continued development of the habilita

tion.program and by formalizaing the intervention process,

At this· point, a. review was made of the history of the Boundary

Street group home ·and of group home programs in general, The rationale

21

for this activity is that a review of program history would (a) aid in

the establishment of program goals by identifying the overall direction

and philosophy of the program, and (b) identify issues with potential

impact on the design of the evaluation system. This activity of re-

viewing program history became increasingly important because the histori-

cal developmental of a program can have a tremendous influence on the

• d d • f 1 • 24 intent an es1gn o an eva uat1on,

·The results of this activity revealed that the history of the

Boundary Street group home is one of unstable growth and fragmented pro-

gram development. The program's background is characterized by a lack of

monetary resources and by a high rate of staff turnover. In additio~,

staff hired for group home positions have had little or no previous

experience·related to this particular type of program or setting. ft is

necessary to note at this point that ~he group homes are not isolated to

this particular program. In a nationwide study conducted by Dr. Gail

O'Connor in 1975, inadequate funding and problems in training and main-

taining staff were indicated as the major problems facing group home

programs. 25 To continue this broad perspective, the development of

group home programs on a national basis emphasized heavily the establish-

ment of services that would reflect the philosophies and concepts of the

deinstitutibnalization ·movement. The actual emphasis on developing and.

implementing effectively designed habilitation services in group homes

26 became only a secondary goal,

It is not difficult to see that the history of the Boundary Street

group home and group homes is .general has been detrimental to the develop-

ment of effective habilitative·programs. Within this point of view, it

is possible to understand why formalized goals for the Boundary Street

program did not exist at the beginning of this evaluation project. The

22

absence of formalized goals, however, does not mean a total lack of

direction for the development of the program. As noted in Chapter I I I,

there are· common goals. and philosophies shared· by group home programs.

The staff of the Boundary Street group home reflected a belief in these

common elements. Using these beliefs as a point of departure, an initial

framework for the development of the group home began to emerge and some

·initial goals and objectives for the program were established. The goals

and objectives of the Boundary Street group home, as determined by the

staff are:

Program Goals:

· 1. To provide srtuations and materials that will help the learner

to promote his own growth, development and functioning ability in:

A. Commu~ication skilis

B. Self-Help Skills

~ C. Leisure/Recreation Skills

D. Social Sk11 ls

E. Academic Skills

2. To provide an;~nvironment that will help to ,prepare the resi

dent to employ and apply the acquired knowledge spontaneously in a manner

which will best meet the needs and demands of the society to which he/she

belongs.

Program Objectives:

l. To develop the power of each resident to communicate physically,

verbally, and as appropriately as possible in both personal and social

situations.

2. To establish a ·routine for each resident for adequately and

consistently performing the survival skills that are considered necessary

to function as a normal human being.

23

3. To have each resident gain practice in appropriate use of

leisure time through developing skills demanded to manipulate objects of

various common games~

4. To incre~se the social ~wareness and peer involvement of each

resident through shared mutual )earning activities.

5 •. To teach each resident the basic academic skills that will lead

to and increase the ·capacity to function independently in society.

The initial attempt at establishing the program goals and objectives

was an important step in the planning process of the evaluation system.

The primary importance is that the goals reflect the basic intent and

philosophy of the program. This point is stressed because it is vital

that an evaluation system reflect the purpose, intent, and goals of the

program for which it is designed. The recognition of the difficulty in

-formulating program goals was also important to the planning process

because this helped to identify one reason for the existence of an eval

uation system in this program. For in the absence of clear-cut goals, an

evaluation system can aid a program in discovering and formulating its

goals. 27

Given the general conditions described above, the lack of program

development, the initial absence of formal program goals, and the desire

to formalize the group home's habilitation program, a major need of the

Boundary Street group home began.to emerge. The need was for an effective,

stable means-fo~ planning and implementi·ng a process of program develop

ment. The recognition of this need also helped to establish the primary

intent and purpose of the proposed evaluation system. The evaluation

system could become a tool to assist in the overall program development

process. The recogniiion of this·primary role is· not fnconsistent with

the concept of program evaluation ·as a whole. In fact, this formative

24

role is one that is documented a~. legitimate to the overall function of

program evaluation. Evaluation "that influences ongoing developments in

the·program has great value -- it improves and gives immediate

benefits. 1128

Several other factors considered in the ini·tial· planning process

reinforced the formative role intended for the proposed evaluation

system. One factor is the strong commitment in the basic program

philosophy and· setting represented by the group home program. This

commitment is shared not only by the group home staff but also by the

program's primari funding sources, as reflected by ~he regulations pro-

mulgated by the State Mental Health Division. The important point is

that there is no desire or compulsion, at the local program level, to use

evaluation procedures for determining alternative methods of programming

or alternative types of program settings .. The emphasis is on maximizing

the development of programs within the basic philosophica-1 framework

already established.

A second factor influencing the intent of this evaluation project

is· that.the Boundary Street group home is part of a service delivery

system with limited resources and limited numbers of available programs.

For example, the Boundary Street·group home is currently one of only four

such programs in the Portland area. What this means, in pragmatic terms,

is that the program.will cont.inue regardless of its effectiveness.

Unless the program violates existing statutes or grossly abuses its

responsibiliti~s, the program wili continue to be funded.as a part of

the service delivery system since it is a needed service. Because of

this Jack of competition and the existing need, there would be little

benefit for the program to expend· efforts on evaluating the overall

effectiveness of its services. A .third major consideration is that the

25

group home has limited resources available to implement program changes.

An evaluation system that concentrated on identifying major areas of

needed program changes (e.g. additional staff, purchasing new program

equ~pment, etc.) could not be.adequately responded to.

The purpose for noting the additional corisiderations mentioned

above is to re~ffirm the basic intent of the proposed·evaluation system.

To help meet the current need of the group home, the evaluation must

assume a role in assisting the .ongoing development of the habilitatlon

program. In essence, the proposed system would emphastze the program

processes and activities.more than its overall effectiveness.· This is

not meant to diminish the importance of effectiveness or outcome oriented

evaluation efforts. But it is important to emphasize evatuation act~vi

ties that will be functional and useful.

A second part of the planning process was to identify the major

program barriers, constraints, or other factors that could cause problems

in implementing the proposed system or in fulfilling its state purpose.

The identification of such potential problem areas would allow for their

consideration in- the system's design.· This, in turn, would hopefully

diminish any negative effects these factors might have on evaluation

efforts. The primary intent_ would be to account for these factors in the

design without compromising the quality or usefulness of the evaluation

system. This step constituted a major effort to minimize any friction

that may be caused by implementation of the evaluation while at the same

time maximizing its .functional nature. The importance of this part of

the planning phase is reflected in Carol Weiss' statement that "evaluation

has to adapt itseif to the program environm~nt and disrupt operations as

little as possible. 1129

26

The first major consideration to be discussed is .the point that the

evaluation system, the data collection instruments and procedures, must

reflect the intent and philosophy of the program. This point has been

clearly stated in previous sections but there is one other component to

be considered. A major concept in providing habilitative services to

menta 11 y. ret~ rded/ deve l opmenta 11 y di sab 1 ed persons is that the 11 p rog ram

activities must result in the development of a continuous, self-correcting

and current individual program plan for each resident. 1130 The implica

tion is that the program, at the individual case level, is not static but

is ever~changi_ng and geared toward constant development and improvement.

This means that the·. evaluation system must recognize the dynamic nature

of the program and must be able to provide on an ongoing basis.

Basically; the evaluation. system must be designed to keep abreast of the

constantly changing program situation.

A second consideration. relates to the availability of resources to

the program. It has already been noted that the Boundary Street group

home has· a limited amount of funds and must operate with a minimum number

of program staff. The impact of this situation is that the proposed

evaluation cannot be expensive to implement or require a lot of staff

time. An elaborate system requiring additional materials or staff would

not have a chance for implementation_ or for impacting positively on the

program. A related issue is the high turnover rate among staff members.

of this program. With this added dimensJon, the proposed evaluation

system should be relatively simple to implement and require little

training on the part of staff. The system, .in order to survive the turn

over problem, must be easy to learn·with the skills easily transferred

from one person to another.

27

The thrrd major consideration is that the Boundary Street group

home is subject to several sets of regulations imposed by local and state

governmental agencies. The most important of these, for program evalua~

tion purposes, are the Standards For Training In Group Care Homes as

established and monitored by the State Mental ·Health Division. An out-

.line of these regulations, as presented on the monitoring form used by

the Division, is provided in Appendix B. The primary point is that these

rules require the program staff to maintain certain records ·and collect

certain types of data on an ongoing basis. These requirements, of course,

cannot be waived or ignored. The consideration is that the evaluation

SY?tem should not merely add additional data collection requirements to

the program. To do so may risk overloading the staff with such require-

ments. The implication for the evaluation design is to use the current

data collection requirements to the fullest extent possible in meeting

the evaluation needs of the program. Hopefully, this could be done by

combining or altering the current. data collection procedures to meet the

dual .purpose of complying with the regulations and the program's evalua-

tion requirements.

In reviewing thi.s chapter, the planning process has led to the

establishment of the basic intent or ·focus of the proposed evaluation.

In addition, several other factors have been identified that must be

considered in the specific design of the evaluation. With this basic

framework in mind, the next step of the evaluation process was to develop

the instruments and procedures needed to collect data relevant to the

group home's evaluati.on needs. As stated earlier the establishment of

criteria as standards·for comparing the data is a Jegitjmate step of the I

I . initial planning process. This step has not yet been addressed. The

proposed evaluation system is process oriented, specific to a single

28

program, and emphasizes the collection of data in program activities as

they occur· or develop. This creates a situation where criteria for com~

parison is difficult to establish because there are no points of

reference:or past experiences· to use in its development. In order to

establish useful criteria, the decision was made to have a ''trial run"

of the proposed system and use the data generated as a beginning point in

developing the criteria. This issue will be di~cussed further in the

next chapter.

CHAPTER V

DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS AND PROCEDURES

The planning protess described .in the preceding chapter established

the framework of the proposed evaluation system by identifying the pri

mary purpose and intent, by noting the proper philosophical and

programmatic cohsiderations,. and by realizng the constraints and limita

tions that exist. It was within this framework tha~ the system's data

collection instruments and procedures were developed. In order to reflect

the evaluation's formative, developmental nature the instrument and

procedures are divided into two broad sections. Each section emphasizes

a somewhat different purpose~ The first section consists of procedures

that will collect data relating specifically to the planning and imple

mentation of the individual resident program plans. The emphasis is to

determi-ne if the key elements of the program plans are adequately planned.

The second seation deals with the,.issue of detailing the group home's

program activities in descriptive terms. Both of these sections reflect

the need to collect information and data that will serve as a ba§is for

making dec·isions about the ongoing development and improvement of the

group home's total habilitation program.

T:he construction of instruments to· collect the type of data just

described. represents a specific philosphy in regard to evaluating a

program. As a prerequisite to developing a program and assessing its.

effectivness it is first necessary to understand what actually cdmprises

the program in operation. Once this is done, it becomes necessary to

determine if the _program activities are conducted or implemented as

plarined. Unless these issues are adequately addressed in·an evaluation

system, it would become possible to base judgements and decisions not on

30

the conditions that actually exi~t but on conditions that are assumed to

exist. Program evaluation must be based on reality, not on.false assump

tions.31 Because the Boundary Street group home is in a state of develop

ment, it was considered of primary importance to develop instruments that

wou1d help the program managers understand the actual conditions and

status of the current program. Once data is generated on this ba~fs, it

is possible to use the information as reference points for selecting the

course and direction of future development or improvement.of the program.

Before describing the data collection methods designed for this

sy~tem it is necessary to mention two additional points. Because the

individual .resident program plans are fundamental to the group home's

habilitation program, and also represent the most basic level of data

collection, the evaluation ~ystem will center around information generated

from the program plans. A second point· is that the evaluation system is

designed to be used .primarily by the skill trainer of the group home

because this person is responsible for the development of the habilita

tion .program.

- DESCRIPTION OF THE EVALUATING SYSTEM

The first section of the evaluation system involves the use of two

sets of instruments and procedur~s. One set is termed the Program

Tracking Record, the other is· the Implementation Review of resident

program pl~ns. The second se~tion of the evaluation system uses one

basic procedure to collect descriptive information on the program

activities of the group home. The instruments used in collecting this

data are the Resident Program Summary, the ·Monthly Program Summary, and

the-Group Home Program Summary. Specific information about each of the

instruments and procedures for the total ·evalution system will be

I· -!

3J

provided below.

Program Tracking Record:

General Description. The Tracking Record is used to document the

completion of the key events necessary in the overall planning, review,

and updatfng of a resident's program plan. The tracking system is a one

page form that is maintained in each .resident 1 s main file. This form

will track the program events during a resident's total stay in the group

home. The development of the Program Tracking Record was based on two

primary references. The first is an article by Dr. Alan C, Rupp that

d . b ru. d 1 d 1 d f . . 1 32 escr1 es a trac~Jng system mo e eve ope or s1m1 ar purposes. The

second reference is the Mental Health Division's standards for training

in group care homes.

The Progr_~m Tracking Record (Figure 1 ·.).consists of three major

components. These components represent the identification of (a) the key

events associated with the process of planning and implementing resident

program plans, ·(b) persons on staff responsible for conducting or com-

pleting the key events, and (c) the time-frame in which the events should

occur. The program events and the time-frame within which they occur are

consistent with.requirements made by the Mental Health Division. The

-staff positions identified correspond with existlng positions in the

group home.

The program events identified on th~ Tracking System Record are

placed on individual rows that run across the form. The staff responsi-

bility and time-frame components are registered along columns. By noting

the intersect between each row and column on the form, it is possible to

determine what event is to take place, the date or time period within

which completion is due, and who completed the ·task or was responsible

for its completion. Each time the event. occurs and has been completed,

PROO

IW1 tM

Ct<ING

[f cd

RD.

• Res

..e..o

o.

J:· T

ime-

Fra

me

a::

LIJ

a::

a::

Cl)

z I-

UJ

0 u.

. C

l)

v; c(

<C

>-w

LI

J 0

a::

:z

~

LIJ ~

V>

:CZ

a:

: a:

: a::

_,

_, 1

-0

t-L

LJ

OL

LJ

ow

-I

UJ

;c

z-

V>

t-zt-

0:1

-<

( a:

RE

SIDE

NT _

. ----------

<C

a::

a:

0 O

C.I

) a::

a::

00

::

-a:

::::>

I UJ

a::

J-0

!-C

l)

~

<C

::c: C

l)

-c(

Uc(

:Cc(

2 I

LL::>

LL

I ::::>

I-

=>

:z

a:

: LU

Lt

.J :r

c;j

V

ICI

Cl

<(

0....

DA

TE O

F A

IJ-1I

SSIO

N

I I

_, z

Q..

_, ::>

;:

::c

0

c a::

C

ll

c(

(.!>

A.

PRO

GRA

M

PLA

NN

ING

,r~~·~~~:-

1 P

r P.

-A

d m

I s

ct i

n n

I n

f o

rm a

t r o

n•

Co

1 1

e c

t e

d

2.

Pre

-Ad

mis

sio

n

Sta

ffin

q H~ld

a .

\fr

i t

ten

P

re -

Adm

i s

s i. o

n :

.Re

o o

r t

Com

o 1

e t

e d

3.

Ou

t-O

f-H

om

e

Dav

P

roq

ram

E~

tabl

I s

he

d

~

4.

In

itia

l A

sse.s

smen

t o

f S

kiJ

'ls.

an

d

Need

s C

om

ole

ted

a.

Resid

en

t P

roq

ram

R

eco

rd.A

dm

inis

tere

d

~.

Tr~inino

Pla

n

Co

mn

lete

d

an

d

Do

cu

men

ted

a::

Q..

Dat

e D

ue

zo

O

c(

rr1m1~·

•.•.

,.:~

.. ~---

:: ':

'~";;r.-~~:-1:~

-. :-..

;;~

-:;'1;

1o"t~

·. ~:·

• ~"·

·: ~·· --

--:-

··~ .. -

~:::

!..:

.J"'

;~i.

..:~

-.:.

,.~~

~·;;

;. ~l~\';:Xf.::~i:..~::.¥~~·!~.~ .. :'!;';;~;:~i._~:;~:::~.\~:,:::;·::~~~!';.~~:~.~

B.

PR 0

GR

AM

I M

P L

EM

E N

TA

T I

ON

f'i~~. ~

~l~~

~ i

:' ?fJ

. 1 ·S

~t~

~:W.

fl :

~~';

.':(E

.r:..;;

fit.''

!·~~;"

->11

:ii!

~,~;

~'M!".lf•i

..

.. ~

,t ·~~ti

>'l

'Ji.

':'

.f(.

'.''<

,' 'F

!7'1

;--

:;;:

~,"'

{ ~;

·~i!

1i

7\f ~f

•••

·}).Y

,:t»"

~ ~~

~;11.'1(

" ~

} •

1.

Ou

art

erl

v

Rev

iew

C

on

du

cte

d

. ~h

l~ft

J.}~

.\'

1~~)·-

;,;.

.. ~!

I ~,i

i":l~i

·Y.trt

:\~.

~J~1

· ,. ~

a .

W r

i t

ten

R

e o

o r

t C

om

o J

e t

e d

!ii

~~·

l~!

!:.:~(

~ 11

~·f·.,.

'1. .

. i

. t

w,:

. .

• r'

:1,

f' '

b.

Tra

inin

o

Pla

n

Mo

dif

ied

B

ase

d

on

R

ev

iew

.~

~!,!: ~:

r~1.g

·:: ~.,.:~

-~·,,,_ .. :., .

. ,~~. -

·~~l~

2.

An

nu

al

Pro

Qre

ss

Re

po

rt

Co

mo

lete

d

1t":l

r:;!

lti~i t<

:-Afd?i.

..~ :a

:; ~~'I

Ft 1 , .

..•.

. •t

:'

• 'l'

l\:f

''l

.:

~--\'>

.;!

.\;"

',;'

:\!

.' ~.

a

. R

es I

de

nt

Pro

o ra

m

Re

co

rd

A

dm

In

Is te

red

<!

·J*'i'.

l.f

;f ~;

j,'. ,:i

't,. !~

ii;;

ff\.~

r;l '

ij "!

'•'<

k.Y.

1'l

'''':.

ff"•

···t'!f:

·,.,

l•H

J<,.

1 :rl

•-•

b.

Wri

tten

R

ep

ort

C

om

ple

ted

~A

!.Y.

'.)~

··,y

r'Yt

·~

-~:::t

,..1 1

/r.i

~~

XTHI

..; ·~

f ·1

• •

• il.;

) )~

~lj1

;r~r

,·>!.

T;.f~i ~

-,~·[!

~~ ·zr

i'W•

)t~.~

. c.

Tra

tn1

no

.Pla

n

Mo

drf

_le

d

Ba

sed

On_AnnuaL.Rev_r~w

"' ·1

~:1 .~

.,~

~1~·

~·(;

1:1•

'-V'

~""·

"'Mf

r.1~"~'

Hr;.

, .~

! ·.

~ -~

-:~"

""-~

;.~~

.:.t·.~ ... ~

... -:.i. .

.. ~.-

-:-~

:~·.

:-,~

;ri:

-.. ~

~~.~

~.,-

-.. 0:

..~ ~~··.~·~~-~~-·11:-·:~··.r .. ·-

: -.. ~~~

-:~·

~;,.

;.;..-~.:~-~.i;;-::--~.~:?~:::.~}J~ , .

... ~:;'..iJ;.~1.·'fr~f~;."_?.;:?1.1..:,!':.~;~1:_-~.::~;

::r~

··l;

.-,;

-_,:

;.;1

;:-;

;;•r

~ ·Hi.1,.:':-:.~;-;:;1.-~

'a. ,

;~:'

.•~.

::1.

·"-•

·:· .. I·

•,~•

--",

t--

..._.·.:

, n·;~r.~·f

1--

C.

Rf.

SIO

EN

T

Rf!;

..~.

_A_S

~E--

.,_~

._,.

,__.

._..

_...

_,. _

_ _.

....

,.. _

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

_ -f.=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"'~

l.

Pre

-Re

lea

se

lnfor~atfon

Co

llecte

d

2.

PrP

.-R

ele

ase

Ass

ess

men

t C

om

nle

ted

. 3.

?re

-Rele

ase

Sta

ffin

q

Held

4.

Wri

tten

R

epo

rt

Co

mp

lete

d

Fig

ure

1.

-----

----

----

--

Pro

gram

Tra

ckin

g

Rec

ord

~·I

j'.•;.;.

;,..:.

1:~.:.

~1-ii.

:.1::.

~~1 .. ;~.

::..:1

J.:j.:

;;::;;

"I;;;,

.... :,,

I~ .. -

~~;~~"

' .i;

~;~·~·

.. ·~

.:~.t!

~a ~rt:.·.

~);4:,

;:i.

·~i}:2

.4,

·~\1""S'"f"'·t~ij:.:·u~···1~·~--

;~1j

,"')

--Z,

, ~~

':-i

:J."S

fiX.

i,~:

-o~·

t5

f-i··,

·· .. i~_

. .~:

; .. -, .... ·~

, .. \f

ir.~\.

, ••

·&t

.~r.:t-· ~~

i;l.

. ~~

:. .

...

. . .

.. ..t

w

:f

'J~rr7;i~fJ.J~i~~'.F~J:l~~~I~~-~

~ '""'

/ w

N

:

33·

the proper boxes at the intersect can be marked to indicate completion.

This record can be monitored periodically to determine and anticipate

when key events are to take place. It can also be used to determine if

events should have occurred but did not.

·Instructions for· Com~letion. The specific instructions for com-

pleting ·the Program Tracking Record are:

1. Enter the name of the resident.

2. Record the date the resident was admitted to the group home.

If a resident has been in the program ·before the tracking record is

implemented, it will be necessary to indicate the year for which the

record is maintained.

3. In the space provided under the '!time-frame" columns, add the

specific dates when the events will be due. These dates should be based

on the residents admission date and consist~nt with the·time-frame indi

cated on each column.

4. After each program event is completed·, mark an 11X11 in the

appropriate column and row intersect, The mark will indicate the

comp 1 et ion of the task.· An 1.1x 11 in the ti me-frame co 1 umn wi 11 indicate

that the event was completed when scheduled. An 11 X11 in the appropriate

responsibility column will· indicate ·the staff person responsible for the

task~s completion.

Additional Comments. In addition to the original purpose of the

Program Tracking Record, there are other potential uses for this form.

Since the key prog~am events and the completion timelines are consistent

with existing regulations, this tracking system can help to monitor the

group home's compliance with those standards. By specifically addressing

the staff responsibility component, it is also possible to use the

system as a staff utilization and planning tool. In essence, this would

34 ;

involve using the record as a work plan by assigning the responsibility

for completing key ~rogram events to individual staff members. This

responsibility can be recorded on. the tracking system prior to the com-

pletion of each event. A procedure such as this may assist in delegating

responsibility among staff to help deal with the problem of heavy work

loads that characterize group home. programs.

Program Tracking Record: Supplement

General Description. The originial Program Tracking Record form is

capable of maintaining information- in program implementation (Section B)

for a complete .calender year. Because residents are often in the group

home for more than a year, some.means of extending this information into

subsequent years was necessary. To deal with this problem, a form was

developed to provide information for additional years solely on the

program implementation events. This.supplemental form (Figure 2.) can

be attached directly over the program implementation section of the

original form.· The supplemental section provides information identical

to that on the original tracking record, but it also provides sp~ce to

identify the specific year for which the data applies.

Instruction for Completion. The supplemental form of the tracking

system should be cut.along its borders and placed directly over Section B

of the original. form. The section should then be secured along on

margin, this will allow for easy- review of the· information recorded on

the form below. The specific instructions for completing the supplemen-

tal form are:

l~ Atta~h the supplemental form as.described,

2. Enter the date that begins the second (or subsequent) year that

will be covered by·the record.

PRO

GR.

4M

IMP

LEM

EN

TATI

ON

FO

R TH

E YE

AR

BE

GIN

NIN

G:

I I

~~;

·zK•

\ ",

.,.,'

. H3

~e

--·

-~~~}

j~.~Ji~_

t·~.·

., ,

''"'

.,.·,?

r..

' ~

l'"j\l

~ ~~

.f•

. .

. ~-

· i!U

!l ..

··i1

~ •

1.

Ou

art

erl

v

Rev

iew

C

ondu

ctP

-d

•·:!

~ill

~ ~!

~l j~

~ I

a W

ritt

en

ll

"'n

nrt

C

om

nlP

tPd

·~l(

~~;:1;.;

.J~ \~I:

~{ 1t~.~!{~.

I "~'

····

,.,M..

U1 .

;. f\ I

b

. T

rain

ing

P

lan

,t1

od

ifj.

z2 B

ased

O

n P

lAn

~ ~;~:~~'

. ;~~

,,, .

. ~ .

-~;·

l·1:~.t~~

~~~~ll

2

. A

nn

ual

P

roq

ress

R

eoo

rt

Co

mp

lete

d

.J ·~~

'.:~ $

,,:; .~lH• ;&

J ~~1

;, ••

• •

•. ~ 1-;

!.:!:t.o

.:;: ~~

...,~

'.'!;:;_

;;~ ;.;.

;.;. n

ru

.~

• a.

Resi

den

t P

roo

ram

R

eco

rd

Ad

min

iste

red

~~!

:tl'.t

fc'~i!

fllF"!

'll ~-~~~~;.;

~~X:

.

I . ~J

C ..

.., ....

.. ~.

:J_"

m'";

'', ~ r'

(" ~ .. ..

_ )

\yjf

~;

b.

Wrl

tte

n

Reo

ort

C

om

ole

ted

1·

~M:;;. ~ ·~. ll~

fA '

.~~·

~ {.~

~.,

6.

• .

fit~

•)i~

'\

•~·

'::."J•

:t;·

I ...

... ,..

·'

· •""

.-&

fi ll

c.

Tra

inln

q

Pla

n

Mo

dif

ied

B

ased

O

n A

nnua

l R

evi

ew

J

,:;t

l ,;:.i

.;;:f:::

::;i~'

~-.;;

!(+;' ~

;:~;}!

J..

·.4 r.

:;-~

:::_

1 ... :..

;~r~

~~~i

i~~~

~-:.

rr~~

,.:-

~5~:

~:;-

s"~~

~ ... :

:~:.·.-~??-:;~-;"ffL_.,~~!~,""~.:;~-·-~·'7~~s~·~~~.:..~"'~-~;;~7;-.-s.r.•~":~·~~~~~-~~..,;~~,-~~·'tf.!.'~~-.,._.~_--tr.,f..1f~?·1:--.;.'.

lt.1

•• •·•

••,.

Jl'I

J,j

:·.

Fig

ure

2.

Sup

plem

ent;

Pr

ogra

m T

rack

ing

Rec

ord

w

\.11

36

3. In the space provided under the time-frame columns, enter the

specific dates when events are due for completion.

4. Complete this section by following the procedures as stated for

the original tracking record form.

Implementation Review: Resident Program Plans

General Description. An additional procedure of the evaluation

system is an implementation review of the resident program plans. The

purpose of this procedure is to determine if the program· plans developed

for residents are constructed and structured properly. This review pro-

cess will also help determine if the program plans are actually imple

mented as planned. The primary reference for the development of the

implementation revi'ew procedure is Evaluating Individualized Goal Plans:

How to Catch Your Staff Doing Something Right by Peter Houts and

Robert Scott. 33 The principle instrument used for the review is a two

page form (Figure 3.) that identifies specific program elements or

activities involved in developing and conducting individual resident

program plans. The basic procedure is to periodically review the

training records of residents to determine if each program element is

satisfactor.ily accounted for or completed.

Prior to the actual review of resident records, there are several

other steps necessary in completing this procedure. First it is

necessary to select the individuals responsible for conducting the

review. One or more people can be selected. The actual number of

reviewers can be left to the discretion of the program staff. For the

state of consistency, the skill trainer should always be be part of the

review process. The next step is the selection of residents whose

records wiLl be reviewed. Although it is possible during each review

to examine the records of all residents, the actual number should be

REVIB'/ER(S): RESIDENT:

DATE OF REVIB'l:

ffiOGR.A/1 ELEMENTS

A. RESIDENT GOALS ANO OBJECTIVES

1. Longe-range goals for the resident are sp~cified.

2. Short-range objectives 4esigned to meet the goals·· are specified:

3.· Short-range objectives are stated in measurable · terms.

4. A11 goals and objectives are prioritized.

S. Goals and objectives are based on assessment information and are consistent with identified needs of the resident.

8. RESIDENT TRAJNtNG ACTIVITIES

1. Training activities are established to meet the short-range objectives.

2. Target behavt.ors. are specified for each training -activity.

3. The curriculum area·for each training activity is Identified.

4. Techniques and procedures for each training activity are specified •.

s. Completion criteria for each training activity is specif Jed.

6. Data collection procedures.for training activities ar_e spec: i f i ed.

7. Schedules for implementing each training activity are established. ·

8. Target dates for the completion and review of each training activity are specified.

I I

--

Figure 3. Implementation Review Restdent Program Plans

37

NO

. I

I I ~ ~

l

1·

I

9. The people responsible for implementing the training activities are specified.

10. All training a~tivities are conducted as planned and scheduled.

11. A11 data specified for th~ training activities Is recorded and up to date.

PERCENTAGE OF PROGRAM ELEttENTS HARKED "YES": ___ t

COMMENTS OM THIS REVIEW:

38

39

limited to two or three. By examining the records of a few residents, it

will be possible to minimize the time involved in the process without

compromi.sing the usefulness of the info'rmation derived. A random selec ..

tion method should also be used in the selection process. This will help

.increase the degree to which the selected plans represent actual program

activities or conditions in the group home, Once .the reviewer(s) and the

residents are selected, the records can be reviewed using the implementa

tion review form as a guideline. This total procedure should be conducted

once every three months.

As this Implementation Review Procedure is implemented over time,

it will be possible to establish a consistent record of the strengths and

wea·knesses existing in the development and implementation of individual

resident program plans. As a result, specific information will be

provided on area~ that must be improved in d~livering skill tr~ining

programs to residents.

Instructions for Completion. The specific instructions for com

pleting the implementation review instrument are:

.1. Enter the name(s) of the reviewer(s).

2. Enter the name of the resident whose. program plan will be

reviewed.

3. Enter the date of the review.

4. Review the resident's program records, concentrat.i.ng specifi

cally on each program element identified on the review form. If each

element is detailed in the·written plan or is a completed activity, the

"yes" column corresponding to the item should be marked. If the element

does not exist or is not~ comp 1 ete, the "no11 column is marked.

5. Determine the percentage of elements marked "yes" and record

in the space provided. The percentage is determined by dividing the

40

number of elements marked 11yes 11 by sixteen (the total number of elements

on the form.)

6. Record any comments felt necessary by the reviewer{s).

Additional Comments. It is also important to note some negative

aspected in the design of the Implementation Review Procedure. The first

comment is that the review process is a subj.ective one. Each reviewer ·

must determine if the essential p~ogram elements exist or are completed

to a satisfac~ory point. To make this judegement people will rely

heavily on past experience and their current perceptions of program

activities. Naturally, each reviewer's experiences and perceptions will

differ. One helpful suggestion made by the staff of the Boundary Street

group home is to have a third-party, someone knowledgable with group

homes but not directly involved, periodially included in the implementa

tion review. This. procedure ·may help to objectify the process by

soliciting comments from someone outside of the program. A second

weakness in the implementation review process is that all of the program

elements identified on the form are not of equal important. Some ele

ments are much more vital than others in the planning and implementation

of program plans. Consideration of this fact is not accounted for in

the procedure and all elements are given eq~~l· weight. Regardless of the

existence of these negative factors, the implementation review process

can still generate useful evaluation information.

Implementation Review: Summary

General Description. Because each Implementation Review Procedure

deals with several individual program plans, ~t was necessary ~o develop

a form that would combine and summarize the information derived, This

summary form allows for ·a quick overview of the implementation review.

results and allows this inform~tion to be transmitted to a· central file.

The implementation review summary form (Figure 4.) provides space to sum

marize the strengths and weaknesses determined to exist in the program

implementation process. This form also provides a summary of the overall

percentage of program elements considered during the review to be com

pleted in a satisfactory manner.

Instruction for Completion. The specific instructions for com-

pleting the implementation review su~mary form are:

1. Enter the date of the review.

2. Enter the number of resident program ·plans reviewed.

3. Enter the name(s) of the reviewer(s).

4. Enter the percentage of pro~ram elements marked 11yes". This is

done by dividing the total number of "yes" responses on the individual

forms by the .total of all possible responses.

5. Note the general areas of strength in the program implementa

tion process as determined by the review.

6. Note the general areas of weakness in the program implementa

tion process as determined by the review.

7. Document any comments felt necessary by the reviewer(s).

8. Select and record the date for. the next implementation review.

Resident Program Summary

General Description. The Resident Program Summary (Figure 5.) is

the primary instrument used in collected descriptive information about

the group home 1 s program acti~ities. The~e was no specific reference

used in the development of this form or procedure. However, the instru

ment was ·designed to coodinate with the forms used by the.Boundary Street

group home staff to record their training ~ctivities. A sample of these

forms is provided in Appendix C.

DATE OF REVIEW: I ·t .

Nt.MBER OF RES IDEITT PROGRAM PLANS REV I Eh'ED:

REvlEM:R(S):

A· PERCENTAGE PF PROGRAM ELEMENTS CQ''1?LETED SATISFACTORILY: %

Bi IDErITIFIED SlRENGTiiS IH IM."l.B-1ENTING RESIDENT PROGRA~ PLANS:

Ca MEAS NEEDING IMPROVEMENT IN IMPLEMENTING RESIDENT PROGRN1 PLA.f\JS:

D. OTHER <nMENTS:

E1 DATE SCHEDULED FOR NEXT REVIEW: I I

Figure 4. Implementation Review: Summary

42

. I j I 1 j

'

I· ! i I l

l

RESIDENT:· --------

r-nNlH!YEAR: ·------~--

. }. PROGRAM TOTALS:

NLMBER OF PROGRAMS CONTl_Nu;D FROt"t LAST t-DNllf

"NtmER OF NEW PROGRAMS IMPL.El'iENTED lHIS f'DNTH

TOTAL rllHfR ~ PRQGfW:L) CC1.IDUCTED ltlIS ram1

TOTAL rJt!"i3ER ff PRCGIW'S irn~UMl\TED 11 IIS rnrn1

NLt1BER OF PROGRAMS TO BE CONTINUED mro NEXT r-oNTH

2. DESCRIPTION OF lHE PROGRAMS CONDUCTED IBIS rorm-t:

NU\1BER OF NLMBER OF QJRRICUU.1'-1 AREA PROGRAM.S PROGRAMS TERMINATED

CONDUCTED succ. ll'!SUCC.

COM'1.JtUCATION SKILLS

SELF-HELP SKILLS

LEISURE/RECREATION SKILLS

SOCIAL SKILLS

ACADEMIC SKILLS

TOT.~

NUMBER OF PROGRAMS CONTINUED

Figure 5. Resident Program Summary

43

TOTAL HOURS Oi- PROGR.A/1 TIME

l . .

' -'

! I l l

'

4·4

The Resident Program Summary is used on a monthly basis to summarize

the training activities conducted with each resident. This instrument is

divided.into two parts. The first sections provides information on the

quantity of programs (training activities) implemented per resident each

month. Because training activities can span more than one month, it was

necessary to build into the prJcess.a way to account for the potential

carry over. In order to continue and document program activities for a

specific monthly reporting period, the program summary sheet also docu-

ments the number of programs continued from the previous month as well as

the number that will continue into the next period.

The second part of the Resident Program Summary is a table that

describes program activities by: d.istributing their frequency among the

group home's curriculum areas. This table provides additional· informa-

-tion by ~i.stributing the number of programs terminated successfully and

unsuccessfully for each month. A successfully terminated program is one

where the resident achieves the completion criteria within the time~frame

specified on the program. An unsuccessful termination is when the

resident fails to accomplish a program task within the ·established frame-

work or the intent or structure of the progra.m itself is no longer

considered appropriate to meet the resident's needs. In either case,

a differe~t approach to meeting the nee9s of .the resident is developed.

By documenting the number of successful and unsuccessful program

terminati6ns, thete is some i~dication of the grou~ home's effectiveness

in implementing individual resident program plans.

The table on the summary form also provides information about the

number of hours per curriculum area that are spent on programming. This

information is requested for two reasons. First, program regulations

require that the number of hours programming be documented. Second, there

may be a distinction between the number of programs con~ucted in a curri

culum area and the amount of time spent on programming. A high number of

programs implemented in a particular program area does not necessarily

mean that a large amourit of ·time is spent in that area. ·Therefore, in

order to maintain a comprehensive picture of the group home's program

activiti~s, it is important to track activities both in terms of humber

of programs and amount of time spent .implementing the programs.

lnsiructions for Completion. The specific in~tructions for com-

pleting the Resident Program Summary are:

1. Enter the name of the· resident.

2. Enter the month and year for whic~ the data is recorded.

3. Enter the number of programs (individual training activities)

that were· continued from the previous month into this reporting period.

4. Enter the number of programs that were newly implemented during

·this reporting period.

S. Enter the total number of programs conducted during the

reporting period. This number should be the sum total of steps 3 and 4.

6. Enter the total number of programs that were terminated during

the reporting period.

7. Enter the number of programs that will be continued into the

next month. This total is computed by· subtracting the number on step 6

from the number entered on step 5.

8. On the table, under the.column headed "number of programs

conducted", enter the number of programs conducted during this r~porting

period for each curriculum area, The total number at the bottom of this

column should eq.ual th~ number- entered during step 5.

9, ·In the two columns headed ·''number of programs term•nated" enter,

by curriculum area,' the number of programs terminated successfully and

46.

unsuccessfully during the .reporting period, The total number entered

sho~ld equal the number recorded during 6,

10. In the column headed "number of programs continued" enter, by

curriculum are-a, the number of programs that will be cont·inued into the

next monthly reporting period~ The total should equal the number entered

in step 7.

11 . In the co 1 umn headed ' 1tota 1 hours ·of p rog_ram ti me' 1 enter, by

curriculum are~,. the number of hours· that programming was conducted,

Hours should be rounded off to the nea~est quarter hour and recorded in

decimals. For example, fifteen m.inutes of programming would be recorded

as . 25 hours, one and one-ha 1 f hours wou·l d be recorded as 1, 50 hours, etc.

Monthly Program Summary

General Description~ The Monthly Program Summary (Figure 6.) is

the second .instrument. used in describi·ng the program activities of the

group home. This form is identical in format to the Resident Program

Summary arid collects information in the same manner. The Monthly

Summary, however, is a compil·ation of the total data collected on each

of the Resident Program Summaries.

Instructions for Completion. This form should be completed after

·every month after all of the Resident Program Summaries are completed ..

The totals recorded on the Monthly Summary should be equal to the sum of

the corresponding items of the Resident S~mmaries. The specific instruc

tions for completing this instrument are:

1. Enter the number of residents served during the reporting

period.

2. · Enter the month-and year for· which the data is collected.

3. Enter the total number of programs (individual training

activities) that were continued from the previous month into this

47

MlllHLY PRffiRnt·1 St.N\l\RY

MMBER OF RESIDENTS SERYEO:

Mlflli/YEAR: l.

J, PROSR.AJ'1 TOTALS:

NlfriBER OF PROGfW1S CONTINUED FROM LAST f"ONtH

Ntt1BER OF NEW PROGRP/15 JM?LEMENTED nus MJNTH

lOTAL Nl?11BER OF PRffiIW'IS cmDUCTED lHIS rumt

TOTAL rum Cf PRfXlRAt"S Trn·HWHED 'lHIS rum I

NU.1BER OF PROGR.lV15 TO BE ·CONTINUED INTO NEXT t-t>NTH

2. DESCRIPTION OF 1HE PROGRAMS CONDUCTED nus r-tJNlH:

Nl.MBER OF NU1BER OF Nl1·1BER OF TOTAL HOURS CURR I CULlri AAEA PROGRAMS PROGRN1S TERMINATED PROGRN1S OF PROGRAM

WIDUCTED CONTINUED TIME succ. . U"lSUCC,

!

CGH~ICATION. SKILL~ .

SELF-HELP SKILLS

LEISURE/RECREATION SKIU..S

SOCIAL SKILLS

ACADEMIC SKIUS

TOTAL

Figure 6. Monthly Pr_ogram Summary

48

reporting period.

4. Enter the tota1 number of programs that were newly implemented

during the month reported.

5. Enter the total number of programs conducted during the month

reported. This number should be the sum of the totals entered in steps

3 and 4.

6. Enter the total number of programs that were terminated during

the reporting period.

7. Enter the total number of programs that will be continued into

the next month~ This total is completed by subtracting the number on

step 6 from the number entered on step 5.

8. On the table, under the column headed "number of programs

conducted'', enter the total number of programs conducted during the month

for.~ach curriculum area. The total number at the bottom of thJs column

should equal the number entered during step 5.

9. In. the two co 1 umns headed "number of programs termi nated 11 enter

the number, by curriculum area, of programs terminated successfully and

unsuccessfully during the month reported. The totals should equal the

number entered during step 6.

10. In the co 1 umn headed ''number· of programs continued" enter the

number, by curriculum area, of programs that will be continued in the

next monthly reporting period. The total should equal the number entered

during step 7.

11. In the column headed 11 tota1 hours·of program time11 enter the

total number of hours that programs were conducted in each curriculum

area. Hours shou1d be rounded off t6 th~ nearest quarter hour and re

corded in decimals. For example, fifteen minutes of programming would be

recorded as .25 hours, one and one-half hours would be recorded ~s 1.50

49

hours, etc.

Group Home Program Summary.

General Description. The Group Home Program Summary (Figure ·7,) is

the third instrument u~ed in describing the group home's program activi

ties. This form summarizes program· activi~ies on quarterly (three month)

and annual basis. These reporting periods correspond with the group

home's fiscal year. The first portion of this form is identical in for

mat to the other program summaries. The second portion of the form

provides a more detailed description of program activities than the other

program su~maries by including a series of tables to be completed,

Instructions for Completion, This instrument summarizes the data

compiled on the ·Monthly Program Summaries. The information reported on

. this form should equal the totals, for the appropriate time period,

recorded on the monthly. summaries. The.specific instructions for com

pleting this fon:i1 are:

l. Enter the number of residents served during the reporting

pe.riod.

2. Enter the year for which the information is collected.

3. Check the appropriate time period covered by the report.

4. Enter the total number of programs (individual training

activities) that were continued from the previous period into this

reporting period.

5. Enter the total number of programs conducted during the period

reported.· This number should be the s·ume of the totals entered in steps

3 and 4.

6. Enter the total number of pr~grams that were terminated during

the reporting. ·period.

7. Enter the total number of programs that will be continued into

Nl.J'YtBER OF RESIDENTS SERVED:

\'fAR: 19_ REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY THROUGH MAACH APRIL lffiOUGH JUNE JULY 1H~OlX1H SEPTEr1BER OCTOBER WROUGH DECEMBER ANNUAL

}. PROGRAM TOTALS:

Ntl1BER OF PROGFW1S CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PERIOD

Nlf'lBER. OF NEW PROGR.0/15. IMPL.B'1ENTED lliI S PERIOD

TOTAL Nlr-t~ER Cf PirrlRt\J\'B ffi'·IDUCIBJ 1HIS PERIOD

TOTAL ?U\'EER Cf PRCXJ!WB "Jm~UNATED nus PERIOD

Nl.MBER OF PROGRA.~ TO BE CONTINUED INTO 1HE NEXT PERIOD

2. DESCRIPTION OF lHE .PROGfW'1S CONDUCTED

A. DISTRIBUTION OF PROGRAMS BY CURRICUU.f1 ft.REA:

CURRICUUM AAEA fu-tBER OF % OF TOTAL PROGP.P.MS. CONDUCTED

CCM1.1.'HCATION SKILLS

SELF-HELP SKI lLS

'LEISURE/RECREATION SKILLS

SOCIAL SKILLS

ACADEMIC SKILLS

TOTALS

F.igure 7. Group Home Pr.ogram Summary

50

l

1. l

i !

I I I I. l

5' 1

B. DISTRIBUTION OF PROGFW'MING TIME BY CURRICULtr1 AREA:

TOTAL HOURS CURRlCULU-1 ~EA OF PROGf'W-1 h OF TOTAL

TIME

CCM·UUCATION SKILLS

SELF-HELP SKILLS

L.EISUREIRECREATION SKILLS

SOCIAL SKILLS •

ACADE111C SKI lLS

TGfALS

C, EFFECTIVENESS OF PROGRAMS BY CURR I CUUJ1 AA.EA:

.. % OF 1HE

QJRRICULlM MF.A > Nll'lBER OF NIJ-tBER % OF lHE NUMBER PROGRA.P.\.S TERMINATED TOT'll TERMINATED TOTAL TERMINATED SUCCESS, I ~SUCCESS,

~ICATIOt\I SKILLS

SELF-HELP SKILLS


SOCIAL SKILLS

ACADEMIC SKILLS .

TOTALS

. I

' j.

; . I l I

52

D. DESCRIPTION OF .PROGRAMS CONTINUED TO fJEXT PERIOD (FOR ANNUAL REPORT ONLY):

W&SER OF CURRICULLM AREA PROGRAMS :Z OF 11iE

' . tnVfINUED TOTAL

COl-H.i'UCATION SKILLS

SELF-HEµ> S~ILLS


SOCIAL SKIU.S ·

ACADEMIC SKILLS

TOTALS

.3. NOTES OR ADDITIONAL COtJMENTS:

53

the next reporting period. This total is determined by subtracting the

number on step 6 from the number entered on step 5.

8. Complete-table A by entering the total number and percentage

of programs conducted during the reporting period for each curriculum

area. The total reported should equal the number entered in step 5.

9. Complete ~able B by entering the number and percentage of·

programming hours conducted per· curriculum area. The hours entered

should be rounded to the nearest quarter hour and recorded in decimal

form.

10 .. Complete table C by entering the number, by curriculum area,

of programs terminated during the reporting period. This total should

equal the number entered ~uring step 6, In addition, the number and

percentage of programs termina~ed.successfully and unsuccessfully should

be entered by curriculum area.

11. Complete table D by entering the number and percentage of

programs, by curriculum area, that will be continued into the next re

porting period. The total on this table should equal the number entered

during step 7.

12. Record any comments that may be necessary.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

The instruments and procedures just described ·constitute the pro

posed evaluation system. This system was developed to provide data that

will assist in the further planning and development of the group home's

habilitation program, All of the instruments and procedures were sub

mitted to the staff of the Boundary Street group home in order to solicit

comments·re9arding the appropria-teness· of the system. The initial

responses seem to indicate that the system, in its present form, would

l I I

54

help meet the immediate evaluation needs of the program. These comments,

of course, do not .represent an evaluation of the system. In order to

assess the system's effectiveness, it must be implemented and utilized

during the course of a program year, Such an implementation would deter-

mine if the existing instruments and procedures will be useful or whether

some modification of the system will be needed.

There will be an added benefit to implementing the evaluation

system on a trial basis. A trial implementation wi 11 help provide base-

line information on the program processes needed to establish criteria

for comparing data generated from the system, To help clarify this point

some example~ of the areas where ~riteria can be set may be in order.

These process areas include:

1. The percentage of prog.ram e 1 ements in resident program p 1 ans

that are com~leted on a regular basis.

2. 'The number of programs implemented for each resident during the

program year.

3. The number ·of prog·rams conducted in each curriculum area

during the program year.

4. The total number of hours of programming conducted in each

curriculum area.

5 .. The success rate of terminating programs in each curriculum

area.

6.· The priority of curriculum areas that wi 11 be reflected by the

quantity of program activities provided.

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSION

Throughout the presentation.of this paper, the utilitarian purpose

of program evaluation efforts has been stressed. There is, of course, no

guarantee that the data generated from the evaluation system propose-0

here will be used as intended. In fact, there is no guarantee that the

evaluation system will be used at all. To overcome these potential

barriers, the intent.of this project was to develop a system that would

·have maximum usefulness and appropriateness in group homes for mentally

·retarded/developmentally di~abled adults. Because the program staff will

be implementing and using the evaluation system, it was considered vital

that the staff perceive the potential usefulness of the system.

Th~ general intent of this project is reflected in the five goals

stated in the introductory chapter. ~twas felt that the accomplishments

of these goals provide for a successful evaluation system. The informa

tion available up to· this point indicates that these goals have been

accomplished. As stated in Chapter V1 however, the proposed system must

be implemented in the group home for an extended period of time before a

final judgement can be made. But the ultimate success of the system

cannot be judged solely on the accomplishment of the project goals.

Success can only be claimed, in the final analysis, if the system is

considered a direct contributor to the improvement of services to the

target population. After all, that is what program evaluation is all

about.

, l

I 56

ENDNOTES

. 1Gail O'Connor,· Home is a Good Place: A National Perspective of Communit Residential Facilities for Develo menta.lly Disabled Persons Washington, D.C.: American Association on Mental Deficiency, Inc., 1976)

p. 4.

2 Carol H. Weiss, 11Alternate Models of Program Evaluation," Social Work, 19, No. 6 (1974), p. 675.

3Peter W. Chommie and Joe Hudson, "Evaluation of Outcome and Process, 11 Social Work, 19, No, 6 .(1974), p. 682.

4Norman .Herotein, 1·1The Challenge of Evaluation in Residential

Treatment, 11 Child Welfare, 14, No. 3 (1975), p. 141.

5Paul .R. Friedman, The Ri hts of Mentall Retarded Persons: The Basic ACLU Guide to the Mentall Retarded Person's Ri hts New Yor~ Avon Books, 1976 , p. 57.

6Friedman, p. 31.

7Homer J. Hagedorn and others, A Workin Manual of Sim le Pro ram Evaluation Techni ·ues for ·communit Mental Health Centers Rockville, Md: National Institute of Mental Health, 1976 , p, 3.

8 Hagedorn, p. 4.

9weiss, 11Alternative Models of Program Evaluation", p. 676. 10 Sara M. Steele, Contem or roaches To Pro ram Evaluation:

Im lications for Evaluatin Programs for Disadvanta ed Adults Syracuse, .N.Y.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Educat·ion, 1973 , pp. 36-37.

11 carol H. Weiss, Evaluation Research: Methods of Assessing Program Effectiveness (Englewood Cliff, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972), pp. 11-12.

12 O'Connor, Home is a Good Place, p. 2.

13Robert B. KugaJ and Ann Shearer, eds. Changing Patterns in Residential Services for the Mentally Retarded (Washington, D.C.: President's Committee on Mental Retardation, 1976), p. 231.

14National Association for.Retarded. Children, Residential Programmin For Mentall Retarded Persons 7 Vol. I I, A Developmental Model for Residential Services Arlington, Texas: National Association for Retarded Children, 1972), pp. 6 ... 7.

57

15Gai1 O'Connor and George Sitkei, 11Study of a New Frontier in Community Services: Residential FaciHties for the Developmentall Disabled, "Mental Retardation", 13, No, 4 (1975), p. 35.

16N . 1 at 1 ona Association for· Retarded Children, p. 5,

17National Association for Retarded Children, p. s. 18N • 1 at1ona Association for Retarded Children, pp,. 5 ... 6.

19Kenneth G. Crosy, "Essentials of Active Programming, 11Mental Retardation, 14, No. 2 (L976), p, 3.

20 0 1 Connor, 11Study of a New Frontier in Community Servi ces 11, p. 35.

21 Kuge 1 , p. 34.

22w . e1ss, Evaluation Research, p. 11.

23 Nancy Koroloff, Quenton Clarkson, and Wayne F. Neuberger, "Program Management", Program Evaluation Project (Portland, OR.: Portland State University, 1974), pp. 1-6. (Mimeographed, .

24 · S tee 1 e, p. 14.

25 . O'Connor, 11Study of a New Frontier in Community Services", p. 36.

26statement by Dr. David-Grove, psychologist, personal interview, Portland, Oregon, February 8, 1978.

27chommie, p. 682.

28 Steele, p. 27.

29weiss, Evaluation Research, p. 92.

30crosby, p. 3.

31 Stee1 e, p. 16.

32Alan C. Repp, 11A Tracking System for Residents' Records to Meet JCAH Standards and fCF-MR Regulations," Mental Retardation, 14, No. 6 (1976)' pp. 18~19.

33Peter S. Houts and Rqbert A •. Scott, Evaluating Ind iv i dua 1 i zed Goal Plans: How To Catch Your Staff Dain Somethin ·Ri ht (Hershey,

·Penn.: The Pennsylvania· State University Press, 1975 .

l

I I

58

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Berdiansky, Harold A., and Richard Parker. "Establishing A Group Home for the Adult Mentally Retarded in North Carolina, 11 Mental Retarda ... t i on , 1 5 , No . 4 ( 19 77) , pp • 8 .. 11 •

Berdine, W.H., M. Murphy, and J.D. Roller. 11A Criterion-Referenced Training Based on the ABS: The Oakwood Resident Scale for Training and Evaluating Programs," Mental Retardation, 15, No. 6 (1977), pp. 19-22.

Bergman, Joel S., ed~ Community Homes for the Retarded. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1975.

Bock, Warren and 'others. Minnesota Developmental Programming System: Training Materials for Individualized Program Planning. St. Paul, Minn.: Unive~sity of Minnesota Press, 1975.

Cherington, Carolyn and Gunnar Dybwad. New Neighbors: The Retarded Citizen in Quest of a Home. Washington, D.C.: President's Committe on Mental Retardation, 1974.

Chommi e, Peter W., and Joe Hudson. 11 Eva.1 uat ion of Outcome and Process, 11

Social Work, 19, No. 6 (1974), pp. 682-687 .

. Crosby, Kenneth G. "Essentials of Active Programming," Mental Retardation, 14, No. 2 (1976), pp. 3 ... 9.

Friedman, Paul R. The Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons: The Basic ACLU Guide to the Mentally Retarded Person's Rights. New.York: Avon Books, 1976.

Gardner, James M. 11 Communit Residential Alternatives for the Developmentally Disabled, 11 Mental Retardation, 15, No. 6 1977 , pp. 3 ....

Grove, David. Personal interview. Portland, Oregon, February 8, 1978

Hagedorn, Homer, J,, and others. A Working Manual of Simple Program Evaluation Techniques for Community Mental Health Centers. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Rockville, Md.: National· Institute of Mental Health, 1976.

Herstein, Norman·. 11The Challenge of Evaluation in Residential Treatment, 11

Child Welfare, 14, No. 3· (1975), pp. 141-152.

Houts, Peter S., and Robert A. Scott. Evaluating Individualized Goal · P 1 ans: . How To Catch Your Staff Doing Something Right. Hershey, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1975.

Houts, Peter S., and Robert A. Scott. Goal Pl~nning With Developmentally Disabled Persons: Procedures For Developing an Individualized Client Plan. Hershey, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1975.

59

Kilber, Steven W., and Carol E. Swanson. The Application And Evaluation Of Goal Attainment Scaling To The Janis Drug Treatment ProQram, A research practicum submitted in partial fulfillment of the require ... ment for a degree of Master of Social Work, Portland State University, 1975.

Koroloff, Nancy, Quenton D. Clarkson, and Wayne F. Neuberger. Program Evaluation Project. Portland, OR.: Portland State University, 1974. (Mimeographed).

Kugel, Robert B., and Ann Shearer, ed. Changing Patterns in Residential Services for the Mentally Retarded. Revised Edition~ Washington, D.C.: President's Committee .0n Mental Retardation, 1976.

National Association For· Retarded Citizens. The Right To Choose: Achieving Residential Alternatives in the Community. Arlington, TX.: National Association For· Retarded Citizens, 1973.

National Association For Retarded Children. Residential Programming Por Mentally Retarded Persons. 4 vols. Arlington, Texas: National Association For Retarded Children, 1972.

O'Connor, Gail. Home is a Good Place: A National Perspective of Community Residential Facilities for Developmentally Disabled Persons. · Washington, D.C.: American Association on.Mental Deficiency, Inc., 1976.

O'Connor, Gail, and George Sitkei. 11Study of A New Frontier i.n Community Services: Residential Facilities for the Developmentally Disabled," Mental Retardation, 13, No. 4 (1975), pp. 35-39.

Paulson, Casper, F., ed. A Strategy for Evaluation Design. Monmouth, OR.: Teaching Research, A Division of the Oregon State System of Higher Educat f on, 1970.

Repp, Alan C., uA Tracking System for Residents' Records to Meet JCAH Standards and ICF-MR Regulations," Mental Retardation, 14, No. 6 (1976)' pp. 18-19.

Scheerenberger, Richard C., and D. Felsenthal. "Community Settings for MR Persons: Satisfaction and Activities," Mental Retardation, 15, No. 4 (1977), pp. 3-7.

Shook, Robert M., "Report to the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped on the First Year Progress of the Handicapped Children's Early Education Program Demonstration Project, 11 Portland, OR.: Child Neurology Clinic of Good Samaritan Hospital and Medical Center, 1977. (Mimeographed).

Sitkei, George E., Systematic Planning and Pro2ramming for Group Homes and Handbook for Operators: An Apprbach to Accountability for Group Home Operation. Eugene, OR. : Un i·vers i ty of Oregon, Rehab i 1 i tat ion Research and Training Center in Mental Retardation, 1976.

l.

60

Steele, Sara M., Contemporary App~oaches To Program Evaluation; lmplica~ tions for Evaluating Programs for Disadvantaged Adults. Syracuse, N.Y.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Education, 1973,

Sze, William C., and June G, Hopps, eds, Evaluation and Accountability in Human Service Programs. Cambridge, M~ss.: Schenkman Publishing Co., 1974. .

Thorne, John M.," "Unified Programming Procedures for the Mentally Retarded, 11 Mental Retardation, 15, No. 1 (L977), pp. 14-17

Thompson, Mark S. Evaluation for Decision in Social Programs. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1975.

Weiss, Carol H. "Alternative Models of Program Evaluation" Soci.al Work, 19, No. 6 (1974), pp. 675-681 ..

Weiss, Carol H., Evaluation Research: Methods of Assessing Program Effectiveness. Eng 1 ewood C 1 i ff.s, N. J. : Prent i ce ... Ha 11 , Inc. , 1972.

.. APPEND l X .A

. DES CR !'PT I ON OF RES I DENT· PROGRAM RECORD

INTRODUCTION

The Resident Program Record .. C11 (RPR11 C11) is designed to meet the evaluation

and training needs of mentally retarded/developmentally disabled persons in their residential situation. ·

The "C" editfon of the~· is designed to assess the functional skill levels of residents who are being serv~ in community group homes and foster homes~ or are ready to be placed into these facilities from the state hospital and training centers~

The three major purp~ses of the RPR"C" are: \

1. to provide a baseline record of the functional skill level of each MR/DD person admitted to a residential facility;

2. upon retesting, the RPR11 C11 will show the individual residents's progress toward stated goals as a result of training in the residential facility; and

3. together with the Student Progress Record (SPR), the Pr.eSchool Student Progress Record (PSPR), the Adult Program ~ (Aek), the RPR"A" and RPR"B", the RPR"C" wi 11 offer a comprehensive look at the progress of all mentally retarded/ developmentally disabled children and adults served in Mental Health Division funded training programs throughout Oregon.

l'he Resident Program Record 11 C" is administered to. all MR/DD residents withing 30 days of admission-"ta a residential facility, and again every six months~ .

The RPR"C" is meant to be an evaluation instrument subject to planned changesils the need arises. This edition of the RPR represents a major revision of the original Group Home Resident Program Record, which was developed in 1975 after two statewide administrations to MR/DD residents. Training staff in residential training facilities will be asked periodically to aid in the continuing review and revision of the RPR"C", so that the Resident Program Record 11 C" clearly reflects and mea~those skill areas that fonn the core of a residential ·training program for MR/DD residents.

61

' !.

SCORING

The. Resident Program .Record ~ {BEE.::£'). i.s de~i9ned to evaluate and measure certain key individual skills of each MR/DO person served in a residential training facility. The evaluator must focus on one resident at a time. using both the scoresheet and the Manual, and evaluate the· resident's functioning on each of the itans listed in the RPR Manual.

All items must be scored either a "YES" or "NO" in both the "skill acquisition" and "skill performance" columns. Individual residents may likely have many "YES 11 scores for a specific item in the "skill acquisttion" column - yet ha.ve a "No score in the corresponding "skill performance• column. Thi.s is to. be expected,.

I

Do not gues when scoring' any item. If the resident has not completely met the criteria for a "YES" score, tnen the item must be scored "NO". If the evaluator has no way to detennine whether the resident meets the criteria, then the item must be scored 11 N0 11

•

,

Do not mark "N/A" (not applicable} for any item unless that scoring option has not been clearly indicated' for that item.

SKILL' ACQUISITION (S!,!1 1;he resident dp it?): .

Score "YES" if the evaluator has seen' the resident perfonn the skill: - in a test situation · - in a training situation - during the routine of the day

Score "N011 if the resident cannot perfonn the skill: - or if the evaluator has· not observed the performance

of the item and cannot get the resident to perform the skill in a.test situation · ·

m.Y:. PERFORMANCE (does the resident do it):

·Score "YES" if the resident perfonns the ·skill in the natural environment, wfthout reminding or assistance: - perfonned as often as needed, for that resident - perfonned often enou~h that the resident is not . "noticeably different". from the general public

- perfonned often enough that the resident does not call negative attention to"himself because'.of lack of

. perfonnance 1

Score "NO" if the resident does not perform the skill in the natural enviro11T1ent:

·-cannot perform the skill - will not perfonn the ·s~ill - requires reminding or assistance - does not perform the s~ill often enough, and is notice-ably different or calls negative attention to self - has no opportunity to perfonn the skill in the natural

ei1vironnent

1i

62.

63

..-- ~skill m sloll

~

D SOCIAL c<J!tl.siti,!)" erfon::ance m; f°HO tErr;o-

~?Eifso::A'l"Rhl\T 10:1sm1's T.::-.posTurc ••••••. .=- . ."~ -·-·- __:::~~:

1.1.2 •••• attention ••••. __ 1.1.J •••• responds •••••• .. 1.1.4 •••• privc?CY ••••••• >< u 1.1.5 •••• behavior •••• ·• LLJ 111.

"' en ... 1.1.6 •••• respects •••••• 0 ~ 1. l .7 •••• ~rsona 1 •••••. -..... 1.1.B •••• property •••••• - 1.1.9 •••• friendship •••. -:ti ... l.1.10 ••• courtesies ••••

'° llJ 1.1.11 ••• rules ••••••••• en CIJ 1. l.12 ••• competitive ••• Ci :;,.. 1.1.13 ••• conversation •• - 1.1.14 ••• fndependently.

'° 1.1.15 ••• dates ••••••••• ..., 1.1.16 ••• sexual •••••••• r:: :I\ cu

~ 1.1.17 ••• conflicts ••••• E 1.1.18 ••• appointments •• c.

0 1. 1.19 ••• 1o!!9-ter.n ••••• -ClJ COMMUN l CA no;, > i .2.1 •••• s1mple •••••••• cu g ..., · 1.2.2 •••• double-task ••• s.. 111 1.2.3.1 •• top •••• ~ •••••• llJ Cl .... 1.2.3.2 •• in •••••••••••• ! S!

1.2.3.3 •• under ••••••••• t ...,, 0 ~

.. 1.2.3.4 •• back •••••••••• W· 1.2.3.5 •• front ••••••• · •.• "'O s:: -~ c 2 1.2.3.6 •• next •••••••••• Cl 2: 1.2.4 •••• quest ions ••••• c c: 0::: .,, 1.2.s •• ~ ..... tion ••• 0 C> ..

~ 1.2.6... ~ ds ••••••••• - 0 w .. ., Lt.J

~ 0 en 1.2~ e s ••••••••• «$ c:: ~ ....

"'O ::z: ~- ...• ·········· S-

~ :c: ::> w . 1

.:~o. -.~;~~~~::::: «$ ~

_. ~ .....,

c(

~ cu C> - > 8· ~ l TH Ai"m SAFETY 0::: 0 co ~ 0:::

co~ "t:J.T:":": • fire •••••••••• - D. 1.3.2 •••• hazards ••••••• Id

~ ....., .... 1.3.3 •••• approac~es •••• c:: z 1.3.4 •••• water ••••••••• cu w :::: 0 1.3. 5 •••• name •••••••••• - .. s.. V> ia l.3.6 •••• emergency ••••• .e w Cb 1.3.7 •••• locks ••••••••• c: :n 1.3.8 •••• pedestrian •••. en

ti 1.3.9 •••• bicycle ••••••• .u 1.3 •. 10 ••• illnesses ••••• s.. ~ 1.3.11 ••• cooperates •••• en e. \:: 1.3.12 ••• 111eth0ds ••••••. -- -.. 1.3.13 ••• health •••••••• c.. :n -ia 1.3.14 ••• weight •••••••• I ~

1.3.15 ••• medications ••. I z ~IlvoiffrnTATlOi' C>

1.4.1. ... pro;:ierty. : .... -en 1.4.2 •••• destination ••• > 1.4.3 •••• restrooms ••••• - 1.4.4· •••• bicycle •• -~ ••• Q

1.4.5 •••• pay-telephone. :r: I- 1.4.6 •••• city bus •••••• -J

'fi 1.4.7 •••• bus line •••••• < 1.4.8 •••• taxi ••••••••••

\ L&J :x: .u c: 1.4.9 •••• vending ••••••• ti) 2 ~

., 1.4.10 ••• 1aundro111at •••• I ..... 1.4.11 ••• businesses •••• I-z .. 1.4.12 ••• recreational •• LLJ .. z 1.4.13 ••• agencies •••••• ::::c ~ 0 .. - 1.4.14 •• ;legal ••••••••• < w ~ 1.4.15 ••• civil ••••••••• z ~ ::> 1.4.16 ••• contracts ••••. en 2.: -J

RECREATION t < l= >

0 1.s.1 •••• rad10 ••••••••• LIJ w - 1.! .2 •••• record •••• : •••

Cl -J L&.. 1.5.J •••• solitary .••••. - - 0 cn u 1. 5.4 •••• participatory. w ~ LIJ . ·1.s.s •••• observational. ~ ~ 1.5.6 •••• factlities ••• ·--

c 1. 5.7 •••• f'vents ••••.•• ...... - --iii

64

SELF-HELP rc~~fsitfo~~erf~~nance YrsT"No -Yfflrio-PfliSo:lAl HYGlENE T.'f:Y.:-•• toi letrng •••• 2.1.2.~ •• nose ••••••• :. 2.1.3 •••• hands ••••••••.

~fs1tion ~.!:!'9!'1~~~ YES-.-t,0- YES !IO 2.6.2.3 •• openers •••••• 2.6.2.4 •• slices ••••••• 2.6.2.S •• appliance •••• 2.6.2.6 •• dishes •••••••

2.1.4 •••• t~eth ••••••••• ·-- --· i--·-2.1.S •••• face ........... 2.1.6 •••• shower •• .' ••••. ·-- ~·---=· ·- ·-2. l .7 •••• sh1tr.ipoos •••••• ·-2.1.8 •••• deodorant ••••.

i---2.1.9 •••• fingcrnails ••• 2.1.10 ••• mcnstrual ••••• 2.1.11 ••• clothing •••••• 2.1.12 ••• tidies ••••••••

.k.,.l.J.3..!..!_•.!.upp 1 i es •••••• GROOMING i.2.1 •••• combs ••••••••• 2.2.2 •••• hair style •••• 2.2.3 •••• shaves •••••••• 2.2.4 •••• clips ••••••••• 2.2.5 •••• dresses ••••••• 2.2.6 •••• coordfnates •• 2.2.7 •••• appropri~te ••. 2.2.8 •••• mirrol" •••••••. 2.2. 9 •••• cosmetics •••• Wlf~)HG -z:l':l .•.. bites •••••••• 2.3.2 •••• swallo~ •• ~ •• 2.3.3 •••• posture •••••• 2.3.4 •••• knife •••••••• 2.3.S •••• cutting ••••••• -2.3.6 •••• serves ••••••• ,z.3.7 •••• passes •••••••• 1.3.8 •••• pours •••••••• 2.3.9 •••• fingers ••••••• 2.3.10 ••• napkin •• · •••••• 2.3.11 ••• coqdi111ents •••. 2.3.12 ••• conversations. 2.3.13 ••• cafeteria ••••• ·2.3.14 ••• fast-service. . 2.3.15 ••• fancI········· DRFSSING z.4.J •••• Duttons •••••• .; 2.4.2 •••• zips ••••••••• : 2.4.3 •••• ties •••••••••.. 2.4.4 •••• position ••••• 2.4.S •••• bra ••••••••••. 2.4.6.:..:..:,lantv-hose •••

tctonn tlG CARE 2~-s.1 •••• c:arefu11y ••••• 2.s.2 •••• dirty clothes. 2.5.3 •••• folds ••••••••• 2.5.4 •••• storage ••••••• 2.5.5 •••• sorts •••••••••

·2.5.6 •••• washing •••••• J 2.5.7 •••• dryer •••••••• J 2.5.8 •••• provides ••••• J 2.5.9 •••• shocs •••••••• J

2.s.10 ••• sews ••••••••• J 2.5.11 ••• repairs •••••• J -2.S.12 ••• irons •••••••• ~ 2.5.13 ••• disposes ••••• ~ 2.5.14~ •• purchases •••• J HOUSEHOLD CHORES

. 2.6.J.J •• room •••••••••. 2.6.1.2 •• dusts •••••••••

-2.6.2.7 •• dishwasher ••• - -- -- - ---2.5.2.8 •• dhlu•s AW.\)' •• . . . ·. .. 2.6.2.9 •• left-ovcrs •••. - ~-- - - . ~-· 2.6.2.10.sack lunch ••• 2.6.2.ll.breakfast •••• 2. 6.2.12.menus •• ~ •••••. 2.6.2.13.hot mtal ••••• 2.6.2.14.cooks ••••••••• 2.6.2.15.bakes ••••••••• 2.6.2.16.lists ••••••••• 2.6.3 •••• Pet •••• ; •••••

skil 1 skill ACADEMIC acQuhition !performance

YES I flO YES NO R£A01NG

· 3.1.l •••• name •••••••••• 3.1.2.1 •• exit ••••••••• 3.1.2.2 •• men ••••••••••. 3.1.2.3 •• women •••••••• , 3.1.2.4 •• ladies •••••••• 3.1.2. 5 •• gentlemen ••••. 3.1.2.6 •• boys •••••••••• 3.1.2.7 •• girls ••••••••• 3.1.2.8 •• keep out ••••• 3.1.2.9 •• poison ••••••• 3.1.2.10.danger ••••••• 3.1.2.11.do not enter. 3.1.2.12.no smoking ••• 3.1.2.13.hot ••••••••••. J.1.2.14.cold ••••••••• 3.1.2.15.stop ••••••••• J.1.2.16.walk ••••••••• 3.1.2.17.wait ••••••••• 3.1.2.18.don't walk ••• 3.1.2.19.on ••••••••••• 3.1.2.20.orf ••••••••••. ---r----3.1.3 •••• infonnat ion ••

'VifffiNG 3. 2.1 •••• co1nes •••••••• 3.2.2 •••• signs •••••••• 3.2.l •••• address •••••• 3.2.4 •••• ·letters •••.•• fUJi"iSER CO:fCEPTS 3.3.l •••• recogn,zes ••• 3.3.2 •••• counts •••• ~·· 3.-3.3 •••• objects •••••• 3.3.4 •••• value •••••••• t:O:,EY J.4.1 •••• names •••••• ; •• 3.4.2 •••• cents ••••••••• 3.4.3 •••• coins ••••••••• 3.4.4 •••• bills ••••••••• 3.4.5 •••• sufficient •••• 3.4.6 •••• when' ••••••••• ~ 3.4 .• 7 •••• how much ••••• 3.4.8 ••• ~do11ars ••••••• 3.4.9.: •• savihgs ••••••• 3.4.10 ••• money orders •• 3.4.11 ••• purchases ••••• 3.4.12 ••• plans ••••••••• 3.4.13 ••• checks •••••••

2.6.1.3 •• sweeps •••••••. 2.6.1.4 •• wtn:ops ••••••• -2.6.1.S •• vacuums ••••••

3.4.14 ••• pays •••••••••• 3.4.15 ••• bud_gels ••.•••• llt'.E

2.6.1.6 •• bed ••••••••••• 2.6.1.7 •• changes ••••••• -2. 6 .. 1. s· •• wfodows •••••• 2.6.1.9 •. sinks •••••••• 2.6 .. 1.10. toilet •• ,. ••••• 2.6.1.ll.trash •••••••• 2.6.1.12.cleans ••••••• 2.6.2.1 •• table ••••••••• 2.6.?.2 •• scr!oes •••••••

3.5.J •••• aates ••.•••••• 3.5.2 •••• holidays •••••• J.5.3 •••• activities •••• 3.5.4 •••• digital ••••••. 3.5.S •••• hour •••••••••• 3.5.6 •••• quarter-hour. 3.5.7 •••• al.ann •••••••• 3.5.8 ..... sels cloc.k •••• 3.5.9 •••. plans •••••..•.

iv . :

0

0

INDIVIDUAL RESIDENT PROFILE

The Individual Resident Profile is intended for those residential facilities who wish to hand-score the results· of the Resident · Program Record. It has been designed to meet the·expressed need of many facilities and is intended for·the benefit of the facility it is not necessary to send copies of the Individual· Resident Profiles to the Mental Health Division.

INSTRUCTIONS ~

1. On your copy of the Resident Pro9ram Record, count all "YES" scores for "ski 11 acquisition" in each of the 16 ski 11 areas; mark an "A" on the line following each appropriate skill area, on the number which corresponds to the total "YES" scores for skill acquisition for that area.

2. On your copy of the RPR, now count all the "YES" scores for "skill perfonnance" 1neach of the 16 skill areas; now mark a •pn on the line following each appropriate skill area, on the number which corresponds to the total 11YES" scores for skill acquisition for ~hat area.

3. Connect all "A"s with a line; connec_t all "P"s with a line of a different color.

.... tW.

n

~ « s .. .... ~ -~ .. .. a. .. ·- 3

~ ., ... ~ -c £ !{ ..

:i:: ~!! =

~ c. ~ :- p· ::-· !t ;,~ •

y

65

-------· •

.... A

---

RE

SID

EN

T'S

N

AM

E·-----------------

DA

TE

OF

EVA

LUA

TIO

N -

------

PROF

ILE

per

cen

tag

es O

i lO

' 2

0,.

.

30

*

40

*

. 50

*

60

i 7

0t

BO

• 9Q

* lO

Ot

· 1

1 I

r 1

I ·

1 1

1 0

· 2

. 4

6 8

· .

lO•

12

I

l4

t 1

6

t 1

8

~9

INTE

RPER

SONA

L RE

LATI

ONSH

IPS

[----t----~----·---~~---~---r~----~--~-r---~--~-+----~J---+··-~---·1·---~---~--~-~r---~----~

• '

I I

I I

· l

I 2

' 3

4 I

5 6

7 . 8

9

lO r

ll

12

·

13

t

l4

lS

COMM

UNIC

ATIO

N -----~-----~---·~r··---~-----~-----~-----~--L--~-----~-----~-----~----i~-----~--i·-~-----r.

· .

. l

I 2

3 4

I 5

6 7

I 8

9 lO

:

ll

12

l3

1

14

1

5

HEAL

TH A

ND S

AFET

Y --

---~

--J-

-~--

---~

----

-~·-

r--~

----

-~--

---~

--~-

-r--

---~

----

-~--

---~

----

-~--

---~

----

-~--

---r

.

• I

. l

I 2

31

4 L 5

6

I 7

8 9

I 1

0

ll

12

. t 1

3

. 1

4 I

1

5

16

CO

MMUN

ITY O

RIEN

TATI

ON ~

----

4~--

--+-

----

r---

-~~-

--1-

---~

----

-~--

---~

-----r

- 1--

~---

--~-

----

~--~

-~--

---~

-~--

i---

--~

I 1

I 21

I

3 r

4 1

• 1

s .

1 6

I .J

RECR

EATIO

N ~--------,--~-----r~~---.-~-r--------~-~------i·----~----------1-~------~-----~---~--------r

. . l

2

3 1 ~

s

I 6

l 7

· I B

9

lo

I 1

1

I 1

2

l}

PERS

ONAL

HYG

IENE

~---

---r

-J·-

--~-

--L-

..... --

---Y------~------~------~----,..~------~------1-~----+----r-~------~

. I

I I

l .

I 2

I 3

4 I

s I

6.

I 7

I B

f 9

GROO

MING

~--

----

---~

----

---r

~---

----

--..

f..-

----

r--~

----

----

-~--

----

----

r---

----

-~-1

-~--

----

r---

----

--t

I I

I I

I .

. I

l 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 1

0

11

1

2

13

I

14

l

EATI

NG/D

ININ

G ~-

----

~---

--r-

----

~---

--~-

-r·-

~---

--r-

----

r·-~

--~-

-~--

~---

--r-

l---

~---

--~-

--~-

~--r

--t-

----

r .1

l I

. 2

I 3

I .

4 I

l 5

I 6

DRES

SING

~--------;-----~-----------L-~---------------1------

--,-

----

-~-1

----

----

~---

~---

--r-

----

---r

I

I •

l j

2 ·

3 41

-5

6

7 tr

I

9 l 1

0

ll'

12

I

13

1

4

CLOT

HING

CAR

E ~-

----

~--

--~-

----

Lr--

---....

.. ·---

-~--

-t·•

----

-~--

---r

----

-~--

--,-

~---

--~,

----

-~--

-r-~

----

--r

. 2

I 4

6.

8 I

lO

12

1

4 I

1

6

I 1

8

20

2

2

I 2

4

26

29

HO

USEH

OLD

CHOR

ES ~

--~-

-1--

;·-4

--~-

-~--

~---

~--r

·-~-

-~-i

~--~

--~-

~~--

~---

~·-~

--+-

-~--

·--~

--1-

-~--

~---

~--~

--~-

-r

2 41

6

I 8

lO I

12

1

l4

I 1

6

I 1

8

I 2

0

2 RE

ADIN

G ~-

--~·

--~J

--~-

---~

---~

---~

---~

~---

~-r-

~---

4--r

-+--

-~--

-i--

--~-

1-~-

--t-

--~-

---~

---r

---~

----

r I

I l

l I

2 I

. I

. 3

I I

if

WRI

TING

~--

----

--i·

----

---t

-·-r

----

~-"-

----

----

----

-~--

----

---r

----

---,

----

t---

J---

~---

--~-

----

~--1

I

l I

I 2

i I

J 1

. I

4

NUMB

ER C

ONCE

PTS

~---

--;-

-~--

;-··

··:-

--t-

-;··

,•-·

;···

--;-

··--

;-~-

--;-

----

~---

·;;·

i--;

;~--

-~~-

---~

~-~:

-~:-

-·-;

t

MONE

Y ~-·

---~--

~--~--

---f--

---~--

~--~--

---t--

----r-

-r--r-

----~-

----~-

~---t-

-----~

-----~

-~i--~

-----f

l

12

·I

3 I

4 I

5 I

6 I

7 I

8 9

TIM

E· ~-.

. --.

......

.... , ..

......

......

1-+-

.. ---

.. r--1

-----

.. r--

... J---

--r-..

-"1--

.. -1------t--,-------l-~--------·~--------1-

per

cen

tag

es O

t 10

%

20

t 30

%

40%

·

SO

' 60

%

70

i.

· 80

%

90

' 1

00

*

RESI

DENT

PRO

GRAM

REC

ORD

O"

O"

APPE

NDIX

B

MEN

TAL·

HEAL

TH

DIV

ISIP

N

STAN

DARD

S FO

R TR

AIN

ING

IN

GROU~

CARE

HO

MES

-

""te

·n"t

~l

He!

tlth

D

ivis

ion

NAM

E O

F E

AC

ILIT

'i

l STR

EET

AD

DRE

SS

2 CIT

Y

3 Y

ES

I N

OIN

/A

COU

NTY

4

.STA

ND

AR,

:>S

FOR

TR

AIN

ING

IN

G

ROU

P CA

RE

HOM

ES

EVA

LUA

TED

B

'i

6 DA

TE

OF

ON

-SIT

E

VIS

IT

8 Z

IP

AD

DIT

ION

AL

EVA

LUA

TOR

5 1

0

1.'I'

l'LE

7 ·r

NIT

IAL

oN

:..sr

TE

. D

9 FO

LLO

W-U

P 0

TIT

LE

11

EX

PLA

NA

TORY

RE

MA

RKS

(5)

STAT

EMEN

T OF

PUR

POSE

....... , .... ,..

D M

ET

D N

OT

MET

13

.

'.~!t,~j;~i;l;f

14

t:'. ~::'. ti

15

16

17

18

19

'> ,:•

·.· ..

•

i---

-+--

--t ti

i~~-

iiJI ,;r5'

~J:;.·

--..f ..

--~·

20

'---+~

~1~:E , ..

21

t

. ·':.

{:'·

~.: .. ~

.. ~:;.

;:

22

,---

--

;fN:;~

(a)

Wri

tten

sta

tem

ent

sett

ing

fo

rth

ph

ilo

sop

hy

(b)

Wri

tten

id

en

tifi

cati

on

of

resi

den

ts,

incl

ud

es:

sex

age

men

tal

or

pb

ysi

cal'

nan

dic

app

ing

co

nd

itio

ns

(c)

Wri

tten

ad

mis

sio

n c

rite

ria·

Wri

tten

rele

ase

cri

teri

a

(d)

Wri

tten

des

crip

tio

n o

f tr

ain

ing

in

clu

des

:

lon

g-r

ang

e g

oal

fo

r gr

oup

care

hom

e

gen

eral

ob

ject

ives

des

ign

ed t

o m

eet

lon

g-r

ang

e g

oal

gen

eral

sta

tem

ent

of

train

ing

pro

vid

ed

gen

eral

des

c;-!

pti

on

of

ad

dit

ion

al

serv

ices

pro

vid

ed

"' -.......J

NAM

E O

F FA

CIL

ITY

YE

Sf

NO

IN,h

\ ~::

_;}

-'·:~.::··

.-(\

.~·.

(6

) A

DM

ISSI

ON

OF

RES

IDEN

TS

J:~:~: ~~

:~~:i .'.~~~~ll't--------------------------------------4

23

.. :·.-

-..... ,

.. ~ ... ''

':·;:·

~ D

M

ET

D

NO

T

ME

T

24

..... _

--

;~:ti~~:g

25

26

27

28

29

30

31. n 33

·.34 35

36

37

38

... I ......... ~=

l 1

---.

....

. ··-+

--*-

·:~''.::Ji:l

ti-_

.. _,_

.. _

.., .

....

.. -

~---

-t

.. ..

-..

....

....

.. -1~ ..

...

----1-11

.... ___

..] __

~---i.

~--"

--·-r1~E

1 .,...

_ ........

..........

.. -.-

(a)

Each

re

sid

ent

dete

rmin

ed M

ED o

r M

R/DD

by

1'lll

D.··

.

. (b

) W

aiti

ng l

ist

mai

ntai

ned

•.

(c)

Eli

gi.

ble

per

s'on

s ad

mit

ted

wit

ho

ut

:ega

rcl

tot

race

;

colo

r;

cree

d;

nat

ion

al o

rig

in;

·

du

rati

on

of

Ore

gon

resi

den

ce;

mea

ns o

f pa

ymen

t.

(d)

Wri

tten

in

form

atio

n p

rovi

ded

pri

or

to p

re-a

dmis

sion

st

aff

ing

, a

nd

in

clu

des

:

Sum

mar

y d

escr

ibin

g f

un~tioning o

f re

sid

ent;

Des

crip

tio

n o

f medica~ o

r b

ehav

iora

l pr

oble

ms;

Rec

ord

of ~ny

curr

ent

or r~commended m

edic

atio

ns a

nd

trea

tmen

ts;

and

Tra

inin

g r

ecom

men

dati

ons.

(e)

Pre

-adm

issi

on s

taff

ing

s h

eld

pri

or

to a

dmis

sion

s.

Wri

tten

rep

ort

s co

mpl

eted

.

EXPL

AN

ATO

RY

REM

ARKS

"'""""

"""-.

..... -·

--

O'\

~

NAM

E O

F FA

.C IL

ITY

-----

·-· _

---

__ _

--.

~~~ _

____

. -;'

-:-~

-·

39

. 40

41

42

. 43 44

4S

46

47

48

49

so

51

YE

SI

NO

fN/A

~trJLU=~J}!JJi

._.._.

,._ .. __

____

_

_ .. _ _, _

__ .,.

... _ .....

.. ---c:--

.--t--·

·----··-

---..a--

--

_Pre

-adm

issi

on a

taff

ing

s at

ten

ded

by

i ..

..

Per

son

to b

e ad

mit

ted;

)

Tra

inin

g C

oord

inat

or;

Pe~son,

agen

cy o

r in

stit

uti

on

mak

ing

req

ues

t fo

r ad

mis

sion

;

Rep

rese

nta

tiv

e o

f lo

cal

men

tal

hea

lth

pro

gram

; an

d ..

.

Pu

bli

c W

eifa

re D

ivis

ion

ad

uit

ser

vic

es w

orke

r •...

~:;J;~

1IT:f=,

~ ~:.ili

lf ;::

').f:~

·i)

:;;;~:

-~?;

:;:.}:..

(7

) G

ROU

P CA

RE H

OME

TRA

ININ

G

PROG

RAM

'!l~~-

! ~

oMft.

D~o

T~T

: ....

. ,. .... _

.. _ .. _..

...

''.'. .f'·.

-~-/;:

·::~\:;_

---·

.... _ .....

..._ ..

·, :i:;

:,;:. i

. J:~}~~

-~~~;~1~1;:~;

..........

-----

-- :~~~}~~~t:

__

_ .,. __

__ ......

..........

...

lt-'.::;~~:~

--

--..

c..

---1

--.-

..

--~-~I

~-r

r--1 -:~~N~-

=~=~";

~ I

;t:f: A

gro

up

care

hom

e sh

all

s

(a)

Pro

vide

an

envi

Ton

men

t w

hich

:

Fo

ster

s h

ealt

h s

ocia

l in

tera

cti

on

Fo

ster

s in

depe

nden

t li

vin

g s

kil

ls

Res

iden

ts a

re r

efer

red

to

in

ter

ms

in k

eepi

ng w

ith

their

age

and

no

t i~

term

s th

at

focu

s on

dis

ab

ilit

ies

or

han

dic

aps;

Res

iden

ts a

llow

ed a

nd t

rain

ed t

o u

tili

ze p

erso

nal

p

oss

essi

on

s;

Res

iden

ts a

llow

ed a

nd

trai

ned

to

uti

lize a

pp

rop

riat

e m

odes

o

f co

rmnu

nica

tion

;

Res

iden

ts n

ave

acce

ss t

o t

elep

hone

;

Res

iden

ts h

ave

oppo

rtun

ity

to o

pen

and

read

ow

n m

ail;

----

----

-----

-------~--

EXPL

AN

ATO

RY

REM

ARKS

°'

\..0

--------.

• -· -&

----

--

•

NAM

E O

F F~CILITY

51

52

53

54

SS

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

64

YE

SI

t-JO

IN/A

-~-JI ·~;~~~1~~\

. ..

_ ..

.. _

__

.. ~ii;,.

·:#;~f ~~~~:

__

,... __ _, ......

.... ~

~~I

---1

.. --...

: ...........

.... :;i~~~

:~~ __

.., .. _

.. .....

........ i

____

.,. ___

.,...,. .....

.

--~-~1

_.

...,..

.,.. _

__

-t..;..

:...-..

... ~

i ...

_ ......... ~ ....

:f:i~l~~l

__

_._ ...

. _Jj

J!

.1nm¥~

.•

: .·. ·

··:

';

....

....

... _

... .

.. -1

-..

....

.

Res

iden

ts a

ssig

ned

and

trai

ned

to

per

form

hou

seho

ld

chor

es;

· ·

Hou

seho

ld c

hor.e

a. a

ssig

ned

by

ro·t

atio

n o

r sh

arin

g;

. .

Wor

k pe

rfor

med

req

uir

es n

o m

ore

than

~ ho

ur p

er d

ay;

Gro

up

Car

e H

ome

com

plie

s' w

ith

Wag

e an

d H

our

(b) Pr

~vid

es w

ritt

en.s

tate

men

t o

f p

olt

cies

and

pro

cedu

res

rega

rdin

g th

e m

anag

emen

t o

f be

havi

or p

robl

ems.

Po

lici

es a

nd p

roce

dure

s p

roh

ibit

s

Ph

ysi

cal

puni

shm

ent;

Sec

lusi

on o

f a

~esident in

a l

ocke

d ro

om;

·Rid

icul

e, c

oer

cio

n,

·th

reat

• o

r cu

rsin

g d

irec

ted

tow

ard

the

resi

den

ts;

Wit

hhol

ding

of

food

, sh

elte

i-,

clo

thin

g o

r ai

d t

o

ph

ysi

cal

fun

ctio

nin

g;

or

· ·

·

Dis

cip

lin

ing

of

one

resi

den

t by

an

oth

er,

exce

pt a

s p

art

of

orga

nize

d se

lf-g

over

nmen

t.

Dis

cip

lin

ing

of

oth

er resi~ents,

in a

ccoT

d w

ith

wri

tten

.p

oli

cy;

Dis

cip

lin

ing

of

oth

er.r

esid

ents

dir

ectl

y s

uper

vise

d by

s·t

aff.

(c)

Pro

vide

wri

tten

sta

tem

ent

of

po

licie

s an

d pr

oced

ures

re

gar

din

g r

esid

ent

com

pla

ints

and

gri

evan

ces.

Po

lici

es a

nd p

rocedu~es

incl

ud

e p

rov

isio

n f

ort

Rec

eip

t o

f co~pla~nts

and

g~ievances;

lnv

es.t

igat

ion

of

fact

s; a

nd

EXPL

AN

ATO

RY

REM

ARKS

""'-J

0

NAM

E O

F FA

CIL

ITY

. 6S

66

·• 67

. 68

·69 70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

Bl

!YE

SI

NO

IN /A

..

il:rnJI

--~

--~1

____

.... __ ....

__ _

___ _

... __

_ .,. ___

__ ..

.... __._

.... ....

'!)~

~-----

.. ---~---·

..........

.... _.,. _

___ _

...... ._..

,. ___ ..,.

____

_

......... ~

----+--

___ ,..

__ ..,_..

.,.~

--.. -.--

-.. -.....

. .....

.... -...

... -......

.....

..... --.

.. _..

.... .....

..... ....-

....... _

.. __

..........

.. --.. -..

.... -

Act

ion o~ su

bst

anti

ated

com

plai

nts

and

grie

vanc

es.

Res

iden

ts f

ull

y i

nfor

med

:

In w

riti

ng

, an

d

By v

erb

al d

iscu

ssio

n;

(e)

Pro

vide

, o

r ar

ran

ge,

fo

r 4

hour

s/w

eek

of

trai

nin

g

for

each

res

iden

t.

•

Tra

inin

g in

div

idu

aliz

ed.

Tra

inin

g d

evel

oped

, su

perv

ised

or

dir

ectl

y p

rovi

ded

by

trai

nin

g c

oo

rdin

ato

r.

Ind

ivid

ual

ized

tra

inin

g p

rovi

ded

in:

rers

on

al a

ppea

ianc

e;

Pu

bli

c be

havi

or;

Inte

rper

son

al r

elat

ion

ahip

aJ

Use

of

per

son

al p

rope

rty;

.

Hea

lth

and

saf

ety

;

Com

mun

ity m

obil

itY

I

Com

mun

icat

ion;

Per

son

al h

ygie

ne;

Eat

ing

;

Dre

ssin

g;

Clo

thin

g ca

re;

EXPL

AN

ATO

RY

REM

ARKS

-......J

NA

ME

O

F-FA

CIL

ITY

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

IYE

SI

NO

IN

/A

.,.. __ ..,

_......

,.._.._

.. .. ..,. _

_ ...,_ _

_ _. __

__ _

.... __

.....,_

.,._ ..

........ ..

.__ .. _.

___ _

1----1

---1

-.-

....

J,-.

....

....

--

... -~.

... :--.....

...... _

... ____

_

.........

__ .. ..

,...._.

.. -.....

1-..---

1----·

--]-]"~ ..

I ~~~

~~i~'·

92

l

.::uw,

--------

..::

~~

93

94

.__

... -

f.,,

.. --4

----

Hou

seho

ld.c

hore

s;

Mon

ey h

andl

ing;

Re~ding;

Wri

ting

;

Num

ber

conc

epts

;

Tim

e co

ncep

ts;

So

lita

ry l

eisu

re t

imer

Par

tici

pat

orj

lei

sure

tim

e sk

ills

; an

d

Obs

erva

tion

al l~isure ~ime sk

ills

.·

(f)

~rovide

an o

ut-o

f-ho

me

da

y pr

ogra

m f

or

each

res

iden

t.

All

MR/

DD ~

esid

enta

in

S h

our/

doy,

S

day/

week

·pr~

gram

.

ME

D.r

esid

ents

in

25 h~ur/week p

rogr

am.

or

MED

res

iden

ts t

rain

ing

pla

n d

esig

ned

to a

chei

ve 2

5 ho

ur/w

eek

lev

el o

f ou

t-of

-hom

e da

y pr

ogra

m l

evel

.

jlai

. .

9S

.';.-..·

·::.,:

.:~.:~~~.,:·

~

D M

ET

D

N

OT

H

ET

(8)

RESI

DENT

TRA

ININ

G P

LAN

AND

EVAL

UATI

ON

·.;:.;

..:l; ~~·~ .. ~!i~

96 _ .......

........

97

..........

.. -.....

......... _

. 98

Tra

inin

g p

lan

s on

fil

e a

t gr

oup

care

hom

e,

Tra

inin

g p

lan

fo

r ea

ch r~sident.

(a)

Init

ial

asse

ssm

ent

for

each

~es1dent.within

30 d

ays

of

adm

issi

on.

EXPLA~ATORY

RE

MA

RK

S

-......J

N

NAM

E O

F FA

CIL

ITY

99

100

'·101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

YE

SI

NO

IN

/A

~D

~UJI

·: 1[[£i

]9i::

(b)

Ann

ual progres~ as

sess

men

ts c

ompl

eted

on

all

res

iden

ts.

(c)

Vri

tten

tra

inin

g p

i.ans

des

ign

ed·t

o m

eet

resi

den

t's

need

s an

d co

nta

inin

g:·

The

lon

g-ra

nge

goal

fo

r ea

ch r

esid

ent;

Sh

ort

-ter

m m

easu

rabl

e o

bje

ctiv

es a

nd a

cti

vit

ies

des!

gned

to

mee

t th

e lo

ng-r

4nge

go

al;

and

Wri

tten

def

init

ion

s o

f _spec~fic re

spo

nsi

bil

itie

s o

f pa~ticipants in

res

iden

ts'

trai

nin

g i

ncl

ud

ing

:

Res

iden

t;

Gro

up

care

hom

e st

aff

;

Tra

inin

g c

oord

±na

tor;

and

Oth

er a

genc

y st

aff

.

(d) ~ritten

reco

rd o

f re

sid

ents

' p

arti

cip

atio

n i

n t

rain

ing

.

Vri

tten

rec

ord

docu

men

ts i

mpl

emen

tati

on o

f tr

ain

ing

de

sign

ed t

o ac

hiev

e g

oal

and

ob

ject

ives

; an

d

Doc

umen

ts

4 bo

ursl

wee

k in

div

idu

al a

nd g

roup

tra

inin

g

for

each

res

iden

t.

(e)

Wri

tten

rev

iew

and

ev

alu

atio

n o

f tr

ain

ing

pla

ns

at

least

eve

ry 3

mon

ths,

Rev

iew

in

clu

des

wri

tten

&

Ass

essm

ent

of

pro

gre

ss o

f re

sid

ent

tow

ard

ob

j.ec

tiv

es;

Ass

essm

ent

of

effe

ctiv

enes

s o

f tr

ain

ing

met

hods

use

d;

Ass

essm

ent

of

app

rop

riat

enes

s o

f co

nti

nu

atio

n o

f tr

ain

ing

pla

n; a

nd

EX

PL

AN

A'l'

OR

Y

RE

MA

RK

S

........

.. ""'

NA

ME.

OF

FAC

ILIT

Y

113

114

YES

I NO

IN~

i.--i---4

---

~f:F ;

':~Ji. ~

~~

Cha

nges

in

tra

inin

g ~lan ba

sed

on r

evie

w a

nd e

val

uat

ion

•

(f)

Incl

ud

es a

ny r

epo

rti

or

info

rmat

ion

th

at

may

hav

e a

bear

ing

on r

esid

ents

' tr

ain

ing

. ·

·~.:;/

, ~-

~~k:

:~w

~:i-~

(9)

RES

IDEN

T CO

MM

UNIT

Y IN

VO

LVEM

ENT

l1S

!~

:~ !

0 M

ET

• 0

NO

UE

T

116 1

-~: ·~~

,_,

__

--.....

..

Com

mun

ity p

rogr

am·d

escr

ibed

in

wri

tin

g.

Com

mun

ity p

rogr

am i

ncl

ud

es:

117

118

119

;~~~~~~;J:t~

~--+--

ti ._

_ ... _

__ .., ..

. ~ ..

(a)

Invo

lvem

ent

of

com

mun

ity i

n g

roup

car

e ho

me

prog

ram

(i

.e.,

vo

lun

teer

s, s

tud

ents

);

(b)

Res

iden

ts u

se o

f co

mm

unity

rec

reat

ion

al f

acil

itie

s av

aila

ble

to

the

gen

eral

pu

bli

c; a

nd

Eil

I

·~.~~·~:.

.:::~..::.

··+

~f<

(10

) R

EL

EA

SE

OF

RE

SID

EN

TS

(c)

Use

o

f co

mm

unity

age

ncie

s by

th

e re

sid

ents

.

~~:i~ .:· ·

1:~~f :'.:

i_{t~~,;~:

12

0

.:~: .. '.

·.:.:.~:

:~_ .. ;.=·:·:

. D

ME

T

D N

OT

M

E'l'

.....

... ~'

:"-·

.... ~

.....

121

122

123

124

123

____

_._..

...,. __

....

... _ .. ..,

.. -.....

.........

_ ...

......

. _ ...

. -1

i...

.---

....

....

-1._

_..

, __

_ _

(a)

Ass

essm

ents

mad

e o

f fu

nct

ion

al l

eve~s w

ith

in 3

0 dn

ya

of

rele

nae

of

all

res

iden

ts.

(b)

Pre

-rel

ease

sta

ff c

ompl

eted

.

App

ropr

iate

ness

of

rele

ase

revi

ewed

;

Ser

vic

es f

ollow~ng

disc

harg

e coo~dinated.

Fin

ding

s o

f p

re-r

elea

se s

taff

ing

~ntered in

wri

tin

g

into

res

iden

ts'

reco

rds.

EXPL

AN

ATO

RY

RE

MA

RK

S

'-.!

..r:

:-

··---

----

---...

... .

.. ...

...

NAM

E or

F~Cit;ITY

126

127

128

129

130

131

i't'E

SI

NO

IN/A

iLLi

t±!it

..

.,_

..,.

__

_.,

..__

_I

.....-~-..---+----

... _ .. .,._

___ ...

..,. ___

1-o

--1

---+

--

1--

--+

----

+--

-

11.~:;~=, .

::50..'

~~}~

Pre

-rel

ease

sta

ffin

g a

tten

ded

bys

Res

iden

t to

be

rele

ased

;

Tra

inin

g c

oo

rdin

ato

r;

Per

son

or

agen

cy a

ssum

ing

resp

on

sib

ilit

y f

ollo

win

g re

leas

e, if

any

;

Rep

rese

nta

tiv

e o

f lo

cal

men

tal

h!a

lth

pro

gram

: an

d

Pu

bli

c W

elfa

re D

ivis

ion

ad

ult

ser

vic

es w

orke

r, i

f re

sid

ent

is r

ecei

vin

g p

ub

lic

finan~ial as

sist

ance

.

Emerg~ncy re

leas

es m

ade

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith

req

uire

men

ts.

~~~~ ... ;:

t~>:

. ;:~

~'~t

(11

) G

ROU

P CA

RE H

OME _~

RAIN

ING

PRO

GRA

M A

DH

INIS

TRA

TIO

N

132 ;·1

; Q~

T Q

NO

T ~T

G

roup

ca

re h

ome

prov

ides

s

133

134

135

136

137

... ..-

-f-

----1

--.

.....

...... -..

.. -~--

............. _ .. _

. _

_ im

_

._ .......

..... _ ....

____

(a)

Tra

inin

g _

unde

r d

iTec

tio

n o

f tr

ain

ing

co

ord

inat

or.

(b)

No

tifi

ed M

enta

l H

ealt

h D

ivis

ion

of

appo

intm

ent

of

curr

ent

train

ing

co

ord

inat

or;

(c)

Em

ploy

s ad

equa

te s

taff

to

pro

vide

tra

inin

g a

s st

ate

d.

in g

roup

car

e ho

me'

s st

ated

pur

pose

,

.Tra

inin

g s

taff

pre

-ser

vic

e o

rien

tati

on

com

plet

ed a

nd

docu

men

ted

•

Tra

inin

g s

taff

12

/yea

r jo

b-r

elat

ed t

rain

ing

com

plet

ed

. :: ·] .'

. .,.:

: ·

''~'~:

} (d

) R

epor

ts p

?"ov

ided

to

Men

tol

Hea

lth

Div

isio

n:

P4' ·~ 77 _!

. 9: an

d do

cum

ente

d •

138

. .

. ~~

= A

nn

ual

.in

div

idu

al p

rog

ress

ass

essm

ent

for

each

res

iden

t;

EXPL

AN

ATO

RY

R

EMA

RK

S

'-J

V'1

NAM

E O

F FA

CIL

ITY

139

140

YE

SI

NO

IN/A

1.--

--1-

-~-.

.:..

.-

'-

Ann

ual

rep

ort

sp

ecif

yin

g t

rain

ing

acti

vit

ies;

and

Oth

er d

ata,

sta

tist

ics

and

rep

ort

s re

qu

ired

.·

EM_

7/1

6/i

G

EXPL

AN

ATO

RY

REM

ARKS

'-!

O'\

77

APPENDIX C

BOUNDARY· STREET DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS

PROGRAM RESIDENT: _____________ _

CATE90RY: ----------------------TOPIC:

------------------------------RATIONALE: --------------~~--~----~------~~~~--~--------~-------

COALS: ------...-------------~----------------------------------------------

TIME FRAME: begin: ----------- end: ---------------~

B!HAVIORAL OBJECTIVES:·-----------------------..-.;..-

PROCEDURE: ---------:---------~--------------------~~--------------------

RECOROING DATA:

1. Resident does the step independently. 2. Resident.requires verbal assistance to complete the step. 3. Resident requires verbal and physical assistance to complete the step.

Month ___________ _

{steps) . Day:

1~

·:2.

3.

4 • . . s.

6.

7.

s. 9 •..

10.

St.arr:

" Time: (f.linutes) tr. I ~ <r. (?) ...... ~· :s (I)

PROG

RAM

DAT

A SH

EET

RF.

SmEN

Ti _

__

__

__

__

__

~_.,..... _

_

No.

CATE

GORY

1 -------------------------

TO

PIO

t-------------

Mon

th:. _

____

____

____

____

____

_ __

( ste

os)

D

avt

1 •.

2.

3.

lu

5.

6.

7.

a. 9.

.. 1

0 •.

Sta

rr:

%

Tim

e:

RR:O

RDIN

G DA

TAi

lo R

esid

ent

does

th

e st

ep i

ndep

ende

ntly

.

2. R

esid

ent

req

uir

es v

erb

al a

ssis

tan

ce t

o complet~ th

e ta

sk.

J. R

esid

ent

req

uir

es v

erb

al a

nd p

hy

sica

l as

sist

ance

to

com

plet

e t~e ta

sk.

-......1

C

X)

program evaluation: a model for evaluating group homes for

Documents