IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v92y2022ics0149718922000283.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating an innovative integrated training for child and youth services: Lessons learned

Author

Listed:
  • Coll, Kenneth M.
  • Stewart, Roger A.
  • Day, Alexander
  • Scholl, Stacey
  • Hauser, Nicole

Abstract

This article highlights one child and youth services agency’s journey to develop and pilot a system for tracking training effectiveness for staff. Given the importance of intentional and strong staff training to the success of an agency, the purpose of this study was to report training outcomes across four-time intervals (i.e., immediately after training considered here as baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and 18 months) using a tracking system based on best practices in staff development. Results indicated that the tracking system allowed this agency to measure and describe post-training outcomes for staff across the four-time intervals. It can be inferred that such training positively influenced youth outcomes. Specifically, the training and follow-up expanded staff’s ability to effectively internalize concepts and be more intentional with their time for the benefit of youth care.

Suggested Citation

  • Coll, Kenneth M. & Stewart, Roger A. & Day, Alexander & Scholl, Stacey & Hauser, Nicole, 2022. "Evaluating an innovative integrated training for child and youth services: Lessons learned," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:92:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000283
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718922000283
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102074?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Futris, Ted G. & Schramm, David G. & Richardson, Evin W. & Lee, Tae Kyoung, 2015. "The impact of organizational support on the transfer of learning to practice," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 36-43.
    2. Coll, Kenneth M. & Sawyer, Stephanie & Scholl, Stacey & Hauser, Nicole, 2019. "A logic model development for an adolescent based intervention to improve benefits from Therapeutic Residential Care (TRC)," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Curry, Dale & McCarragher, Timothy & Dellmann-Jenkins, Mary, 2005. "Training, transfer, and turnover: Exploring the relationship among transfer of learning factors and staff retention in child welfare," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 931-948, August.
    4. Collins, Mary Elizabeth, 2008. "Evaluating child welfare training in public agencies: Status and prospects," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 241-246, August.
    5. McLaughlin, John A. & Jordan, Gretchen B., 1999. "Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 65-72.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Futris, Ted G. & Schramm, David G. & Richardson, Evin W. & Lee, Tae Kyoung, 2015. "The impact of organizational support on the transfer of learning to practice," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 36-43.
    2. Griffiths, Austin & Royse, David & Murphy, April & Jones, Olivia & Culver, Kalee & Turner, James & Smajlovic, Alma, 2023. "Exploratory factor analysis and reliability of the Child Welfare Employee Feedback Scale: Further revision (CWEFS-R)," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    3. Tim Benijts, 2014. "A Business Sustainability Model for Government Corporations. A Belgian Case Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 204-216, March.
    4. Osborne, Cynthia & Huffman, Jennifer & Caldera, Selena & Lipton Galbraith, Anna, 2020. "The influence of field-based training on caseworker turnover," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Fielden, Sarah J. & Rusch, Melanie L. & Masinda, Mambo Tabu & Sands, Jim & Frankish, Jim & Evoy, Brian, 2007. "Key considerations for logic model development in research partnerships: A Canadian case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 115-124, May.
    6. Ebenso, Bassey & Manzano, Ana & Uzochukwu, Benjamin & Etiaba, Enyi & Huss, Reinhard & Ensor, Tim & Newell, James & Onwujekwe, Obinna & Ezumah, Nkoli & Hicks, Joe & Mirzoev, Tolib, 2019. "Dealing with context in logic model development: Reflections from a realist evaluation of a community health worker programme in Nigeria," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 97-110.
    7. Wasserman, Deborah L., 2010. "Using a systems orientation and foundational theory to enhance theory-driven human service program evaluations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 67-80, May.
    8. Voeten, J.J., 2012. "Understanding responsible innovation in small producers’ clusters in Northern Vietnam : A grounded theory approach to globalization and poverty alleviation," Other publications TiSEM e01da02b-ef2b-47c9-8d06-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Peyton, David J. & Scicchitano, Michael, 2017. "Devil is in the details: Using logic models to investigate program process," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 156-162.
    10. Matt Andrews, 2022. "This is How to Think About and Achieve Public Policy Success," CID Working Papers 413, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    11. Wifo, 2021. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 10/2021," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 94(10), October.
    12. Sobelson, Robyn K. & Young, Andrea C., 2013. "Evaluation of a federally funded workforce development program: The Centers for Public Health Preparedness," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 50-57.
    13. Wu, Huang & Shen, Jianping & Jones, Jeffrey & Gao, Xingyuan & Zheng, Yunzheng & Krenn, Huilan Y., 2019. "Using logic model and visualization to conduct portfolio evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 69-75.
    14. O'Keefe, Christine M. & Head, Richard J., 2011. "Application of logic models in a large scientific research program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 174-184, August.
    15. Vinícius P. Rodrigues & Daniela C. A. Pigosso & Jakob W. Andersen & Tim C. McAloone, 2018. "Evaluating the Potential Business Benefits of Ecodesign Implementation: A Logic Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    16. Chanel Bjanca V. Balinbin & Krystina Trizia R. Balatbat & Alyssa Nicolette B. Balayan & Maria Isabel C. Balcueva & Mary Grace B. Balicat & Thea Arabelle S. Balidoy & John Rey B. Macindo & Gian Carlo S, 2020. "Occupational determinants of compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue among Filipino registered nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5-6), pages 955-963, March.
    17. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    18. Strand, Virginia C. & Spath, Robin & Bosco-Ruggiero, Stephanie, 2010. "So you have a stable child welfare workforce -- What's next?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 338-345, March.
    19. Jürgen Janger & Agnes Kügler, 2018. "Innovationseffizienz. Österreich im internationalen Vergleich," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61111.
    20. Fangyuan Chang & Andrea Eriksson & Britt Östlund, 2020. "Discrepancies between Expected and Actual Implementation: The Process Evaluation of PERS Integration in Nursing Homes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-18, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:92:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000283. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.