Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:39 pm
Time: 9:39 pm
Results for process evaluation
3 results foundAuthor: O'Brien, Keith Title: A Process Evaluation of the "Choose to Refuse" Heroin and OxyContin Prevention Education Program Summary: This report presents a process evaluation of the "Choose to Refuse" (CTR) Heroin and Oxycontin Prevention Education Program which was created by the Juvenile Justice Staff at the Essex County District Attorney's Office. The report documents lessons learned in developing a drug prevention programs, and is intended to provide information on the options and best practices when considering developing a drug prevention program. Details: Boston: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety, Research and Policy Analysis Unit, 2006. 26p. Source: Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 118366 Keywords: Drug Abuse Prevention Program (Massachusetts)Drugs (Massachusetts)Process Evaluation |
Author: Hiller, Matthew Title: Fayette County Juvenile Drug Court Implementation Evaluation Summary: The current evaluation describes the implementation of the Fayette County Juvenile Drug, which was planned beginning in 1999 and established initially as a pilot program in January 2001. It received funds to become fully implemented in September 2001. During this evaluation, data were collected on drug court operations and drug court participants in order to The 16 strategies pertain to collaborative planning, teamwork, clearly defining a target population and eligibility criteria, judicial involvement and supervision, monitoring and evaluation, community partnerships, comprehensive treatment planning, developmentally appropriate services, gender-appropriate services, cultural competence, a focus on strengths, family engagement, educational linkages, drug testing, goal-oriented incentives and sanctions, and confidentiality. The process evaluation concluded that the Fayette County Juvenile Drug Court had successfully incorporated these strategies in its implementation. The program staff attempts to meet the need of each participant, and the opinions and suggestions of team members are considered by the judge before making final decisions about participants. The cohesiveness of the drug court team provides a supportive and therapeutic environment that facilitates the recovery of participants. The evaluation recommends building stronger relationships with local treatment programs, increasing the involvement of participants' families, enrolling 30 percent of eligible youth each year, and developing a plan for funding the court beyond grant monies. Evaluation methods included interviews with court team members, participant observation, a focus group, and a review of program documentation. 8 figures and appended participant observation coding sheet, the participant record coding sheet, and the consent and script for the focus group. Details: Lexington, KY: Center on Drug and Alcohol Research, University of Kentucky, 2003. 71p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 22, 2012 at http://courts.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5032E79A-6565-4E19-AB8D-C6D6AC555ADE/0/FayetteCountyJuvenileDrugCourtImplementationEvaluation2003.pdf Year: 2003 Country: United States URL: http://courts.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5032E79A-6565-4E19-AB8D-C6D6AC555ADE/0/FayetteCountyJuvenileDrugCourtImplementationEvaluation2003.pdf Shelf Number: 123724 Keywords: Drug Courts (Kentucky)Drug Treatment ProgramsJuvenile OffendersProcess EvaluationSubstance Abuse |
Author: Bipartisan Policy Center Title: Tenth Anniversary Report Card: The Status of the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Summary: A decade after the September 11 terrorist attacks, nine of the 41 recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission in July 2004 remain unfinished. Today, our country is undoubtedly safer and more secure than it was a decade ago. We have damaged our enemy, but the ideology of violent Islamist extremism is alive and attracting new adherents, including right here in our own country. The terrorist threat will be with us far into the future, demanding that we be ever vigilant. Changing circumstances require that we regularly reassess our priorities and expenditures to determine what is needed to defend our country and people. Our terrorist adversaries and the tactics and techniques they employ are evolving rapidly. We will see new attempts, and likely successful attacks. One of our major deficiencies before the 9/11 attacks was a failure by national security agencies to adapt quickly to new and different kinds of enemies. We must not make that mistake again. Details: Washington, DC: Bipartisan Policy Center, 2011. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 22, 2012 at http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/CommissionRecommendations.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/CommissionRecommendations.pdf Shelf Number: 123731 Keywords: 9/11 Commission ReportProcess Evaluation |