Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Many agencies serving survivors of domestic violence are required to evaluate their services. Three possible evaluation strategies include: a) process measurement, which typically involves a frequency count of agency activities, such as the number of counseling hours given; b) outcome evaluation, which measures the impact of agency activities on clients, such as increased understanding of the dynamics of abuse; or c) performance measurement, which assesses the extent to which agencies achieve their stated goals. Findings of a telephone survey of state funders of domestic violence agencies in the United States revealed that most states (67%) require only process measurement, while fewer than 10% require performance measurement. Most (69%) funders reported satisfaction with their evaluation strategy and emphasized the need for involvement of all stakeholders, especially grantees, in developing an evaluation.

Keywords

domestic violence evaluation domestic violence service provision

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen, N.E. , Bybee, D.I. , & Sullivan, C.M. (2004). Battered women’s multitude of needs. Violence Against Women, 10, 1015-1035.

Bourne, M. , Neely, A. , Platts, K. , & Mills, J. ( 2002). The success and failure of performance measurement initiatives: Perceptions of participating managers. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22, 1288-1310.

Creswell, J.W. ( 2009). Mixed methods procedures. In J. W. Creswell (Ed.), Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (pp. 203-225). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Davidson, J.E. ( 2005). Evaluation methodology basics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Edelman, I. ( 2000). Evaluation and community-based initiatives. Social Policy, 31(2), 13-23.

Edleson, J.L. , & Bible, A.L. ( 2001). Collaborating for women’s safety: Partnerships between research and practice. In C. Renzetti , J. L. Edleson , & R. K. Bergen (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 73-95). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Goodman, L.A. , Epstein, D. , & Herman, J.L. ( 2008). Listening to battered women: A survivor-centered approach to advocacy, mental health, and justice. Washington, DC : American Psychological Association.

Hatry, H.P. ( 1999). Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.

McNamara, C. ( 2004). Organizational assessment for nonprofits. Retrieved September 15, 2004, from http://www.mapnp.org/library/org_eval/org_eval.htm

10.

Meyers, T. , & Daly, J. ( 1997). View and commentary from the trenches: A battering intervention project’s reaction to participation as a site in program evaluation . Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/pivot/pivot.html

11.

Neuendorf, K.A. ( 2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Nielsen, S.B. , & Ejler, N. (2008). Improving performance?: Exploring the complementarities between evaluation and performance management. Evaluation, 14, 171-192.

12.

Plantz, M.C. , Greenway, M.T. , & Hendricks, M. ( 1997). Outcome measurement: Showing results in the nonprofit sector. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 75, 15-30.

13.

Poister, T.H. ( 2003). Measuring performance in public and nonprofit organizations . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

14.

Riger, S. ( 1999). Challenges in collaborative research on violence against women. Violence Against Women, 5, 1099-1117.

15.

Riger, S. , Bennett, L. , Wasco, S.M. , Schewe, P.A. , Frohmann, L. , Camacho, J.M. , et al. (2002). Evaluating services for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

16.

Sullivan, C.M. , & Cain, D. ( 2004). Ethical and safety considerations when obtaining information from or about battered women for research purposes. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 603-618.

17.

United States Department of Justice. (2009 ). OVW Grant Programs. Retrieved January 7, 2009 , from http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/ovwgrantprograms.htm

18.

United Way. (2000). Agency experiences with outcome measurement: Survey findings. Retrieved September 15, 2004, from http://national.unitedway.org/outcomes/files/AgencyOM.pdf

19.

Van Der Knaap, P. ( 2006). Responsive evaluation and performance management. Evaluation, 12, 278-293.

20.

W. K. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Logic model development guide. Retrieved May 30, 2009, from http://www.wkkf.org/Search/Site.aspx?x=0&y=0&q=logic+model+development+guide

21.

Wholey, J.S. , & Hatry, H.P. ( 1992). The case for performance monitoring. Public Administration Review, 52, 604-610.

A Nationwide Survey of State-Mandated Evaluation Practices for Domestic Violence Agencies

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References