PROGRAM & POLICY EVALUATION ‘Goal Attainment Scaling’ CRJS 4466 PROGRAM & POLICY EVALUATION ‘Goal Attainment Scaling’ 1. Evaluation projects 2. Test #3 – November 23 3. Take-home exam November 30

4. Goal Attainment Scaling the quantification of individualized goal sets with clients usually use of 5-point Likert scale measurement of progress toward goals is individualized for each client use of a ‘follow-up’ guide to chart progress toward goals ‘success’ scores for individual clients/aggregated groups can be compared across programs/agencies

GAS Scoring Guide Level Expected Outcome Goal 1: Social Play -2 most unfavourable outcome isolated play -1 present level of performance parallel play expected level of success interactive play +1 more than expected level of success interactive play 80% +2 most favourable expected level of success cooperative play

4. Goal Attainment Scaling used primarily in mental health field, but now branching out into general health assessments, corrections, CAS, etc. use of GAS helps to clarify goals, expectations for clients, to measure progress, plan interdisciplinary case management strategies, compare effectiveness of different programs

5. Steps in GAS Selection of goals (at least three, well-defined, individualized client goals, measurable) Weighting goals (reflective differential importance of goals) Follow-up time selection (post-intervention) Scaling (usually, using Likert format -2 through +2) Specify other scale levels (e.g. less than expected/more) Client assessment as per GAS

6. GAS and Evaluation to use in evaluation, requires that program staff be taught to write relevant, realistic, measurable goals computation of average or summary scores across clients - summing (simple index) versus true scaling (weighted) versus conversion to t-scores (text)

7. Variations of Goal Attainment Scaling can use alternate scoring systems (e.g. 0 to 100, or a ‘percentage’ system related to how much progress has been made toward the goal) but note: criticism that goal attainment scaling is inherently subjective – so how much measurement refinement should we assume?

7. Problems with Goal Attainment Scaling measurement validity and reliability lack of control over selection of goals confusion of goals with activities (e.g. attendance) lack of staff training in use of GAS cannot simply combine goal score statistically, as may hide progress in particular areas (e.g. marks in courses)