Correctional Service Canada
www.csc-scc.gc.ca
Common menu bar links
Women Offender Programs and Issues
This Web page has been archived on the Web.
Pet Facilitated Therapy in Correctional Institutions
IMPLEMENTING PFT
N. Program Evaluation
Evaluating the effects of pet therapy programs is a challenge facing researchers in the discipline for several reasons (Cusack and Smith, 1984). Many institutions do not document the effectiveness of their PFT program because its success is visibly noticeable to all involved and anecdotal information often takes the place of empirical data. As well, many staff members do not have the background to conduct such evaluations. Finally, evaluations can be expensive to conduct.
…standard measures of affection for pets have not been developed. Several research studies have concluded that measuring degree of attachments to pets may be difficult... It is preferable to use several measures, some self report and some more objective indicators that might be observed or rated by your staff, or (ideally) impartial outsiders. (Lago, Knight, Rohrer-Dann and Friend, 1985).
The Pact Manual (Lago, Knight, Rohrer-Dann, Friend, 1985) lists why evaluations should be completed:
1. Evaluation, carefully done, helps keep us from fooling ourselves by giving us other information to consider. |
2. Evaluation results provide performance evidence that helps to convince future clients, other community members, health professionals, and funding agencies that programs are worth supporting. |
|
3. Evaluation is necessary in planning what should be done next. |
Cusack and Smith (1984) outline guidelines that institutions can use to assess the effects of their programs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lago, Knight, Rohrer-Dann and Friend (1985) continue to explain the distinctions (monitoring and outcome) in the process of evaluation and other characteristics to consider:
Monitoring represents the regular tabulation and examination of reports documenting the service activities in a program. For example, the number of animals placed, or the number of people attending an education program. Monitoring information should be routed to the appropriate committee chairman and to board meetings as regularly scheduled reports... The monitoring report should be used to summarize how the program has been doing over a given calendar period. (Lago, Knight, Rohrer-Dann and Friend, 1985).
Outcome evaluation refers to a process of comparing documented service performance to the organization’s goals... It should focus on changes in the experiences and the quality of life of clients and owners. Thus, the emphasis is not on what we do, but rather on does what we have done show desired or negative effects on the lives of older persons. (Lago, Knight, Rohrer-Dann and Friend, 1985).
Monitoring information accumulates to be one of the sources of information used in outcome evaluation. (Lago, Knight, Rohrer-Dann and Friend, 1985).
The most useful way of including clients into your evaluation process is to document complaints, concerns, or compliments whenever they arise. If the evaluation committee receives a "critical incident" report for every major client communication this information can be tabulated and added to an evaluation report that suggest issues your group might need to work on. (Lago, Knight, Rohrer-Dann and Friend, 1985).
Case studies growing out of the critical incident approach are also very useful, especially when you are dealing with a relatively uncommon event. (Lago, Knight, Rohrer-Dann and Friend, 1985).
Pet therapy has enormous potential; in terms of benefits, costs, and feasibility of implementation, it could conceivably outdistance most other treatment modalities (Cusack and Smith, 1984), and formal evaluations will assist in the program’s general assistance and stature.
