Introduction
Each juvenile holdover program must clearly identify its key program components, administrative options, and the systemic relationships that will provide the foundation for the program design. The formulation of a program purpose, goals, and objectives are tangible outcomes of the strategic planning process. In order to determine if the program is meeting its goals and to obtain information that can pinpoint areas of its strengths and weaknesses, an evaluation plan must be developed and implemented. Finally, moving from an abstract plan to an operational program requires the formulation of a clear action plan.

By the conclusion of this chapter, readers will be able to:

• Discuss the formulation of a program purpose statement.

• Distinguish between long- and short-term goals.

• Develop measurable objectives.

• Discuss process and outcome evaluations.

• Create an action plan for the development and implementation of a juvenile holdover program.

Scenario 3-1: Hector
What Do You Mean the Juvenile Holdover Won’t Keep This Kid?
Hector, a 16-year-old runaway, has been held in the Pinecrest Juvenile Holdover Program since Friday evening and his court hearing is scheduled for Monday afternoon. During the hearing, the county prosecutor and judge state that they want him held pending the investigation that is necessary before the filing of the formal petition by the county attorney’s office. The investigation will probably take another week to complete. Hector has no family in Pinecrest. He lives in a town 85 miles away and was hitch-hiking out of town when he was apprehended. A call is made to the coordinator of the juvenile holdover program who stated that the purpose of the juvenile holdover program is to provide for short-term holding and program policy is that a youth should not be held for more than 24 hours, excluding weekends. Therefore, the juvenile holdover coordinator explains that it will not be possible to continue to hold Hector there for another week. Arrangements will have to be made to transport him to a juvenile detention facility in another community or to release him pending the next hearing.

The attorney and judge are both upset, indicating that they thought that was why Pinecrest had developed a juvenile holdover program—so that the county would not have to transport youth and have them held in another jurisdiction. Both indicated that they understood that the 24-hour policy was only a guideline. The coordinator tries to explain the staffing and licensing issues involved but the response is somewhat less than accepting. The judge vows to talk with the chair of the county board and have the matter placed on the agenda for the next board meeting. The judge then issues an order directing the juvenile holdover coordinator to hold the youth at the Pinecrest Juvenile Holdover Program until the next hearing scheduled in one week. The juvenile holdover staff member who accompanied Hector to the court hearing returns him to the juvenile holdover program and the dilemma continues to unfold.

The juvenile holdover coordinator and the nonprofit agency operating it have a decision to make. Should Hector be held for an additional week, thus compromising the integrity of the purpose and policies of the juvenile holdover program and placing the license to operate in potential jeopardy? Should the matter be taken to another arena? What is the appropriate place to take the concern, since the judge and county attorney are the ones requesting the continued hold? A concern about being held in contempt of court is raised. What happens if they simply release him to his mother who has come to Pinecrest for the hearing? Clearly, the expectations of the judge and the county attorney were not consistent with the purpose statement and operating polices of the juvenile holdover program.

Purpose Statement
The viability of a juvenile holdover program depends on its ability to address a pressing local problem. It is crucial that a juvenile holdover program focus on needs within its jurisdiction that can be addressed realistically. This will enable agencies to develop manageable and effective programs. The following two primary questions can help program organizers limit the scope of a program to something that is realistic and achievable (Fulton, Stone, and Gendreau, 1994):

• What deficiencies are we trying to overcome?

• Which deficiencies can we realistically overcome given the existing resources and level of support?

A clearly articulated statement identifying the primary purpose of the program will assist program organizers and staff to remain focused on achievable and congruent goals. The purpose statement for any program, like an agency mission statement, should clearly state the primary purpose of the program and the population for whom it is designed. It also should include a very brief and general description of the services it will provide (Fulton, Stone, and Gendreau, 1994). See Figure 3-1 for a sample purpose statement for a juvenile holdover program.

Program Goals
Program goals are broad, general statements that serve to map out the future and provide measures to evaluate success in achieving the program’s purpose. Goals should clarify the intentions of the program and direct program activities. It is recommended that program organizers or staff apply the following guidelines when developing goals for juvenile holdover programs (Godwin, Steinhart, and Fulton, 1998).

• Focus the goals according to what the program is seeking to accomplish, (i.e, program purpose).

• Focus the goals according to the appropriate target population, procedures, and services being provided.

• Carefully select the goals based on prioritized needs and available resources.

• Differentiate short- and long-term goals.

Measurable Objectives
Objectives are crucial to effective program implementation and evaluation. They specify how program goals will be achieved and should include a method for evaluating results. While program goals should clearly state the intentions of a program, objectives should describe the mechanisms and strategies that will be used to accomplish the program’s goals. Specific and measurable objectives should be assigned to each major goal area (Crowe and Schaefer, 1992; Fulton, Stone, and Gendreau, 1994, as cited in Godwin, Steinhart, and Fulton, 1998). Figure 3-2 provides sample long- and short-term goals, measurable objectives, and outcome measures for a juvenile holdover program.

Evaluation Plan
Policymakers and funding sources want to be assured that programs and interventions put in place are accomplishing the goals and objectives established. This is accomplished through program evaluation. Evaluation should be viewed as a way program organizers or staff can learn and grow from their past experiences. Program organizers and staff can have more control over the type of information sought during the evaluation process if they base the evaluation on the program’s objectives. There should be a balance between information that will be of use to the program staff to enhance and improve the program’s services and information or data that will be of interest to outside stakeholders (Boone and Fulton, 1995). There are two types of evaluation that are useful to consider as plans are developed for a juvenile holdover program: process evaluation and outcome evaluation.

Process Evaluation
Process evaluation is descriptive in nature and provides an ongoing assessment of the effectiveness of the implementation and operation of the program. Process measures look carefully at various program components to determine if those components are providing the services desired and if they are operating as efficiently as possible. For example, the intake process of a holdover program could be the subject of a process evaluation. The first assessment will determine if the intake procedure is being implemented as it was designed and set forth in policy and procedure. Any discrepancies are identified and an attempt is made to determine why functional modifications have occurred. It may be a staff training issue. The procedure as set forth initially simply may not be workable for any number of valid reasons. As a response to what is learned in this type of evaluation (e.g., the intake process is not functioning as outlined in the program policy and procedure manual), those responsible for the program can then make decisions to revise the procedures or emphasize training and staff accountability if the original procedure is still judged to be the most appropriate.

Process evaluation can offer new programs a chance to fine tune program practices, as well as a means for monitoring ongoing program operations. Process evaluation is dynamic and continual.

Outcome Evaluation
Outcome evaluation provides determines whether the program is achieving its intended results. Program organizers and staff should be realistic when developing program objectives so outcomes can be measured within limited human and financial resource constraints. If possible, data elements – information necessary to collect for evaluation purposes – should be incorporated within the program’s forms and record keeping procedures and/or within an automated management-information and client-tracking system.

Objectives identified in the planning process form the basis for program evaluations. The target or desired outcomes are established and data is collected to indicate if that target is met. The results are quantified so that the degree of success can be specifically identified. For example, if a desired outcome (target) was to reduce use of secure detention facilities by 20 percent (e.g.,10 individuals per year from a baseline of 50) and the actual reduction revealed by examination of the data is 12 fewer juveniles placed in secure detention, the outcome objective has been met and exceeded (12 = a 24 percent reduction). On the other hand, if an examination of the data reveals that the reduction was only 5 fewer juveniles placed in secure detention, then the outcome objective was not met (5 = a 10 percent reduction). Evaluation results should provide a yes or no answer to the question of whether the objective was accomplished, while also providing some insight into why the objective was or was not met. This insight can be the most critical part of the evaluation process. This is where learning occurs. The data should point to areas of direct exploration for possible program changes and where decisions can be made regarding needed modification to the program design, the target population, or to the desired outcomes. Perhaps the initial objectives were too optimistic and somewhat unrealistic. With solid information from program evaluations, objectives can be appropriately modified. Figure 3-2 provides sample goals, objectives, and outcome measures for a juvenile holdover program. Figure 3-3 provides an example of how an outcome measure can be used as a learning tool.

Creating an Action Plan
There are many tasks and activities associated with developing and implementing a juvenile holdover program. Program organizers, in concert with the advisory board or working group members, should develop strategies for making the implementation process more manageable. An action plan is a useful tool for program development efforts because it provides a framework for defining what needs to be accomplished to implement the juvenile holdover program. It also helps to keep the development and implementation process on schedule and gives those involved an idea of where their contribution fits within the overall program plan (Godwin, Heward, and Spina, 2000).

The action planning process involves:

• Determining goals.

• Specifying tasks.

• Assigning responsible parties.

• Scheduling target due dates.

• Identifying resources needed to accomplish the tasks.

Tasks or activities outlined in an action plan often are sequential. The ability to move ahead on one task is dependent on the successful completion of a necessary preceding step. Therefore, an action plan should allow for modifications and adjustments to tasks, assignments, and due dates as needs arise. Table 3-1 provides a sample action plan format for one goal established for the development of a juvenile holdover program.

Table 3-1: Sample Action Plan

Conclusion
The strategic planning process moves the juvenile holdover program from a general statement of purpose to the creation of a detailed action plan that will lead to actual implementation – the day the door opens and the first youth is admitted. See chapter 9, “Assuring Your Success,” for sample program development goals and tasks and worksheets that provide a process to use during strategic planning and an action planning format for use during implementation.

PREVIOUS CHAPTER / NEXT CHAPTER

www.nhtsa.dot.gov / Index

---