The Forum for Youth Investment - Article Example

The Forum for Youth Investment Executive Summary The concern of non-successful youth investment initiative remains a challenge in the various economies. This is further compounded by the concern of the escalating unemployment margins. The programs envisaged by the forum for youth investment seek to ensure that the initiatives adopted by these age set remains bound to realize the aspired success. Apparently, the youth source programs from academic institutions that endeavour at assisting them realize their goals of success. However, the script changes upon the implementation of these skills. The economy offers novel challenges that desire the input of experienced players to navigate. This assists in outlining the essence of such measures to the youth groups. This report seeks to narrow on the procedures adopted by this program in the undertake of the respective process of evaluation. It offers an insight on the progressive procedure undertaken by the respective tools with critical concern being anchored on their alignment to the eventual goals of success under aspiration. Background The forum for Youth investment is a non-profit and non-partisan organization that has taken the front role in making sure that the youth are ready to face the future. They work together with the nation and the entire community to ascertain that youths fit well within the society with adequate college, work and life skills. The program provides various resources that youth programs can be evaluated. Thus, it makes use of evaluative research with the use of practical experience and thorough research to come up with appropriate strategies, innovative ideas and partnerships. It is mainly a form of assessments as it centers on the needs of the youth and the way they can improve their lives. These tools are necessary for the measurement of youth outcomes in the effort to provide solutions that are strong for young people. Benefits of the program These programs will be used to evaluate the various programs that are used to provide youth interventions. They include programs that are used by individuals as well as those that are applied in groups. The elemental concern identified by the forum for youth investment remains on the inability of youth interventions in supporting their future desires. The initiative equates on the demands of the economic frontier and the potential it offers to the youths towards the realization of the eventual investment policies. However, the concern of impending challenges and reduced skills seem to alter the progressive realization of the associated goals. The evaluation of possible success margins accredited to the entire initiatives adopted by the youths call for the development of ideal tools that may stand viable in the eventual implementation of the programs. Tools and instruments isolated by the forum for youth investment seek to engage on this practise. The program offers a substantial opportunity for evaluating on these concerns. It is thus, used to provide solution of the various loopholes that are present in the varied assessment tools among the youth. The tools evaluate the needs of individual youth members in order to provide workable solution. Additionally, the tools are used by youth administrators to find the appropriate tools for evaluation and assessment (Yohalem & Wilson- Ahlstrom, 2009). Aims and objectives The tools of evaluation aim at measuring the quality of the various youth programs. They focus on providing benefits towards various youth programs that have been developed to conduct different activities. Thus, the major beneficiaries of this program will be individuals and groups that use of the tools to improve the lives of the youth. This is evident through formulation of strategies that can be involved in numerous activities of the youth. They include researchers, practitioners, policy makers and advocates. In turn, these people will work with the youth to ensure that they achieve a standard level of stability in the future. Implementation The implementation process will be used in evaluating the results and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the tools. Thus, there will be an opportunity to make necessary adjustments to ensure that the tools work. In particular, adult leaders and the youth will get the necessary connections, information, and tools that they require to come up with greater opportunities and results for the young people (Yohalem & Wilson- Ahlstrom, 2009). This will allow for the consideration of the potential that stands to be generated from the opportunities considered by the youths. They stand to offer an advisory team upon which the concept of investment harbouring and nurturing stand to be implemented. The advice secured from the selected senior partners allows for the consideration of their potential input in the shaping of the interventions. This formulates the background upon which the tools are developed. The eventual process of implementation remains anchored along the prospect of having the entire system structured toward the realization of success and its terminal end. This implies that it offers options to develop the pre-established interventional structures, as well as mounting novel practises. Additionally, it is considered to be considerate if it offers possible solutions to the errors noted during the progress of both the evaluation and implementation process. Causal Model or Project theory The programs underlies of two models probable causal models or project theories. They include the making of adjustments on the different youth programs that are low quality. After a number of researches, it will be possible to identify the specific parts that are not effective and make changes. There will also be a necessity to come up with entirely new projects to replace those projects that are not outstanding for the youths. It will include the efforts of policy makers and legal systems to draft the appropriate documents. This implies that the cost of the entire programs may range in accordance to the description of the adopted policy (Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2012, p. 6). However, it remains of substantial contribution to point out that the respective policies hinges on the realization of the entire working-strategy adopted by the forum. This is with regard to the identified levels of goal evaluation. Negative observation may call for a revisit of the adopted policies. Such revisits may consider making further adjustment or adopting an entirely novel policy on the program. Section 2: Components Key elements involved in the enactment of this model involve the intervention program (such as the forum for youth investment), informed stakeholders, and pre-existing youth programs. The intervention programs will seek to evaluate on the performance of the youth programs, with central aim being nested on their effectiveness. The stakeholders seek to present their contribution in the bettering of this program. This is via chipping their skills and knowledge into the redefinition of the youth programs. This contribution remains guided the interests or aims aspired by these programs. The programs comprise of a set of tools and instruments that assist towards the realization of the aforementioned interest. Success of a single program is founded on the efficiency of the incorporated tools (Langbein, 2012, p. 87). The Forum for Youth Investment envisions the usage of over a dozen tools towards the realization of this interest. The tools desire to be procured in order to facilitate their usage. This amounts to the prospective start-up cost aspired by the evaluation process. Their usage further focuses on the validity and reliability of the identified variables towards the undertaking of the evaluation process. This allows for the promotion of their relevance as entities. Immediate goals The immediate targets remains anchored at quantifying the effectiveness of the youth oriented programs. This is with regard to their capacity to achieve the ultimate goals that were captured in their designing or structuring. These measures will allow for the deduction of the possible adjustments that may be engaged in the singular youth programs. Immediate goals offer room for the consideration of the potential that stands to be realized from the observation of a singular program. This is in line with the anticipations of both the involved organization and the considered youth groups. Articulating the targeted immediate goals implies that the evaluation on the essence of the applied tools remains under possible evaluation margins. Immediate goals, further, assists in the evaluation of the relevance of the instruments deployed in the deduction of the respective programs. This assists in the further validity of the variables selected for the evaluation process. Ability to capture the dynamics of a study in a manner that allows for immediate goals remain the potential measure that can warrant the viability of the adopted variables. However, the failure in meeting such goals implies on the potential ineffectiveness of the considered avenues of program evaluation. The process of certifying the respective initiatives under youth investments circles requires the embrace of functional techniques. This is in hope of achieving viable results that spell the situation as well as stand to offer sound advice to the involved stakeholders. The process has been enlisted to comprise of a significant number of partners that pair up towards the realization of the eventual functional evaluation system. Immediate goals allows for the cementing of the roots that hold these players in the same pool of thoughts. Intermediate goals The intermediate targets nested on this program remains captured under the identification of the skills harboured by the youths and their input in the respective investments. This is anchored along the description of the respective nation and institution of learning on the attributes of investment. This is conceptualized on the concept of youth investment as fathomed by the aforementioned stakeholders. The ideal purpose of these goals remains best defined by their capacity to linker the future hopes of the evaluation process to the immediate results achieved upon fulfilment of the exercise. The observation of the considered intermediate goals implies that the path towards the realization of the long-term agendas remains at course. Additionally, the potential of these goals remains spelt out on the follow-up process that is engaged by the evaluation team. The role of the forum for youth investment remains best described via its interest in ensuring the success of the engaged youth groups. Success may only be quantified upon the embrace of a desire to follow on the progress of the respective persons and groups (Mertens & Wilson, 2012, p. 112). This assists in the outline of the role of these groups towards the realization of the agendas of the entire forum. Long-term goals The success of youth investment in the market remains the elemental goal of the intervention program. This is in regard to the capacity of the youth to investment as well as being able to make meaningful sustainability of such initiatives. Having the youths willing and participating in the investment remains ascribed in the long term interests of the intervention program. The participation of the youths in the realization of the evaluation agendas associated to the forum offers room for the promotion of stable investments. Their commitment in the engage of these practises offers opportune reflection for their devotion in securing their future. Ultimate goal Eventual improvement of the livelihoods of the youths remains the ultimate goal of the program. This is to be achieved via the involvement of committed stakeholders that will steer the ultimate focus towards its realization. The program steers at identifying the relevance of the investment measures adopted by the respective youths. Validating their success allows for their consideration in the promotion of the preparation procedures engaged in the preparation for the youths for the future life. Section 3 Defining the cost and outcomes The concept of establishing the cost effectiveness as well as the possible benefits accredited to a program involves the elucidation of the associated procurement expenses. This is captured along the description of both the program and he services it intends to extends to the procurer. A variety of the programs suggested under the Forum for Youth Investment have zero procurement cost. However, some of the programs come with a cost figure. The maximum figure associated to such programs rises up to $ 300 for the Program Observation Tool (POT). Each of these programs is mentioned to be able to offer findings of a group involving up to 16 persons. Stephanie R. Cellini and James E. Kee propose the Cost - effectiveness analysis as the elemental phase upon which the process of identifying the expense associated to a program may be detected. Making assumptions of total cost to range between a minimum of zero dollars and $ 300, the Cost-Effectiveness Ration of the programs under the Forum for Youth Investment falls between 0 and 18.75. This is since the Units of effectiveness is placed at its maximum level, 16. Having the cost Effectiveness Ratio implies that the expense incurred in developing a single unit can be evaluated. This assists in the calculation of the eventual cost Benefit Analysis (CBA). With the total cost of each unit being determined in the previous formulae, the nets benefits accrued to each investment may be determined. This will be based on the eventual findings of the program under review. Apparently, returns exceeding the $18.75 mark implies that the prospect of making positive net benefits are attainable. This implies that the success of the program can be calculated via the CBA formulae. Associated costs Two critical expenses are related to the implementation of the program. This includes the procurement and the enactment costs. Apparently, the acquisition of some of the tools under the wider forum for youth investment remains accessible at a cost. This expense comprises of the procurement cost. The cost may elevate up to $300 for a single tool. However, some of the tools are accessible without incurring costs. This allows for the consideration of the program as rather friendly towards the primary need that evokes its interest. Additionally, costs such as the enactment and other implementation expenses remained considered under this category of expenditure. The implementation calls for the provision of platforms upon which the raw data may be acquired from the target persons. This is in accordance to the unit of outputs that is described by the respective tool. Apparently, the programs under the forum engage a population of about sixteen persons. The extraction of raw data from these entities calls for the engagement of additive methods of information generation and registry. This includes sampling techniques, as well as other interview process. The elemental aim annexed to this exercise remains considered along the accuracy of the generated data and the eventual concept of affordability. Other costs includes the revenues to the involved personnel acquired towards the realization of the eventual task of program evaluation. Distribution of the respective costs The aforementioned cost may be considered to evenly distribute into two critical categories. These include the start-up and the operation costs. The procurement expenses and that of the staff revenues remain considered in categorizing under the start-up costs. This is in regard to the description that best define the respective expenses. They stand to be described along the pool of costs that are required prior to the implementation of the programs. They assist in the establishment of the program. The implementation costs remains categorized under the operation costs. This comprises of expenses that are incurred during the engagement of the program. They are considered a parcel to the success of the program. Additionally, they assist in the realization of the prospective interests aspired by the evaluation process. They enable for the gathering of the data that shall be evaluated via the aforementioned tools. Hidden cost The tools do not acknowledge the prospect of possible hidden costs. However, some tools may be improved in later seasons. This may offer room for additional cost that may be considered hidden from the elemental cost of their procurement. However, the concern of upgrade remains determined along the discretions of the respective procurement parties. The tools do not attract additional cost during operation. This rules the prospect of hidden cost in their description. Considered benefits The success of the evaluation program remains considered to be of substantial contribution to the development of success investment initiatives for youths. The tools considered the prospect of having stable youths upon the attainment of the identified age (21 years). The program offers an avenue for the evaluation of their respective potential towards the validation of this interest. This is capture via the focus on a set of test scores and capacity preparedness of these persons. The success of the youths in the equipping of personal lives in a manner considered patented to progress remains considered as the eventual outcome. The entire policies adopted by this program towards the shaping of this interest remains bound to equate the cost benefit analysis (CBA). Validity reliability and hypotheses The validity and reliability of the tools deployed in the quantification of the aforementioned interest remains best captured under the nature of outcome they stand to impact. This shifts the concern from the tools to the variables identified in the promotion of the evaluation process. The identification of ideal variables assists in equating the strengths of the subsequent tools adopted. These assists in the illustration of their validity. Regarding reliability, the tools have been certified to meet the desired threshold of efficiency. However, the reliability of their usage will, again, focus on the nature of the gathered data. The identified variables desire to capture the concern in its cumulative capacity. This caters for the concern of reliability. The variables meet the desired threshold that advocates for their reliability. The primary hypotheses under testing in the evaluation exercise lies on the potential success of the adopted investment programs. The tools examine whether the investment initiative harboured by the youths are bound to succeed. This deprives room for possible novel hypotheses to be developed during the phase of evaluation. Recommendations The program may consider expanding its capacity to including the testing of the preparation procedures undertaken by the youths prior to establishing the respective investment initiatives. Reference Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2012). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Education. Langbein, L. I. (2012). Public program evaluation: A statistical guide. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe. Mertens, D. M., & Wilson, A. T. (2012). Program evaluation theory and practice: A comprehensive guide. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Yohalem, N., & Wilson-Ahlstrom, A. (2009). Measuring youth program quality: A guide to assessment tools. Washington, DC: Forum for youth investment. Appendices Flow table of the evaluation process Read More