Evaluation of the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy - Research Proposal Example

A Critical Analysis of Values and Ethics Applied in Reporting xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Evaluation of Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Tutor xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date Introduction Program evaluation has become a very vital tool in determining the success of implemented strategies as a means to prevent misappropriation of funds as well as duplication of services. To attain precise, reliable and accurate data, there is need to ensure that the method applied is an accurate one (Wholey et al 2004). Effective program evaluation aids the decision making process as actions that have negative impacts or resulting to wastage are avoided. This is determined by the methodology applied in data collection, recording and analysis (Owen and St Leger 2004). Evaluation is justified by the significance of the information being collected and how timely it is. Assessment of IHSS and services that are funded for the purpose of assisting trauma and torture survivors were done by DHA (Department of Health and Aging) in conjunction with DIMIA (Department of Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs). This report was aimed at the capacity of the services to meet set objectives, identify the need for modifications, determining client satisfaction and determination of the way forward. Survivors of torture and trauma who seek refuge in Australia have access to services funded by the Commonwealth. These services include PASTT (Program of Assistance to the Survivors of Torture and Trauma) which is funded by DHA and EHAI which receives funds from DIMIA. People who find come to Australia to seek refuge due to the trauma and torture experienced in their country are accommodated and given support. This is in recognition of the human right to protection, basic needs and a dignified life. The needs of individuals differ with regard to their culture, original area of residence, religious affiliation and physical challenges (Owen and St Leger 2004). However, most of the needs are similar such as the need for shelter, food, clothing and protection. The methodology used in collecting data useful in writing the report has been evaluated for precision and accuracy. In addition, shortcoming of the methodology used have been depicted and recommendation given to improve the evaluation process. Fallacies such as clientism, pluralism, methodologicism, contractualism and managerialism have been discussed as represented in the report. The discussion looks in to the report in comparison to different recommended evaluation methods to find any gaps or shortcoming in the application of the evaluation methodology. Lastly, a conclusion is drawn from the overall report and recommendation given with regard to the evaluation procedures and sampling design. Methodology The methodology applied by Urbis Keys Young was a successful one in evaluating the program though it had some shortcomings. The commissioning of Urbis Keys Young to conduct the combined evaluation for services funded by the Commonwealth and IHSS was done by DHA (Department of Health and Ageing) in collaboration with DIMIA (Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs) which is a department under the Commonwealth. First, Urbis Keys Young held consultations where main stakeholders were involved in giving the background information regarding the two organizations (i.e. DIMIA and DHA). This was important in the identification of the main issues to be considered in program evaluation. These groups were also supportive in designing the questionnaires and determining the clients to be involved in the evaluation. Secondly, the report included a literature review for both organizations which is important in understanding organization policies, nature of refugee placements and the values upheld by these organizations (Wholey et al 2004). Evaluation websites were used in gathering information from stakeholders. However, this method may not have been effective since the stakeholders may fail to clearly understand the questions being asked. In addition the method limited evaluators from gathering other important details which would have been possible if the interview were done face to face. Following specific guidelines indicates that there was biasness as the fallacy of methodologicism is clearly represented (Neuman 2003). In addition to collection of information online, field work was carried out in six different places where. Different stakeholders were invited for interview but the turn up was very poor since it was below 50%. This is indicated by the total number of individuals who attended the interviews as indicated in the report. Discussion The issue on informed consent and the privacy of information provided is questionable due to the barriers involved. It is possible to receive inaccurate data since one is not there to evaluate the client fears and address them adequately. Those clients in the services caring for those people who survived from trauma and torture from who information was collected were compensated for the time used and the transport cost incurred. This raises an ethical consideration in that there is biasness in receiving information. It can result to those involved in the research giving false information. In addition, it acts as a barrier to any other organization or individual who may want to conduct a similar research and is not willing to compensate the people involved. The method used is thus inadequate. The fact that the evaluation was commissioned by the two organizations does not limit the extent to which discussed issues were to be evaluated. This is because these organizations have a good representation of people and freely allowed the evaluators to consult other international organizations such as Department of Education and Workplace Relations. However, majority of people involved in this evaluation were from IHSS, DHA and DIMIA. The terms of reference were also adequate to draw conclusion that could be generalized to a wide population. This is because evaluators were independent and this eliminates the possibility of them being biased in drawing conclusions. the evaluation process was adequately funded as there were no issues raised regarding inadequacy of funds and this increased the possibility of a timely evaluation and adequate consultations. Inadequate funding has been found to be a major cause of inadequate consultations which results to a biased conclusion. Questioning the entrants raises an ethical consideration as this group of people may not be willing to participate in the evaluation. They may not be receptive as has been found in some cases. For instance, in a survey for people living with breast cancer, one respondent was thought to be rude as she answered that researchers should learn the hard way instead of nagging them with questions. They may feel that their privacy is being violated (Wedeen, 2000). One of the values depicted in the report is respect for human rights. IHSS recognize that whether human being can afford to live comfortably or not, that is his right. As a result, she aims at providing quality life to the refugees and survivors of trauma. Fairness involves enhancing equitable accessibility of the settlement services is also very clear. Services delivered to the refugees are not discriminative in any way. As a result, their value and respect for human dignity is evident. According to the report, equitable accessibility of the services was confirmed by all stakeholders including the clients. Another value is represented is enhanced timely provision of services. Entrants are in a position to access services immediately they get to Australia. In addition, the fact that organizations were to select persons to be involved in the evaluation could have resulted in biasness in the sampling method. Compliance with set standards as a value is depicted in the report. The report indicates that an in-depth research was conducted on the literature review concerning the organizations under investigation. This is very important to develop an understanding of the direction to take when evaluating the program as well a setting the comparison standards in determining the effectiveness of applied strategies (Wholey et al 2004). Several fallacies are clear in the report. One of these fallacies is clientism which is depicted in the report as the organizations seek to meet the needs and preferences of the client. For instance, refugees who do not wish to live in the centers have a fund allocated to them (DAMIA, 2003). They are able to move to private housing as they are given interest free loans. Service provision has been reviewed severally to determine how well the needs of the refugees are met. The main aim for this is to enhance autonomy without encouraging dependency. From IHSS service principles, it is clear that the client cannot be ignored. As a result, attention given to other stakeholders cannot be compared to that accorded to clients. This can result to poor relationship between the management and the employees and hence poor services. Collectivism is also evident since the report has had the input of different stakeholders and not merely the evaluators. I.e. from the report, it is clear that all stakeholders have been involved in coming up with the final results and the conclusion. This people are refugees from all nationalities including those with disabilities have been represented. The stakeholders were well represented as the evaluators involved people from different groups that are stakeholders in the two organizations. the stakeholders involved included voluntary and contracted staff members, management team for IHSS, DHA and DIMIA staff member, service providers for IHSS, Clients who have previously used the services provided by the Commonwealth and IHSS, PASTT providers, survivors of torture and trauma who had benefited from the services and international stakeholders involved as advisory and funding teams for the three organizations. This ensured that data collected clearly represented the opinions of all stakeholders regardless of their sex, age or social class. The data relied upon were opinions and this would have influenced the results hence resulting to a biased conclusion. Conclusion IHSS has not ignored the role of evaluation in redefining the strategies applied in meeting the objectives of the program. Ignoring the importance of evaluation could have resulted in wastage of resources as the program would not have identified areas where it was failing. The report indicates that the evaluation was scientifically done though the evaluators made several assumption that could have resulted to the report being biased. This is clear in selection of samples to be interviewed where managers selected individuals to be involved. These kind off biasness must be overcome of an evaluation is to meet the purpose for which it was being carried out. The fallacy of clientism which overrides other fallacies defines the organizations commitment to meeting the need for the clients. There is need for the organization to redefine the evaluation method to enhance accuracy in findings without which success in running the program would remain a dream. Another fallacy represented in the report is pluralism. Though the opinions of those considered as the least have been collected, the ultimate decision on who should be involved lies with the manager. The evaluators relied on their opinions in selecting the samples to be involved. This may result to the report being biased in that clients might end up giving information that favors their managers and not the truth. Bibliography Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, 2003, Evaluation of the integrated humanitarian settlement strategy (IHSS). http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/pdf/evaluation_report.pdf< retrived in 24 July 2010>. Neuman, WL 2003, Social Research Methods,25 Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 5th edn, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, pp. 1–19. Owen, J. M. and St Leger, P. (2004). Evaluating Policy: Trends and Issues. Workshop presented at the Annual conference of the Australasian Evaluation Society, Adelaide. W Wedeen, RP 2000, ‘Consent in epidemiology: Implications of history for public policy’, Archives of Environmental Health, vol. 55, iss. 4, pp. 231–39. Wholey, J., Hatry, P., Newcomer, K., 2004, Handbook for practical program evaluation. San Francisco, John Wiley sons. Read More