Strategic Planning & Program Evaluations

The strategic planning and program evaluation process includes the creation of strategic outlines, the design of data collection forms, administrative and outcome-based performance evaluations, and time-study and materials analysis. As a result of these efforts, Ottawa County remains at the forefront in verifying the cost-effectiveness of its programs and services.

A list of completed evaluations is as follows:

Outcome-Based Evaluations
Addiction Program Therapy Evaluation (2002) Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Evaluation (2009)
Domestic Violence Evaluation (2002) Electronic Content Management System Evaluation (2010)
Gatekeeper Program Evaluation (2006) Parenting Plus Program Evaluation (2007)
Sentenced Work Abatement Program (SWAP) Evaluation (2011) Sentenced Work Abatement Program (SWAP) Evaluation (2007)
Traditional and Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) Evaluation (2007)  
 
Administrative Evaluations
Attitudes Matter Program Evaluation (2003) Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Evaluation (2008)
Communities Helping Ottawa Obtain a Safe Environment (CHOOSE)
Evaluation (2011)
Gatekeeper Program Evaluation (2005)
Inmate Case Management and Treatment Program Evaluation (2009) Mental Health Point-in-Time Study
P.A. 2 Funding Report (2006) Sentenced Work Abatement Program (SWAP) Evaluation (2006)
Sheriff's Senior Volunteer Program Evaluation (2007) Sobriety/Drug Courts Evaluation (2006)
The Drain Code, Public Act 40 of 1956  
 
Strategic Planning Model
Strategic Planning Model

Outcome-Based Evaluations

Addiction Program Therapy Evaluation (2002)
This evaluation provides information about the Ottawa County Addiction Program Therapy Program that will assist in determining its overall effectiveness and efficiency. The primary program factors analyzed include, but are not limited to, program administration, recidivism, cost.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Evaluation (2009)
This evaluation assesses whether the Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) Program is administered efficiently and whether beneficial, cost-effective outcomes are being achieved. This is accomplished by analyzing administrative and operational program components, as well as completion rates, recidivism rates, and cost. This evaluation revealed that as a result of continuing to contract with Catholic Charities to administer the CBT Program, the County saved nearly $53,000 during fiscal year 2008. Based on the efficient administration of the program and the overall cost-effectiveness it was recommended that the contract with Catholic Charities to administer the Program be extended for an additional two years.

Domestic Violence Evaluation (2002) (7,495KB)
This evaluation report provides insight into the demographic, trend, and relational aspects of this community problem that will assist county leaders with future policy decisions. It also provides a statistical assessment which illustrates the impact that present programs and policies have on the reoccurrence of domestic violence. This data will be used as a benchmark to determine whether new policy decisions reduce the occurrences of domestic violence.

Electronic Content Management System Evaluation (2010)
This comprehensive four-year study documents the cost and benefits of the County's Electronic Content Management (ECM) System. The System is designed to image, manage, archive, and deliver justice system documents in digital/electronic formats. The evaluation includes an assessment of the County's Return-on-Investment (ROI) using a Time-Study and Materials Analysis, a Cost-Benefit Analysis and a Sensitivity Analysis. The evaluation also documents the intangible benefits of the ECM system that have resulted for employees and individuals involved in the County’s criminal justice system. This study revealed a negative ROI as a result of several factors that have prevented the complete utilization of the ECM system by all departments; however, it was determined through the study that a positive ROI could be achieved in ten years if state legislation is amended that would allow a completely paperless workflow in the courts.

Gatekeeper Program Evaluation (2006)
This 2-Year evaluation provides information about the implementation and administration of the Gatekeeper Program. The program was created to provide holistic (spiritual, physical, emotional, and psychological) in-jail and post-jail programs for inmates as well as personalized discharge plans that would increase the likelihood of successful transition back into the community. Based on the results of this evaluation, it was recommended that the program be discontinued in the fall of 2006.

Parenting Plus Program Evaluation (2007)
This evaluation provides information about the Parenting Plus Program's success in accomplishing program goals, the relative cost of providing services, and the availability of options that exist to provide program services through other venues. Based on the results of this evaluation, it was recommended that the program be restructured in order to provide services in a more cost-effective manner.

Sentenced Work Abatement Program (SWAP) Evaluation (2011)
This evaluation calculates the projected cost of the SWAP Program for the 2012 program year and the cost implications that would result if the program were discontinued. The difference between the County’s anticipated General Fund contribution and the increased expenses if the program is discontinued is $16,305. Since the County’s net General Fund contribution for SWAP does not exceed the Board’s $20,000 threshold, it was recommended that the SWAP Program be continued in 2012.

Sentenced Work Abatement Program (SWAP) Evaluation (2007)
This evaluation provides a cost analysis of the SWAP Program during 2006 by assessing the program's existing and projected fee-for-service, the number of service hours billed, and the County's cost to administer the program. Based on the results of this evaluation, it was recommended that the fee-for-service be raised in order for the County to avoid funding an amount greater than $20,000 in 2008.

Traditional and Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) Evaluation (2007)
This evaluation assesses aspects of the Traditional and ISP programs which include demographic information, completion rates, probation requisites, substance abuse assessments, home and office visits, drug and alcohol testing, and probation violations. An assessment of program cost and post-program recidivism rates are also included in this report. Furthermore, it provides a qualitative analysis of the participants’views regarding treatment, overall accountability, as well as aspects of their retionships with judges and probation officers obtained through a survey of former program participants.

Administrative Evaluations

Attitudes Matter Program Evaluation (2003)
This evaluation provides information about the three-year pilot project involving the Attitudes Matter Program. The program is a prevention-based, social marketing campaign designed to educate parents about juvenile substance-use issues and encourages parents to address these issues with their children. The purpose of the program is to reduce substance-use among juveniles.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Evaluation (2008)
This evaluation assesses the administrative effectiveness of implementing the Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) Program, as well as participation and completion rates, demographic characteristics of program participants, and program cost. This report also includes a summary of self-reported feedback from participants. The results of this interim administrative evaluation revealed that the CBT program is being administered very efficiently. The privatization of CBT instruction also resulted in a $53,508 savings for the County during fiscal year 2007.

Communities Helping Ottawa Obtain a Safe Environment (CHOOSE) Evaluation (2011)
This 2011 evaluation of the CHOOSE Program includes an assessment of program activity outputs, determines whether the activities are aligned with the program’s pre-established goals and objectives, and whether the activities are having a preliminary impact in the targeted quadrant. An assessment of program cost is also included. The results of the evaluation revealed that CHOOSE services continue to be provided countywide. Because a quadrant-based delivery system is not used, it is not possible to verify whether CHOOSE is achieving positive outcomes.

Gatekeeper Program Evaluation (2005)
This evaluation provides information about the implementation and administration of the Gatekeeper Program during its first year of operation. The program was created to provide holistic (spiritual, physical, emotional, and psychological) in-jail and post-jail programs for inmates as well as personalized discharge plans that would increase the likelihood of a successful transition back into the community. The overall goal of the Gatekeeper Program is to enhance life-skills where needed in order to deter future criminal offenses.

Inmate Case Management and Treatment Program Evaluation (2009)
This Interim Evaluation Report assesses whether the ICMT Program is administered efficiently. This is the first step in the overall evaluation process of the Program. If it is determined that the program is administered efficiently, the second step will be to complete an outcome-based evaluation that will assess participant recidivism rates to determine whether beneficial, cost-effective outcomes are being achieved. This evaluation measures the extent to which the ICMT Program is achieving the targeted administrative measures. The administrative functions that were measured involved the ICMT Case Manager’s ability to maintain high program enrollment levels, adhere to the program’s target population criteria, and administer the primary components of the program. Also included in this evaluation is an overview of program completion rates, treatment plan completion rates, jail diversions, and program cost.

Mental Health Point-in-Time Study
In February 2009, the results of a three-month point-in-time study were presented to the Mental Health Task Force. That study was compared to a study completed by the Planning and Performance Improvement Department in 2005 to determine improvement in jail diversion. The studies assessed the number of offenders that were diverted from jail by patrol officers and by jail staff because of mental health concerns. The results of the 2009 study were inconclusive since patrol officers and jail staff had not collected the data for the second point-in-time study with the same level of intensity and dedication as had been applied to the first study in 2005.

P.A. 2 Funding Report (2006)
This report explains the origination of PA 2 Funds, clarifies statutory spending requirements for these funds, describes the County’s historic practices regarding the expenditure of the funds, and provides possible options for the future administration of these funds.

Sentenced Work Abatement Program (SWAP) Evaluation (2006)
This report provides an overview of the Sentenced Work Abatement Program’s (SWAP) benefits, drawbacks, and cost. Furthermore, it provides information about the satisfaction level of the organizations using the program. This report also provides an indication of whether organizations are willing to accept future rate increases to cover actual program expenses.

Sheriff’s Senior Volunteer Program Evaluation (2007)
This evaluation provides information about the implementation and administration of the Senior Volunteer Program during its first year. This program was designed to utilize the services of senior citizen volunteers to perform routine tasks that are typically the responsibility of deputy officers. This allows officers more time to perform law enforcement duties such as road patrol, traffic safety, and criminal arrests.

Sobriety/Drug Courts Evaluation (2006)
This report provides an assessment of the administration and operational performance of the 58th District Court Sobriety Court and the 20th Circuit Court Adult Drug Treatment Court and Juvenile Drug Treatment Court programs, as well as relative program cost.

The Drain Code of 1956, Public Act 40 of 1956 (88KB)
The Planning and Performance Improvement Department is reviewing an overhaul to the Drain Code introduced under House Bill 4552 and Senate Bill 217. The bills would modernize the laws governing the office of the county Drain Commissioner. They also would expand the environmental responsibilities of the Drain Commissioner. The Department performed a review of a similar bill, House Bill 4803, in 2000.

Strategic Planning Model

Strategic Planning Model
The Strategic Planning process is designed to provide the framework for evaluating the outcome-based performance and cost-effectiveness of targeted county programs and services. The Strategic Plan is comprised of the following evaluation components:

  1. Strategic Outline: This outline will identify the target population for whom the program/initiative provides services, goals and objectives that clearly articulate desired outcomes, actions that are or will be undertaken to accomplish the goals, and the output and outcome-based measures that will be used to evaluate the performance and cost-effectiveness of the program/initiative.

  2. Performance Analysis (Baseline, Benchmark, and Target Measures): This analysis will identify the baseline measures that will be used to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the program/initiative. Benchmark measures will also be identified to compare the impact of the program/initiative to comparable programs/initiatives in other counties, if available. Target measures will also be identified and used to determine whether the program/initiative is accomplishing its goals and objectives and is being administered efficiently and effectively.

  3. Cost Effectiveness Model: This model will identify the potential annual cost savings to the County if the program/initiative achieves optimum effectiveness (i.e. successfully accomplishes targeted outcome measures).

  4. Organization and Workflow Analysis: This analysis will include a diagram of the organizational structure of the program/initiative in order to clearly identify each staff position(s) that is involved in implementation and administration as well as the percent of time that each position will dedicate to administering the program components.

  5. Program and Dataflow Analysis: This analysis will include a diagram that identifies the specific components of the program/initiative and the sequential flow of the components from the first stage of the program to the last. The diagram may also identify the specific responsibilities of each staff position(s) to accomplish the program components, as well as list the type of data that will be collected for each program component.

  6. Data Collection: Data collection tools (e.g. surveys, forms, questionnaires) will be developed to obtain the output, outcome, and self-reported data that are necessary to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the program/initiative.

  7. Time Analysis: A time tracking system will be developed to assess the amount of time that primary program staff spend to accomplish the goals and objectives of the program/initiative. These data will be used to ensure that the program/initiative is being administrated efficiently and effectively.