You are using one of your free views. If you are a Links Plus subscriber please sign in. If you would like to become one to continue access to this content, please click here.

Utilizing Phillips’ ROI Model to Evaluate Human Services Programs Premium Content

Premium Content: This article is part of Links Plus, a premium ASTD subscription.

Saturday, March 27, 2010 - by Carl Rabun

Send to Kindle

National social services agencies are dealing with the implications of the changes in federal and state Welfare to Work (WTW) program regulations brought about through the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act (DRA).

The policies put in place by the new regulations have created an increased emphasis on participation by welfare recipients with dramatic penalties imposed on state and local agencies that fail to meet federal participation requirements. Additionally many states, such as California, are experiencing budget crises that have seriously affected the funding streams usually available to social service agencies for creating new programs and working with partner agencies to better serve their recipients.

In addressing the need for effective and financially responsible WTW activities, many local agencies are reviewing programs and contracts with partner agencies n an attempt to show the financial feasibility of program components. With many agencies used to traditional budgetary practices that call for the comprehensive spending of allotted funds with no system in place to measure the effectiveness of the spending, there could be a lack of experience in comprehensive program evaluation, which is what is needed. As a result of the potential lack of experience, many local social service agencies may be struggling with evaluation techniques and strategies to discover how an organization demonstrates the functional effectiveness and financial feasibility of a WTW program, as well as the functional and financial effectiveness and program value of a developed activity.

EZONE

The Employment Zone (EZONE) job readiness workshop was created by the Kern County Department of Human Services to satisfy the state and federal work participation requirements for recipients of cash assistance. The workshop is three weeks in length, with a modified two-week workshop created for KCDHS district offices outside of the local Bakersfield area. The workshop includes eight days of instruction from Mondays to Thurdays, with Fridays dedicated to job searching. The afternoons of the second week and the entire third week are also dedicated to job searching. The average class size is 30 participants per workshop.

Each week of the workshop focuses on specific aspects of the career development process. The first week was designed to help people gain the skills necessary to get a job (for example, resume development, interview skills practice, change management, and more). The second week focuses on the skills necessary to keep and advance in a job (for example, organization and time management, customer service, stress management, and money management) while to supporting the participant's daily job search requirement. The third week is dedicated to daily one-on-one coaching sessions with the EZONE job developer, during which job contacts and leads are distributed and collected and barriers to employment are discussed.

The initial results of the workshop showed that 70 percent of participants gained employment by the conclusion of the workshop. The results were such that KCDHS deemed EZONE a success - which led to other county social service agencies inquiring about the workshop specifics. The positive reception has led to EZONE being included in "best practice" seminars in various state conferences.

A new and effective method to measure the impact of Welfare to Work activities, such as EZONE, is critical in validating the financial investment made on the activity by a social services agency. Currently, the program evaluation consists of a standard exit survey and a follow-up program that reviews the cases of class participants who did not initially find employment. The cases of participants who complete the activity without finding employment are then reviewed monthly for a period of three months after the date of program completion to learn if employment has been gained.

EZONE has been an established WTW activity for almost four years. A comprehensive long-term study was conducted to examine participant employment acquisition, long-term employment retention, and post-workshop participation results for those participants who had not yet found employment to compliment the data that was already generated on job acquisition. The accumulation of data was sufficient to also perform a ROI study proving the financial feasibility of the workshop as an effective WTW activity.

Methodology

This case study utilized the Phillips ROI evaluation methodology as the basis for data gathering and analysis. While ROI began as a statistical evaluation tool, the methodology is growing in usage and popularity and is currently being used to evaluate thousands of programs in several practice areas, including training, human resources, and healthcare, according to the ROI Institute.

Upon further research, there were few examples of ROI implementation in social service programs and soft skill development programs, of which EZONE is both. While an obviously explanation for this could be that ROI is still growing and might not have reached these business sectors as of yet, another reason could be attributed to a number of detractors who label the methodology as inappropriate for training that teaches attributes of interpersonal development, such as soft skills.

Phillips asserts that ROI can be very effective when evaluating soft skills programs where the outcome is the improvement of items that can be measured with hard data; such as reducing turnover through team building and communications training or compliance with diversity or sexual harassment standards created by an organization. Phillips attributes the misconception that ROI cannot be used to measure soft skill programs to the misuse of the methodology in smaller programs that do not need to be evaluated to show a return on investment.

Study planning

The planning for the study consisted of designing and developing tools for evaluating the functional and financial effectiveness of EZONE and gaining approvals from KCDHS for the access to EZONE and department statistics that are crucial to the undertaking of the study. Tools included a post-activity questionnaire that focused on isolating the effectiveness of the workshop by discovering past participant views on whether the workshop was beneficial to them finding employment. The questionnaire was randomly distributed to participants from many of the past EZONE workshops. Additionally, to conduct a case study involving human subjects, an informed consent form was designed with the intent to be administered to the study participants.

Another planning component was working with KCDHS to facilitate the performance of the study. KCDHS was notified of the intent to conduct the case study and was provided the details of the study procedure. An interview with the EZONE supervisor was conducted to learn of the history of the workshop and the causes behind its development. Because EZONE is an established activity that utilizes tested and presumably effective curricula delivered by trained and experienced facilitators, there was no need to alter or modify the delivery process. KCDHS was asked to provide access to the budget for EZONE, as well as participation and job acquisition data associated with EZONE to facilitate levels three, four, and five of the evaluation process, which measured short- and long-term program success.

The final component of the planning level was to identify possible intangible benefits that were not able to be ascertained through statistical data. Because of the importance of developing soft skills - such as attitude, change management, motivation and self efficacy to the success of the workshop - evaluating intangible benefits was a huge component of the effectively evaluating the efficacy of EZONE.

Anticipated benefits

Before undertaking the actual data collection, expenditures by the department for each EZONE were estimated, as well as the savings to the department as a result of a successful project. By estimating the amount of money that would be saved on cash aid payments to the roughly 21 of 30 (70 percent) participants expected to gain employment and keep full-time jobs that paid $8 per hour, for three months time, the amount would come to $25,200.

Factoring in the estimated expense of $3,958 incurred by the department to run each EZONE, the expectation was that EZONE will show a benefit to cost ratio of 6.37:1 and a ROI of 538 percent. Intangible benefits included increased notoriety for EZONE and possible benchmarking opportunities, and KCDHS management accepting ROI as an effective program evaluation tool to be replicated for evaluating other agency programs.

Data collection

When data were gathered, there were some roadblocks. Upon the request of the necessary data and access, the researcher was informed that due to confidentiality regulations KCDHS was unable to allow access to any participant records that had identifying features, such as social security numbers, names, or addresses. Additionally, the researcher was denied access to the case management system and could not expect any assistance from any county employees while on county time.

These restrictions created several issues that needed to be addressed for the study to continue:

  • a lack of determination of any continued WTW participation, job acquisition, and retention, of approximately 264 participants that went off of aid as a result of EZONE participation
  • the lack of access to client addresses meant that the intended isolation method of a questionnaire mailed to participants would not happen.

In addressing these issues, the researcher first looked at what was actually provided by KCDHS. The researcher was provided statistics of every EZONE workshop held in 2009, which included total numbers and percentages of participants initially enrolled, the total of participants who attended and completed EZONE, and numbers and percentages of participants who found work during or within 90 days of completing EZONE. The researcher was also given the spreadsheet listing the jobs and starting salaries of every employed EZONE participant and budgetary information regarding the running of the workshop during 2009. The researcher determined that the data made available was sufficient to provide an ROI that was based on the standard scope of the workshop (0-90 days) without utilizing the long-term statistics that would make for a more comprehensive ROI.

Additionally, to address the lack of isolation method, the researcher created a questionnaire for KCDHS case managers that asked for their opinions on the efficacy of EZONE. To circumvent the restrictions placed upon employees participating in the study, case managers were asked to complete the questionnaire at home or on their lunch break, estimate answers to questions that asked for statistics, and email the completed questionnaire to the researcher's private email.

Lessons learned

Due to the limited amount of data made available to the researcher, the study plan was modified to focus the study on utilizing the available statistics to determine the ROI of EZONE to KCDHS. While the actual ROI of EZONE - which included the amount of aid saved through participants going off of aid due to jobs found as a result of EZONE, long term participation, and a possibly more effective method of isolation through learning what participants believed from them directly, would be preferable - researchers expected the the results to still show a positive ROIbecause the average starting salary for EZONE participants was more than $1 per hour more than anticipated, the actual cost of materials was drastically less ($950 per year versus $3,600 per year) than anticipated, and the amount of participants working within 90 days who completed EZONE was not much different from the estimate (62 percent versus 70percent).

Whatever the result of the study, it is hoped that KCDHS stakeholders will see the benefit of ROI and will want to provide better access to records for further research. An idea that is currently being discussed is to allow the researcher to become a volunteer employee of the county during the data collection process; which would give the researcher the desired access to determine a more definitive return-on-investment.

Regardless of any future efforts, the current study has shown the ability of a researcher to perform an ROI evaluation in a social service agency; which will no doubt assist KCDHS stakeholders, as well as stakeholders from other county, state and federal organizations in determining both the practical and financial benefits of their programs in the future.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carl Rabun develops and facilitates trainings for various organizations throughout California including, The UC Davis Center for Human Services and Executrain. He is a doctoral candidate at Capella University in the training and performance Improvement program.

Utilizing Phillips’ ROI Model to Evaluate Human Services Programs

Enter your email address to receive one-time free access to this subscriber-only resource:

Subscribe today to gain full access to ASTD Links Plus Premium Content, or enter your email address above for a sneak peek at exclusive subscriber content.

Already a Links Plus Subscriber? Please sign in to access this resource.

Authored By: