How To Evaluate The Impact Of A Bereavement Camp On Children

Transcription

1 Evaluating the impact of bereavement camps on children: balancing ethics, rigor, and response rates Deepa Shanadi, MPH, MS Research and Evaluation Bureau

2 Research Partnership Kent State University, Kent, OH College of Education, Health and Human Services Human Development and Family Studies Research and Evaluation Bureau The Moyer Foundation: Seattle, Philadelphia, Camp Erin Comfort Zone Camp Funding from The New York Life Foundation

3 Learning Objectives At the completion of this session, participants will be able to: articulate survey instruments used for evaluating the impact of bereavement camps using the positive youth development model. describe evaluation methods to increase survey participation rates with a survey population composed of diverse demographics and evaluation of a sensitive topic (bereavement).

4 Evaluation Purpose Evaluate longitudinal impact of bereavement camps for children who have lost significant life figures. To longitudinally measure positive youth development as it relates to the bereavement camp experience and the impact of bereavement camp on the family system.

5 Prior Research on Bereavement Camps Limited amount of research Small sample sizes Single-site studies Qualitative in nature: impressions and anecdotes

6 Our project Multi-site -Camp Erin -Comfort Zone Camp -The two largest national networks of bereavement camps for children who are grieving a significant loss Multi-year and longitudinal to examine camp impact over time Mixed Methods (Use of quantitative and qualitative data) Multiple stakeholder groups (alumni) A focus on growth and resilience Multidisciplinary research team

7 Survey Methodology Instrument Pre-camp survey Two-week post-camp survey Three-month post-camp survey One-year post-camp survey Two-year post-camp survey Camp alumni Target Population Parent/Guardian Child (6-11 years old, years old) Child (6-11 years old, years old) Parent/Guardian Child (6-11 years old, years old) Parent/Guardian Child (6-11 years old, years old) Parent/Guardian Child (6-11 years old, years old) Anyone currently >17 years old and attended camp before 2012

8 Methodology Thank you gifts Pre-camp 2-week post-camp 3-month post-camp 1-year post-camp Strength

9 Institutional Review Board All instruments reviewed by Kent State University s Institutional Review Board (IRB). Level 2 approval (minimal risk to participants) Additionally: By Camp Erin s partner/host organizations

10 Response Rates Sensitive topic: loss of a loved one Vulnerable population: (6-11 and years old) Use of image based Likert scale Multiple formats: hard copy, online in Qualtrics Multiple languages: English and Spanish Reminders from Camp Directors, Intake Coordinators Use of social media

11 Survey Instruments: Parents/Guardians Demographic information: age and gender of Parent/Guardian camper(s) age and gender Child s loss: relationship of loss, cause of death, time since death, other support services FACES IV measures family functioning, communication, satisfaction Total: 62 statements, 5-point Likert scale

12 Survey Instruments: Campers Positive Youth Development Scale from ChildTrends Flourishing* Grief Process self-report scale adapted from Worden s* Tasks of Grieving 4-point response scale -ages 6-11; image-based -ages 12-17; text-based Total: 47 statements * Child Trends (2012).Positive indicators. Retrieved from: D04ED13E922#Constructs *Worden, J. W. (1996). Children and Grief. NY: The Guilford Press.

13 Positive Youth Development* Views young people as resources to be developed rather than problems to be managed Concerned with what promotes resilience and flourishing Specifies 5 Cs *Lerner, R., Dowling, E., & Anderson, P. (2003). Positive youth development: Thriving as the basis of personhood and civil society. Applied Developmental Science, 7(3),

14 5 Cs of Positive Youth Development CARING CHARACTER COMPETENCE CONFIDENCE CONNECTION

15 Survey Instruments: Positive Youth Development Drawn from Child Trends Flourishing Project CARING CHARACTER COMPETENCE CONFIDENCE CONNECTION Forgiveness; Empathy Gratitude Educational Engagement Hope; Life Satisfaction; Purpose; Self-Worth Positive Relationships with Parents; Positive Relationships with Peers

16 Survey Instruments: Positive Youth Development Sample items CARING 5 items I understand other people s feelings. CHARACTER 3 items When good things happen to me I think about the people who helped me. COMPETENCE 4 items I care about doing well in school. CONFIDENCE 9 items I am happy being me. CONNECTION 6 items I have friends who care about me.

17 8 Features of Settings that Promote Positive Youth Development * Physical and Psychological Safety Clear and Consistent Structure and Appropriate Supervision Supportive Relationships Opportunities to Belong Positive Social Norms Support for Efficacy and Mattering Opportunities for Skill- Building Integration of Family, School and Community *Larson, R., Eccles, J. & Gootman, J.A. (2004). Features of Positive Developmental Settings. The Prevention Researcher, 11(2), 8-13

18 Challenges Longitudinal design attrition over time Pre-camp survey 2- week post-camp survey 599 campers to date 146 campers to date 89 (completed both) - 3-month post-camp survey 122 to date 32 (completed all three) Coordinating across multiple camp locations, camp dates 38 camps in 2013 No control group Parent consent required

19 Current and Further Analysis How are positive youth development and the grief process correlated? What is the impact over time on campers? What are the differences in benefits of camp by age group and gender? Which components of camp were most meaningful long term?

20 Thank you New York Life Foundation The Moyer Foundation Camp Erin Camp Directors and Comfort Zone Camp Intake Coordinators and their staff Campers and their families

21 Acknowledgement Kent State University Pamela Freeman, PI Sue Maxymiv, PI Rhonda Richardson, PI Leanna Lostoski, Corey Raleigh, Graduate Assistants Camp Erin Bethany Gardner, Program Manager Lisa Willis, National Director of Programs Comfort Zone Camp Peter Shrock, National Program Director Michelle Taylor, Program Quality Manager

22 Contact Information Deepa Shanadi, MPH, MS Evaluator Research and Evaluation Bureau, College of Education, Health, and Human Services, Kent State University, Kent, OH

23 Evaluating the impact of bereavement camps on children: balancing ethics, rigor, and response rates Deepa Shanadi, MPH, MS Research and Evaluation Bureau