Listserv Session:
Evaluation Framework (February 2-9, 2004)

---

Listserv Resources

• Exhibits from 2004 Evaluation Framework Listserv (PDF)
• Click here for the full evaluation framework description.
• Click here for a PDF version of the draft ADRC evaluation framework and potential indicators.
• Click here to view the listserv discussion on the evaluation framework. This moderated listserv was held during January 2004 and is no longer active.

Related Materials

Draft ADRC Evaluation Framework and Potential Indicators

At AoA and CMS’ request, the staff of the Technical Assistance Exchange (TAE) drafted a framework for examining the Aging and Disability Resource Centers (ADRCs) within the environment they operate, as well as potential indicators to measure performance outcomes and impact. The framework built off of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) framework and 'AoA-CMS' major initiatives and system change goals. The framework will provide a means for identifying indicators that demonstrate progress toward or accomplishment of the desired systems change goals. Indicators will build upon start-up process measures from Year One with grantee, AoA, and CMS feedback. Therefore, we are sharing the framework and indicators with you, the grantees, to solicit your feedback. It is critical to get your input about these items because they will be the basis for both establishing the grant reporting requirements and possibly standardizing some indicators across the grants for a national evaluation. We want to work with you to refine the framework and indicators to meet your data collection, monitoring and outcome tracking needs. We consider the concepts and measures described in the Draft ADRC Evaluation Framework and Potential Indicators as a starting point for dialogue.

Initial feedback for the evaluation framework and potential indicators took place in a moderated forum on the ADRC site. New Jersey stated that the design of the evaluation framework was "consistent with the grant and New Jersey's evaluation framework" and posted their evaluation matrix. New Hampshire wanted clarification on the purpose and issues connected with "public trust," as a measure in the evaluation framework. Lewin responded that trust in ADRCs would vary over time depending on the strength of the program's reputation. For example, in the short term, trust might be measured in terms of objectivity and reliability of information, and comprehensiveness and assistance of ADRC consumers. However, over a longer period of time, as ADRCs become more established in communities, trust might be measured in terms of public trust in the ADRC as an institution and as a reliable informational source for community-based long term care and other related issues. The moderated forum was just the beginning of a continual discussion on the evaluation framework and potential indicators.

---