Assignment Prompt & Instructions
[>Sociology homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/social-science-sociology)
Please see attached files
**files (2)**
– ## wks4.docx
– ## Processevaluationsareoftenconductedatmultiplepointsthroughouttheimplementationofaprogram.docx
**## wks4.docx**
5
**Needs Assessment for a Relapse Prevention Program**
WKS 4
Walden University
March 22, 2026
**Program Description**
The change proposal that I present in the case of Still Waters Professional Counseling is Life Skills and Relapse Prevention Program of adults under substance use counseling. This is aimed at fixing the poor client engagement rates that I noted during field placement particularly among those who were required to attend counseling by the Department of Family and Children Services. Despite the numerous attendances of clients at their sessions, there are those who present low attendance, motivation and lack of coping skills outside counseling. The program would also involve role plays, guided discussions, weekly goal tracking, practice in triggers management and practice in routine building that would make the treatment more practical and action oriented. According to Dudley (2020), social work assessment is expected to reveal client issues and gaps in service. It is within that framework that this program would bring in additional structured and practical additions to assist clients by making counseling material translate into behavior change, which they need to practice on a daily basis.
**Inclusion Criteria in the Program**.
The target clientele would consist of adult clients who are already receiving substance use counseling in the agency. The first priority would be given to the clients that are court ordered or referred to Department of Family and Children Services, the clients with a specific behavior those results in relapse on a regular basis, and those clients that cannot always use the methods of coping without the sessions. The inclusion of these clients is due to the fact that they seem to require more than just traditional counseling. Their low attendance patterns imply that there is a discrepancy between the treatment attendance and the benefit of treatment. This at-risk population would be additional in terms of accountability, rehearsal, and support with the help of a structured skills-based program.
**Justification for the Proposed Program**
Semi structured interviews with clients that already receive substance use services is the first technique that I would utilize to collect credible information. Interviews would enable clients to explain the greatest problems they encounter when attempting to apply coping skills in their daily lives. Such an approach would offer in-depth information regarding the barriers in the form of low motivation, unstable routines, trigger exposure, and weak support systems. The needs assessment that incorporates the voices of the people affected by the service issue directly are more powerful (Ravaghi et al., 2023). This is why the interviews with clients would be a good source of first-hand evidence.
The second technique that I would employ is a short anonymous questionnaire that will be shared among clients and counselors. The client survey would help define the patterns regarding the obstacles to engagement, whereas the counselor survey would involve practice-based observations regarding service participation, risk of relapse, and unmet needs. The importance of using both groups is that the assignment requires the information of the clients and other stakeholders, and counselors are the major stakeholders in the planning and implementation of the program. The surveys would assist in understanding the prevalence of the problem within the agency and would supplement more profound information obtained with the help of interviews.
The two approaches are the best alternatives since interviews are in-depth and surveys are broad. They would then come up with credible evidence to support program development and implementation. It has been found that motivation, tangible assistance, and continuous involvement are core to substance use behavior change, which explains why a structured relapse prevention program and counseling should be implemented (Schwenker et al., 2023; Gaolaolwe et al., 2025). Such a strategy would reinforce the quality of the provided services and increase the likelihood of successful recovery in the clients in the long term.
References
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gaolaolwe, W., Moagi, M. M., Kovane, G. P., & Sehularo, L. A. (2025). Exploration of effective substance use relapse prevention programmes for the youth: An integrative literature review. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 32(3), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.13144
Ravaghi, H., Guisset, A.-L., Elfeky, S., Nasir, N., Khani, S., Ahmadnezhad, E., & Abdi, Z. (2023). A scoping review of community health needs and assets assessment: Concepts, rationale, tools and uses. BMC Health Services Research, 23, Article 44.
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3)
Schwenker, R., Dietrich, C. E., Hirpa, S., Nothacker, M., Smedslund, G., Frese, T., & Unverzagt, S. (2023). Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2023(12), CD008063. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008063.pub3
**## Processevaluationsareoftenconductedatmultiplepointsthroughouttheimplementationofaprogram.docx**
Process evaluations are often conducted at multiple points throughout the implementation of a program. Because the program is in progress, each evaluation may lead to findings that offer practical, real-time adjustments. In this way, a plan for ongoing evaluations allows for continuous monitoring and improvement.
Of course, planning a process evaluation does not just require thought about future evaluations. It also requires careful consideration of factors such as the central purpose and questions seeking to be answered, timing, the selection of an evaluator, and data collection and analysis. In this Assignment, you address these factors as you plan a process evaluation to be conducted on the potential program that you proposed earlier in the course.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To Prepare
Recall the program that you proposed in Week 4. Attached separately If needed, review your previous work related to the program, client needs, and the logic model. Process evaluation considers the inputs, including resources and activities, recorded in the logic model and how they have been applied.
Suppose your program proposal was approved, and the program was implemented at your agency, practice, or community setting. You must now develop a plan to evaluate the process of implementation. In other words, you must determine if the program is working as it was originally intended.
**ASSIGNMENT BELOW**
Submit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course.
Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.
Explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program.
State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why.
Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).
Include a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question).
Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).
Describe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.
Describe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).
Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your paper. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.
submission information
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubmit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course….Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully summarizes the program and the needs of the target population. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed summary of the program and the needs of the target population. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to summarize the program and the needs of the target population. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why a process evaluation would be important for the program….State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why….Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).
16 to >14.24 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
14.24 to >12.64 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully explains why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response clearly states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Choices are fully justified through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
12.64 to >11.04 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed explanation for why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Justification is limited, incomplete, or vague and/or does not reference the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
11.04 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response may state the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. However, there is little or no attempt to justify these choices through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInclude a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question)….Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through more than two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions and/or through strong alignment between specific questions and the broad/overarching question.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response identifies at least two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response includes an appropriate overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation. … Response identifies two appropriate subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation. Questions lack specificity and/or clarity.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation is inappropriate or missing. … Response identifies fewer than two subquestions, subquestions are inappropriate, or they are missing.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.
16 to >14.24 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
14.24 to >12.64 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully describes plans for gathering and analyzing the information. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
12.64 to >11.04 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for gathering and analyzing the information. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
11.04 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for gathering and analyzing the information. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully describes plans for ongoing evaluations. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for ongoing evaluations. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for ongoing evaluations. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. … Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). … Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. … Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. … There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity.
12 pts
Total Points: 80
**## Processevaluationsareoftenconductedatmultiplepointsthroughouttheimplementationofaprogram.docx**
Process evaluations are often conducted at multiple points throughout the implementation of a program. Because the program is in progress, each evaluation may lead to findings that offer practical, real-time adjustments. In this way, a plan for ongoing evaluations allows for continuous monitoring and improvement.
Of course, planning a process evaluation does not just require thought about future evaluations. It also requires careful consideration of factors such as the central purpose and questions seeking to be answered, timing, the selection of an evaluator, and data collection and analysis. In this Assignment, you address these factors as you plan a process evaluation to be conducted on the potential program that you proposed earlier in the course.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To Prepare
Recall the program that you proposed in Week 4. Attached separately If needed, review your previous work related to the program, client needs, and the logic model. Process evaluation considers the inputs, including resources and activities, recorded in the logic model and how they have been applied.
Suppose your program proposal was approved, and the program was implemented at your agency, practice, or community setting. You must now develop a plan to evaluate the process of implementation. In other words, you must determine if the program is working as it was originally intended.
**ASSIGNMENT BELOW**
Submit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course.
Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.
Explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program.
State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why.
Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).
Include a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question).
Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).
Describe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.
Describe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).
Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your paper. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.
submission information
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubmit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course….Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully summarizes the program and the needs of the target population. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed summary of the program and the needs of the target population. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to summarize the program and the needs of the target population. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why a process evaluation would be important for the program….State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why….Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).
16 to >14.24 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
14.24 to >12.64 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully explains why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response clearly states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Choices are fully justified through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
12.64 to >11.04 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed explanation for why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Justification is limited, incomplete, or vague and/or does not reference the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
11.04 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response may state the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. However, there is little or no attempt to justify these choices through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInclude a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question)….Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through more than two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions and/or through strong alignment between specific questions and the broad/overarching question.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response identifies at least two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response includes an appropriate overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation. … Response identifies two appropriate subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation. Questions lack specificity and/or clarity.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation is inappropriate or missing. … Response identifies fewer than two subquestions, subquestions are inappropriate, or they are missing.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.
16 to >14.24 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
14.24 to >12.64 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully describes plans for gathering and analyzing the information. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
12.64 to >11.04 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for gathering and analyzing the information. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
11.04 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for gathering and analyzing the information. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully describes plans for ongoing evaluations. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for ongoing evaluations. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for ongoing evaluations. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. … Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). … Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. … Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. … There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity.
12 pts
Total Points: 80
**## wks4.docx**
5
**Needs Assessment for a Relapse Prevention Program**
WKS 4
Walden University
March 22, 2026
**Program Description**
The change proposal that I present in the case of Still Waters Professional Counseling is Life Skills and Relapse Prevention Program of adults under substance use counseling. This is aimed at fixing the poor client engagement rates that I noted during field placement particularly among those who were required to attend counseling by the Department of Family and Children Services. Despite the numerous attendances of clients at their sessions, there are those who present low attendance, motivation and lack of coping skills outside counseling. The program would also involve role plays, guided discussions, weekly goal tracking, practice in triggers management and practice in routine building that would make the treatment more practical and action oriented. According to Dudley (2020), social work assessment is expected to reveal client issues and gaps in service. It is within that framework that this program would bring in additional structured and practical additions to assist clients by making counseling material translate into behavior change, which they need to practice on a daily basis.
**Inclusion Criteria in the Program**.
The target clientele would consist of adult clients who are already receiving substance use counseling in the agency. The first priority would be given to the clients that are court ordered or referred to Department of Family and Children Services, the clients with a specific behavior those results in relapse on a regular basis, and those clients that cannot always use the methods of coping without the sessions. The inclusion of these clients is due to the fact that they seem to require more than just traditional counseling. Their low attendance patterns imply that there is a discrepancy between the treatment attendance and the benefit of treatment. This at-risk population would be additional in terms of accountability, rehearsal, and support with the help of a structured skills-based program.
**Justification for the Proposed Program**
Semi structured interviews with clients that already receive substance use services is the first technique that I would utilize to collect credible information. Interviews would enable clients to explain the greatest problems they encounter when attempting to apply coping skills in their daily lives. Such an approach would offer in-depth information regarding the barriers in the form of low motivation, unstable routines, trigger exposure, and weak support systems. The needs assessment that incorporates the voices of the people affected by the service issue directly are more powerful (Ravaghi et al., 2023). This is why the interviews with clients would be a good source of first-hand evidence.
The second technique that I would employ is a short anonymous questionnaire that will be shared among clients and counselors. The client survey would help define the patterns regarding the obstacles to engagement, whereas the counselor survey would involve practice-based observations regarding service participation, risk of relapse, and unmet needs. The importance of using both groups is that the assignment requires the information of the clients and other stakeholders, and counselors are the major stakeholders in the planning and implementation of the program. The surveys would assist in understanding the prevalence of the problem within the agency and would supplement more profound information obtained with the help of interviews.
The two approaches are the best alternatives since interviews are in-depth and surveys are broad. They would then come up with credible evidence to support program development and implementation. It has been found that motivation, tangible assistance, and continuous involvement are core to substance use behavior change, which explains why a structured relapse prevention program and counseling should be implemented (Schwenker et al., 2023; Gaolaolwe et al., 2025). Such a strategy would reinforce the quality of the provided services and increase the likelihood of successful recovery in the clients in the long term.
References
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gaolaolwe, W., Moagi, M. M., Kovane, G. P., & Sehularo, L. A. (2025). Exploration of effective substance use relapse prevention programmes for the youth: An integrative literature review. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 32(3), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.13144
Ravaghi, H., Guisset, A.-L., Elfeky, S., Nasir, N., Khani, S., Ahmadnezhad, E., & Abdi, Z. (2023). A scoping review of community health needs and assets assessment: Concepts, rationale, tools and uses. BMC Health Services Research, 23, Article 44.
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3)
Schwenker, R., Dietrich, C. E., Hirpa, S., Nothacker, M., Smedslund, G., Frese, T., & Unverzagt, S. (2023). Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2023(12), CD008063. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008063.pub3
**## Processevaluationsareoftenconductedatmultiplepointsthroughouttheimplementationofaprogram.docx**
Process evaluations are often conducted at multiple points throughout the implementation of a program. Because the program is in progress, each evaluation may lead to findings that offer practical, real-time adjustments. In this way, a plan for ongoing evaluations allows for continuous monitoring and improvement.
Of course, planning a process evaluation does not just require thought about future evaluations. It also requires careful consideration of factors such as the central purpose and questions seeking to be answered, timing, the selection of an evaluator, and data collection and analysis. In this Assignment, you address these factors as you plan a process evaluation to be conducted on the potential program that you proposed earlier in the course.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To Prepare
Recall the program that you proposed in Week 4. Attached separately If needed, review your previous work related to the program, client needs, and the logic model. Process evaluation considers the inputs, including resources and activities, recorded in the logic model and how they have been applied.
Suppose your program proposal was approved, and the program was implemented at your agency, practice, or community setting. You must now develop a plan to evaluate the process of implementation. In other words, you must determine if the program is working as it was originally intended.
**ASSIGNMENT BELOW**
Submit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course.
Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.
Explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program.
State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why.
Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).
Include a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question).
Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).
Describe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.
Describe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).
Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your paper. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.
submission information
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubmit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course….Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully summarizes the program and the needs of the target population. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed summary of the program and the needs of the target population. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to summarize the program and the needs of the target population. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why a process evaluation would be important for the program….State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why….Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).
16 to >14.24 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
14.24 to >12.64 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully explains why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response clearly states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Choices are fully justified through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
12.64 to >11.04 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed explanation for why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Justification is limited, incomplete, or vague and/or does not reference the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
11.04 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response may state the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. However, there is little or no attempt to justify these choices through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInclude a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question)….Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through more than two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions and/or through strong alignment between specific questions and the broad/overarching question.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response identifies at least two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response includes an appropriate overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation. … Response identifies two appropriate subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation. Questions lack specificity and/or clarity.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation is inappropriate or missing. … Response identifies fewer than two subquestions, subquestions are inappropriate, or they are missing.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.
16 to >14.24 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
14.24 to >12.64 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully describes plans for gathering and analyzing the information. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
12.64 to >11.04 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for gathering and analyzing the information. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
11.04 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for gathering and analyzing the information. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully describes plans for ongoing evaluations. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for ongoing evaluations. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for ongoing evaluations. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. … Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). … Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. … Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. … There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity.
12 pts
Total Points: 80
**## wks4.docx**
5
**Needs Assessment for a Relapse Prevention Program**
WKS 4
Walden University
March 22, 2026
**Program Description**
The change proposal that I present in the case of Still Waters Professional Counseling is Life Skills and Relapse Prevention Program of adults under substance use counseling. This is aimed at fixing the poor client engagement rates that I noted during field placement particularly among those who were required to attend counseling by the Department of Family and Children Services. Despite the numerous attendances of clients at their sessions, there are those who present low attendance, motivation and lack of coping skills outside counseling. The program would also involve role plays, guided discussions, weekly goal tracking, practice in triggers management and practice in routine building that would make the treatment more practical and action oriented. According to Dudley (2020), social work assessment is expected to reveal client issues and gaps in service. It is within that framework that this program would bring in additional structured and practical additions to assist clients by making counseling material translate into behavior change, which they need to practice on a daily basis.
**Inclusion Criteria in the Program**.
The target clientele would consist of adult clients who are already receiving substance use counseling in the agency. The first priority would be given to the clients that are court ordered or referred to Department of Family and Children Services, the clients with a specific behavior those results in relapse on a regular basis, and those clients that cannot always use the methods of coping without the sessions. The inclusion of these clients is due to the fact that they seem to require more than just traditional counseling. Their low attendance patterns imply that there is a discrepancy between the treatment attendance and the benefit of treatment. This at-risk population would be additional in terms of accountability, rehearsal, and support with the help of a structured skills-based program.
**Justification for the Proposed Program**
Semi structured interviews with clients that already receive substance use services is the first technique that I would utilize to collect credible information. Interviews would enable clients to explain the greatest problems they encounter when attempting to apply coping skills in their daily lives. Such an approach would offer in-depth information regarding the barriers in the form of low motivation, unstable routines, trigger exposure, and weak support systems. The needs assessment that incorporates the voices of the people affected by the service issue directly are more powerful (Ravaghi et al., 2023). This is why the interviews with clients would be a good source of first-hand evidence.
The second technique that I would employ is a short anonymous questionnaire that will be shared among clients and counselors. The client survey would help define the patterns regarding the obstacles to engagement, whereas the counselor survey would involve practice-based observations regarding service participation, risk of relapse, and unmet needs. The importance of using both groups is that the assignment requires the information of the clients and other stakeholders, and counselors are the major stakeholders in the planning and implementation of the program. The surveys would assist in understanding the prevalence of the problem within the agency and would supplement more profound information obtained with the help of interviews.
The two approaches are the best alternatives since interviews are in-depth and surveys are broad. They would then come up with credible evidence to support program development and implementation. It has been found that motivation, tangible assistance, and continuous involvement are core to substance use behavior change, which explains why a structured relapse prevention program and counseling should be implemented (Schwenker et al., 2023; Gaolaolwe et al., 2025). Such a strategy would reinforce the quality of the provided services and increase the likelihood of successful recovery in the clients in the long term.
References
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gaolaolwe, W., Moagi, M. M., Kovane, G. P., & Sehularo, L. A. (2025). Exploration of effective substance use relapse prevention programmes for the youth: An integrative literature review. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 32(3), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.13144
Ravaghi, H., Guisset, A.-L., Elfeky, S., Nasir, N., Khani, S., Ahmadnezhad, E., & Abdi, Z. (2023). A scoping review of community health needs and assets assessment: Concepts, rationale, tools and uses. BMC Health Services Research, 23, Article 44.
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3)
Schwenker, R., Dietrich, C. E., Hirpa, S., Nothacker, M., Smedslund, G., Frese, T., & Unverzagt, S. (2023). Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2023(12), CD008063. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008063.pub3
**## Processevaluationsareoftenconductedatmultiplepointsthroughouttheimplementationofaprogram.docx**
Process evaluations are often conducted at multiple points throughout the implementation of a program. Because the program is in progress, each evaluation may lead to findings that offer practical, real-time adjustments. In this way, a plan for ongoing evaluations allows for continuous monitoring and improvement.
Of course, planning a process evaluation does not just require thought about future evaluations. It also requires careful consideration of factors such as the central purpose and questions seeking to be answered, timing, the selection of an evaluator, and data collection and analysis. In this Assignment, you address these factors as you plan a process evaluation to be conducted on the potential program that you proposed earlier in the course.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To Prepare
Recall the program that you proposed in Week 4. Attached separately If needed, review your previous work related to the program, client needs, and the logic model. Process evaluation considers the inputs, including resources and activities, recorded in the logic model and how they have been applied.
Suppose your program proposal was approved, and the program was implemented at your agency, practice, or community setting. You must now develop a plan to evaluate the process of implementation. In other words, you must determine if the program is working as it was originally intended.
**ASSIGNMENT BELOW**
Submit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course.
Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.
Explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program.
State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why.
Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).
Include a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question).
Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).
Describe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.
Describe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).
Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your paper. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.
submission information
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubmit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course….Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully summarizes the program and the needs of the target population. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed summary of the program and the needs of the target population. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to summarize the program and the needs of the target population. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why a process evaluation would be important for the program….State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why….Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).
16 to >14.24 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
14.24 to >12.64 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully explains why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response clearly states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Choices are fully justified through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
12.64 to >11.04 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed explanation for why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Justification is limited, incomplete, or vague and/or does not reference the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
11.04 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program. … Response may state the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. However, there is little or no attempt to justify these choices through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInclude a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question)….Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through more than two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions and/or through strong alignment between specific questions and the broad/overarching question.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response identifies at least two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response includes an appropriate overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation. … Response identifies two appropriate subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation. Questions lack specificity and/or clarity.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation is inappropriate or missing. … Response identifies fewer than two subquestions, subquestions are inappropriate, or they are missing.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.
16 to >14.24 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
14.24 to >12.64 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully describes plans for gathering and analyzing the information. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
12.64 to >11.04 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for gathering and analyzing the information. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
11.04 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for gathering and analyzing the information. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Response fully describes plans for ongoing evaluations. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for ongoing evaluations. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for ongoing evaluations. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
12 to >10.68 pts
Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%
Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
10.68 to >9.48 pts
Meets Expectation 80%–89%
Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
9.48 to >8.28 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. … Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). … Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.
8.28 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement 0%–69%
Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. … Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. … There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity.
12 pts
Total Points: 80