Description
Refer to the “Social Work Capstone Analysis Paper Requirements” document to complete this assignment.Please refer to Social Work Disposition #7: Standard: Social Workers’ Ethical Responsibilities to Clients when completing the Ethical Considerations section of your paper.Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.Option 2: If you are completing the Program Assessment, you will need to reach out to the program to obtain additional information.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
1
Social Work Capstone Analysis Paper
Option 2: Program Evaluation
Sharon D. Pridgen
Grand Canyon University
SWK 690 Capstone
Julie Orme
December 6, 2023
2
Social Work Capstone Analysis Paper
Option 2: Program Evaluation
Literature Review
Depression, a rampant mental health issue, impacts seriously on individuals and communities
globally by affecting around 5% of adults worldwide (WHO, 2023). This psychological problem
goes beyond emotional suffering to deteriorating physical wellbeing, broken relationships, and,
in rare cases, death through suicidal tendencies (Dowling et al., 2019; Taylor et al., 2017). The
issue of public health is further complicated by poor access to effective treatments, including
social discrimination in relation to the illness and inadequate investments in healthcare.
Whiteford et al. (2015) contend that mental disorders are a global burden demanding
comprehensive approaches to this public health crisis. Meanwhile, Sanchez et al.’s (2018) metaanalysis of school-based mental health services among elementary school children shows
promising results as an effective early intervention strategy. The article by Ramirez (2014) aims
to investigate the relationship between academic performance and school-based mental services
because it demonstrates how mental health affects educational outcomes.
Reiss (2013) explores how socioeconomic disparities impact children’s and adolescents’ mental
ill health, thus going below surface-level literature reviews. Henceforth, policymakers need to
prioritize social determinants if the gap between different class groups is to be reduced while
tackling mental illness at the same time. Green et al.’s (2021) research provides insights into the
efficacy of classroom-based SEL programs, which may be helpful in fostering healthy emotional
development during puberty. Weare’s (2010) research on SEL’s connection to mental wellness
comes from a theoretical perspective that could be useful for understanding what might happen if
they were formalized in schools and other institutions. A combination of these articles
emphasizes that schools should provide evidence-based interventions for students with mental
illnesses and develop early preventive measures.
Educational settings still face challenges even though some progress has been made toward
solving mental health problems there. The study conducted by Sanchez et al. (2018) reiterates the
effectiveness of school-based mental health services for elementary-aged children, thereby
calling for future research and evidence-based practice. Weare (2010) recognizes the
complexities of integrating mental health and social-emotional learning (SEL), which indicates
how challenging it is to navigate between these fields. This implies that School-based
interventions like those that promote social and emotional learning show the potential to reduce
the impacts of mental illness in different persons, hence demanding a comprehensive approach
for individuals and communities (Feiss et al., 2019; Duong et al., 2021). It thus requires more
research as well as coordinated efforts towards improving the quality of mental healthcare
services primarily available within educational institutions.
Description of Program
It is worth noting that the MindOut program stands out as a remarkable initiative directed at
enhancing the social and emotional well-being of young people aged 15-18 years in Irish postprimary schools (Dowling et al., 2019). This universal Program delivered by teachers at school
3
aims to help students become better decision-makers about their health, personal lives, and social
development. As such, the impact of MindOut extends beyond individual students to encompass
staff, parents, and the wider community, thus promoting holistic social and emotional
development within post-primary schools. This focus on SEL is essential because it targets an
age group where this skill set is critical. The MindOut program offers specific avenues for SEL.
It comprises activities and resources for students tailored to improve their social and emotional
skills in general. For instance, interactive workshops and group activities focus on building selfawareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship management, and responsible
decision-making skills among participants. These activities are designed for meaningful student
engagement in the learning process and the creation of a supportive environment leading to the
development of significant life skills.
To review a program appropriately, it is necessary first to review its structure, as indicated by
Dowling et al. (2019). Whole-school strategies are used by MindOut, hence ensuring that social
and emotional development is integrated into multiple levels. In addition to students, both
teachers and parents are supported through resources made available by the inclusive Program.
In effect, this inclusive framework allows for a more nuanced assessment of program outcomes,
given how different actors within the educational ecosystem relate with each other. One critical
aspect of any program assessment involves setting goals or objectives that can be identified and
measured directly. Therefore, among other primary goals, MindOut’s primary goals include the
promotion of social-emotional skills, prevention through mental health interventions, and
academic improvement in participants’ lives (Dowling et al., 2019). These objectives are
considered when assessing whether the stated benchmarks have been achieved or not. For
example, self-esteem, emotional intelligence, coping skills, interpersonal competence, and
mental well-being can be assessed via standardized measures or surveys implemented by the
Program. These measurable outcomes that align with the goals are helpful in assessing how
effective a program is.
Besides quantitative methods such as surveys, qualitative approaches, including focus groups
and interviews, may be used to capture participants’ experiences. Such qualitative data can give a
broader understanding of how the Program affects students’ social-emotional development.
Quantitative findings could be complemented by open-ended questions about benefits
experienced, challenges that were encountered, and areas of improvement noted. Furthermore,
the collaborative character of the Program, which incorporated young Irish people and teachers
in its development (Dowling et al., 2019), also highlights inclusivity and relevance to culture.
This aspect should be considered when doing a program assessment so that it takes into account
cultural nuances, contextual relevance, and the adaptability of this Program to the diverse needs
of the target population.
In terms of program assessment, educators need to consider any difficulties they might face or
ways they can improve it. There may be certain impediments or drawbacks faced during the
creation and running process, which Dowling et al. (2019) could share about the MindOut
system. This would lead to a much more sophisticated evaluation that pinpoints areas for
refinement or further support if necessary. In addition, gathering feedback from survey
questionnaires given by participants, as well as conducting feedback sessions with other
stakeholders such as teachers, would offer insights on whether certain aspects need further
attention in the curriculum. For instance, does MindOut have the potential for growth? To
answer this question, one needs to examine what happens beyond intervention timeframes in
4
participant’s lives. Longitudinal assessments monitor growth in social-emotional skills as
reflected in mental health changes over time, and academic attainment levels, among others, help
establish sustainability over long periods.
Furthermore, there is a need to explore possibilities of expanding the Program to other
educational settings or regions with a view to determining their broader applicability and
contributions towards global and national initiatives towards adolescent wellbeing. Hence, the
assessment founded on the goals and objectives of the Program provides a comprehensive
understanding of how it influences student development, mental health, and academic
performance. Hence, MindOut uses both quantitative and qualitative approaches for an allinclusive approach to enhancing the well-being of older adolescents within the education system.
Program Assessment
The mindset program has explicitly articulated its mandate, which is to enhance the social and
emotional health of students between the ages of 15 and 18 in Irish post-primary schools. The
changes seen in the short term involve positive development of traits such as self-awareness,
self-management, interpersonal relationships, social relations, and socially responsible decisionmaking for program participants. The immediate outcomes signify that the Program is successful
not only in the social and emotional changes among the adolescents but also in the long-term
outcomes; the MindOut program anticipates permanent improvement of emotional well-being,
psychological disorders, a reduced prevalence of the risk factors for mental problems, as well as
a promotion of academic persistence and achievement. However, this broad perspective
emphasizes that the Program contributes not only to short-term change but also to a longer-term
positive trajectory for persons.
A thorough needs assessment strategy is used in this sense in order to check the performance of
the scheme and further amend the applied measures. For this reason, it depends on the use of
focus groups, surveys, and interviews of participants, educators, and other stakeholders for
feedback provision. For the dynamic exploration of experiences and perceptions, however, focus
groups are better, and quantitatively based analysis is a survey. Interviews allow for more
qualitative depth than quantitative studies in their investigation of intricate dimensions, which
enhances the whole assessment process. Nevertheless, even though the Program has laudable
objectives and solid evaluation procedures, there are some difficulties and limitations. Mainly,
there exists a well-established problem of tailor-made support to students with sophisticated
social and emotional features. Such a limitation shows that the Program may face a challenge in
serving the varied needs of its target adolescent youth grouping. Addressing this gap might
necessitate added resources, education for teachers, or cooperation with specialized
psychologists in order to promote a universal approach toward all learners.
Theories and Evidence-Based Interventions that Inform the Program
Theory: CASEL’s Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) Framework.
CASEL’s Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) Framework is the basis for The MindOut
program, which emphasizes emotional and social skills development as a means of bettering
mental health while reducing the risk of mental disorders like depression (Clarke et al., 2015;
Taylor et al., 2017). CASEL’s SEL Framework provides a holistic approach to nurturing
essential social and emotional competencies among school-going children. It consists of five
5
central areas, namely self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship building,
and responsible decision-making. According to the MindOut program, this framework is what
helps when creating interventions. Notably, the Program aligns itself with CASEL’s selfawareness competency by helping students understand their emotions and triggers. For example,
workshops and activities at MindOut teach students self-regulation skills that help them control
their emotions in more constructive ways. Activities that promote empathy, together with
accepting different opinions, are used to enhance social awareness. Collaborative learning
activities that encourage effective communication and teamwork improve relationship skills.
Lastly, responsible decision-making is underscored by critical thinking, which keeps young
people informed about health matters, personal lives, and even social development.
This theory is in line with current research that emphasizes the effectiveness of school-based
interventions for promoting emotional and social skills development. The works of Clarke et al.
(2015) and Taylor et al. (2017) support the idea that promoting these skills leads to better mental
health and reduced risk of mental health diseases, such as depression. The theoretical foundation
of the CASEL SEL Framework suits this initiative by providing a well-structured and evidencebased approach to developing targeted social and emotional competencies among adolescents
who are grown up. Additionally, the CASEL SEL Framework also enhances the programs’
efficacy through its systematic intervention design framework. This holistic approach to socialemotional learning involves an integrated way of addressing different aspects of emotional
management that have developmental stages as specified by the framework. To tap into the
unique needs of older adolescents, the Program uses this sequential progression in tailoring
interventions. This includes workshops and activities that gradually increase self-awareness or
self-management capabilities throughout a trajectory matching up with CASEL’s framework.
Additionally, through the integration of CASEL, we also get personalized treatment plans within
the MindOut Program. By aligning interventions with specific competencies, educators can tailor
support based on the unique strengths and challenges of each student. For instance, there may be
a student in need of lower levels of self-awareness who would receive focused activities to
enhance it in line with CASEL’s system model. Therefore, this framework guides educators in
creating interventions that meet individual needs within a broader social-emotional context.
Also, this CASEL SEL Framework is, among other things, designed to promote a positive school
climate for MindOut program participants, making it more inclusive at the same time. That being
said, it has been established through research that supportive school environments are vital for
good psychological health (Green et al., 2021). Among other things grounded in the CASEL
framework, these are some activities undertaken by the Program to develop emotional
intelligence-driven school cultures that care about effective communication and empathy. These
elements are also aimed at facilitating the growth of social and emotional skills among
participants as well as fostering mental health-conducive environments. Additionally, CASEL’s
SEL Framework enables the Program to have a solid basis for ongoing evaluation and
improvement. The Program is able to measure the targeted competency in a structured way over
time, due to which enough information can be received. Regular assessments based on the
framework’s core competencies identify strengths as well as areas needing more attention or
rounds of revisiting in order to make these evaluations accurate representations of what they
stand for. This feedback loop driven by principles from CASEL allows the MindOut program to
remain adaptive to the changing needs of teenagers, thus maintaining its effectiveness and being
flexible.
6
Impact of Culture, Diversity, and Oppression
The MindOut program is designed to be culturally relevant and inclusive – a commitment to this
ideal has been made through consultations with young Irish people as well as teachers. The
objective is that the Program should not just be suitable for its target age group but should also
respond to the cultural specificities of older Irish teenagers. To embrace diversity problems, the
Program adopts a comprehensive approach by incorporating content that recognizes explicitly
and addresses issues regarding gender, sexual orientation, age, social class, race, ethnicity, and
disability. For instance, in the content of this Program, some modules and activities explicitly
talk about diverse gender identities and sexual orientations. These sessions aim to offer support
to all individuals without restriction on how they choose their gender or their sexual orientation.
Also, discussions and activities around age become part of this Program in a bid to generate
awareness and sensitivity and challenge stereotypes.
In a situation where each case stands on its merit, cultural sensitivity must be considered when
planning for treatment. The project realizes that different people draw upon distinct cultural
backgrounds, so in return, it is supposed to be sensitive as well as accommodate individual
diversities in treatment planning. For example, if a participant belongs to a particular ethnic
group, their treatment plan may involve culturally relevant activities that resonate with this
identity or counseling approach. This ensures that the impact of the Program is practical and
respects the individual’s cultural background, thus supporting a more meaningful and
personalized intervention. By being proactive on the issues linked to diversity in addressing
individual cases through cultural competence, the MindOut Program intends to make it reach
many participants, hence becoming an accessible resource beneficial for most heterogeneous
people. Hence, it ensures that this Program includes everybody, irrespective of their race or
ethnicity.
Ethical Considerations
The MindOut program study has been conducted in accordance with stringent ethical standards,
as exhibited by obtaining ethical approval from the Research Ethics Committee at the National
University of Ireland Galway. In addition, the study’s human participant procedures were
carefully aligned with the ethical standards set out by the 1964 Helsinki Declaration. For
instance, written informed consent was obtained from all participants in this study. Additionally,
passive parental consent was secured to ensure transparency and respect for participants’
autonomy. These protocols on ethics highlight the commitment to informed consent as well as
participant well-being. Within a single case analysis, participants were dealt with within an
ethical framework where they were made fully aware of the nature and purpose of their
involvement. Communication was clear to allow voluntary and informed consent from
participants. Moreover, there were measures to ensure confidentiality and privacy of participants,
mainly since mental health information is confidential.
Ethical considerations underpinned the entire process of program evaluation. In doing so, it was
taken into account that evaluation methods and tools should be respectful of participants’ rights
and well-being wellbeing. Possible dangers or discomforts connected with participation were
weighed very carefully against evaluation benefits. Ethical dilemmas were continuously
addressed through participant communication, emphasizing their freedom to withdraw without
any consequences at any stage they felt like doing so. A broader ethical dilemma may emerge
when reconciling the necessity for detailed individual case analysis with maintaining anonymity
7
about participants’ identities. This was done by sticking to strict measures aimed at protecting
data while anonymizing individual cases as much as possible. Solutions included using aggregate
data for reporting purposes and employing secure data storage practices.
Evaluation
The MindOut program was evaluated in a comprehensive manner using different approaches that
measured various aspects of their well-being and wellbeing. For evaluating self-esteem, one of
the most critical aspects of social and emotional development, the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale
was used. In terms of reliability, this scale is prevalent; thus, it contributed to a better
understanding of how participants perceive themselves and their confidence levels. Moreover,
the Trait Meta-Mood Scale was employed to measure emotional intelligence, which is another
vital part that needs to be considered during evaluation. This instrument enabled researchers to
understand participants’ ability to regulate and understand emotions in a more sophisticated
manner as opposed to emotional well-being and self-awareness.
The coping Strategy Indicator was used to assess coping skills required by adolescents in dealing
with the challenges. The DSTRESS approach has been proven helpful in examining how resilient
one can become under stressful conditions. It measured the effectiveness of various stress
responses employed by individuals necessitated by stress, offering an understanding of their
resilience as well as adaptive capacities. Accordingly, interpersonal competencies were also
covered through the use of the Adolescent Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire for
measuring influence assertion and conflict resolution by those being studied. Hence, this gave an
all-round examination of MindOut’s social skills in order for its effect on personal relationships
to be understood well enough. Similarly, positive mental health and overall well-being were
assessed among respondents using the 14-item Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale.
That measure offers a more complete assessment of the participant’s well-being beyond what has
been a narrow focus on ill health so far; it captures dimensions related to positive aspects of
mental health.
Policies that Impact the Program
The MindOut program represents a crucial intervention aimed at evaluating the impact of Social
and Emotional Learning (SEL) programs on a demographic that often faces systemic neglect—
older adolescents from disadvantaged backgrounds in Ireland. It is important to note that older
adolescents are often overlooked when it comes to programming and evaluation studies, leading
to a significant gap in understanding and addressing their unique social and emotional needs. The
Program operates within the micro-level policy framework of individual schools, which is
consistent with localized initiatives of these institutions for improving social-emotional learning.
At this level, the approach acknowledges that the school environment has the utmost importance
in shaping adolescents’ social-emotional development. MindOut complements other school
initiatives by ensuring that interventions are targeted and appropriate for the context, paving the
way for a supportive environment where older adolescents can traverse through the challenges
they face.
At the mezzo level, however, this Program overcomes this lacuna by closing a wider researchintervention gap for marginalized young people. Mental health risks are increased among
underprivileged teenagers who have limited access to resources supporting social and emotional
skills. MindOut would like to mitigate this problem by providing specialized responses to unique
8
challenges faced by deprived youth. This mezzo-level focus recognizes how social and
emotional learning reaches beyond classroom boundaries, thereby affecting the overall wellbeing of adolescents within communities. In sum, the MindOut program works at the micro level
within individual schools while also filling the mezzo-level gap in research and intervention for
disadvantaged youth; thus, it not only helps improve social and emotional competencies among
older adolescents but also calls for changes in existing systems that promote their wellbeing
since such policies alienate them in both policy areas and research.
Implications and Recommendations for Future Practice
After a deep and insightful experience in completing this program analysis the complexities of
the measurement terms encountered during the analysis, including those found in the technique
of social and emotional learning programs, have been a great challenge. However, this brings out
how important it is to have interventions on some pervasive social issues at hand. It, therefore,
calls for action from all relevant stakeholders, such as policymakers and practitioners in social
work, who should develop and implement interventions that can improve the well-being of
people who are less fortunate within society. The complexity of the measurement terms also
serves as a practical insight for social work practitioners and policymakers. It emphasizes that
program evaluations need to use measures that are accessible and understandable. Simplifying
measurement tools can enhance the feasibility of evaluations, ensuring that practitioners can
effectively assess program outcomes and make informed decisions based on the results.
There are two key areas where interventions could be focused.
•
•
Primarily, long-term outcomes need to be given more importance. In addition to changes
that occur immediately, social-emotional learning programs must have lasting effects for
one’s well-being to continue being stable. Future interventions should incorporate
measures that capture the lasting effects on participants, providing a more comprehensive
understanding of program efficacy.
Secondly, there is a need for interventions to use objective measures as well as
independent evaluations. These will help improve credibility and reliability when
evaluating these programs. Employing independent evaluators can mitigate biases and
offer an impartial evaluation of the Program’s impact. Objective measures, validated and
standardized, contribute to the robustness of the evaluation, ensuring that findings are
reliable and can be extrapolated beyond the specific context of the Program.
These recommendations also imply a shift towards more inclusive and longer-term planning by
social workers when looking at such issues within their respective communities. Policymakers
should consider incorporating guidelines that advocate for objective measures as well as
independent evaluations while assessing the effectiveness of social-emotional learning programs,
thus helping them respond better in terms of the impact of these programs. In this way,
practitioners’ and policymakers’ collective efforts can result in more impactful interventions for
social and emotional well-being.
9
References
Clarke, A., Morreale, S., Field, C.-A., Hussein, Y., & Barry, M. (2015). What works in
enhancing the development of social and emotional skills during childhood and
adolescence? A review of the evidence on the effectiveness of school-based and out-ofschool programs in the UK.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a809c17e5274a2e87dbaca5/What_works
_in_enhancing_social_and_emotional_skills_development_during_childhood_and_adole
scence.pdf
Dowling, K., Simpkin, A. J., & Barry, M. M. (2019). A Cluster Randomized-Controlled Trial of
the MindOut Social and Emotional Learning Program for Disadvantaged Post-Primary
School Students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(7), 1245–1263.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-00987-3
Duong, M. T., Bruns, E. J., Lee, K., Cox, S., Coifman, J., Mayworm, A., & Lyon, A. R. (2021).
Rates of mental health service utilization by children and adolescents in schools and other
standard service settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Administration and
Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, pp. 48, 420–439.
Feiss, R., Dolinger, S. B., Merritt, M., Reiche, E., Martin, K., Yanes, J. A., … & Pangelinan, M.
(2019). A systematic review and meta-analysis of school-based stress, anxiety, and
depression prevention programs for adolescents. Journal of youth and adolescence, 48,
1668-1685.
Green, A. L., Ferrante, S., Boaz, T. L., Kutash, K., & Wheeldon‐Reece, B. (2021). Social and
emotional learning during early adolescence: Effectiveness of a classroom‐based SEL
program for middle school students. Psychology in the Schools, 58(6), 1056–1069.
Ramirez, J. (2014). The relationship between school-based mental health services and academic
achievement.
Reiss, F. (2013). Socioeconomic inequalities and mental health problems in children and
adolescents: a systematic review. Social science & medicine, pp. 90, 24–31.
Sanchez, A. L., Cornacchio, D., Poznanski, B., Golik, A. M., Chou, T., & Comer, J. S. (2018).
The effectiveness of school-based mental health services for elementary-aged children: A
meta-analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
57(3), 153-165.
Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting Positive Youth
Development through School-Based Social and Emotional Learning Interventions: A
Meta-Analysis of Follow-Up Effects. Child Development, 88(4), 1156–1171.
Weare, K. (2010). Mental health and social and emotional learning: Evidence, principles,
tensions, balances. Advances in school mental health promotion, 3(1), 5–17.
Whiteford, H. A., Ferrari, A. J., Degenhardt, L., Feigin, V., & Vos, T. (2015). The global burden
of mental, neurological and substance use disorders: an analysis from the Global Burden
of Disease Study 2010. PloS one, 10(2), e0116820.
10
WHO, (2023). Depression – World Health Organization (WHO). https://www.who.int/healthtopics/depression#tab=tab_1
Social Work Capstone Analysis Paper Requirements
Directions: As a current or future social worker, it is important that you can successfully present
a client case or program evaluation in an agency or professional setting. In the final course in
your program, you will submit a case analysis of a client or a program evaluation. This
assignment, the social work capstone analysis paper will be completed during two different
courses, SWK-645 and SWK-690. Below are the social work capstone analysis paper
requirements as well as what is due in each course.
Option 1: Case Analysis
1. Literature Review (SWK-645)
Complete a thorough literature review of a minimum of 10 relevant resources for your
capstone project. The literature review should contain a summary and analysis of each
source.
2. Biopsychosocial Assessment (SWK-690)
Complete an assessment using the provided biopsychosocial template on the client
including physical and developmental history, psychological factors, family functioning,
social functioning, finances, legal issues, spiritual functioning, coping strategies, and
strengths. (750 -1,000 words minimum)
3. Treatment Plan (SWK-690)
Develop a treatment plan using the provided treatment plan template that focuses on at
least two areas for change identified in the assessment. Be sure to include goals,
measurable objectives, and timelines.
4. Theories and Evidence-Based Interventions (SWK-690)
Discuss what theories and evidence-based interventions have guided your work with the
client and justification for their selection. (500-750 words minimum)
5. Impact of Culture, Diversity and Oppression (SWK-690)
Discuss how you addressed culture, diversity, and oppression as you worked with your
client. Discuss challenges associated with gender, sexual orientation, age, social class,
race, ethnicity, and disability. (250-500 words minimum)
6. Ethical Considerations (SWK-690)
© 2020. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Discuss the ethical considerations that apply to this client. Include a discussion of how
you used the NASW Code of Ethics to guide you in your work. Refer to Social Work
Disposition #7 in this section. (250-500 words minimum)
7. Evaluation (SWK-690)
Describe what designs and measures you used to evaluate outcomes with this client.
Discuss your rationale for choosing the measures you did. (250-500 words minimum)
8. Policies that Impact the Client (SWK-690)
Identify and discuss social and agency policies that impacted your client during your
work with them. Include discussion of micro, mezzo, and macro policies that affected
your client. (250-500 words minimum)
9. Implications and Recommendations for Future Practice (SWK-690)
Discuss the challenges and limitations you experienced when working with your client.
What have you learned from the process and what might you do differently in the future?
What are some recommendations you have for the client moving forward? Discuss your
strengths and weaknesses during your work with this client. (250-500 words minimum)
Option 2: Program Evaluation
1. Literature Review (SWK-645)
Complete a thorough literature review of a minimum of 10 relevant resources for your
capstone project. The literature review should contain a summary and analysis of each
source.
2. Description of Program (SWK-690)
Provide a detailed description of the program that you are evaluating. What is the
programs vision and mission? Describe the populations that the program serves? What
services are provided? What are the programs goals and objectives? (500-750 words
minimum)
3. Program Assessment (SWK-690)
Provide an assessment of the program using the provided Social Work Logic Model
template. Is the program meeting its vision and mission? Are goals and objectives being
met? Is the program able to meet the needs of the
