Guidelines for Evaluating Parent Training Programs

• Author: Jan M. Matthews,Alan M. Hudson
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2001.00077.x
• Published date: 01 January 2001
• Date: 01 January 2001

2001, Vol. 50, No. 1 77

Guidelines for Evaluating Parent Training Programs

Jan M. Matthews*and Alan M. Hudson

We present guidelines for the evaluation of parent training programs. These have been developed within the framework of the Context,

Input, Process, Product (CIPP) model of evaluation described by Stufflebeam (1983). The guidelines emphasize that components of

evaluation should occur before, during, and after implementation of any training program. The content of programs and the training

methods employed should be based on sound theoretical principles and on evidence of effectiveness. We also recommend multiple

indirect and direct measures of parent and child behavioral outcomes.

It is common in contemporary society for community service

agencies to provide a variety of education and training ac-

tivities for parents. Such services have arisen out of a need

to support parents to undertake the complex task of rearing their

children. The nature of the activities varies considerably, ranging

from topics such as information delivery to active skills training.

Although many agencies are in the business of providing

parent education and training activities, few ever assess the effect

these activities actually have on the families involved. In a time

of escalating demands for financial accountability by ser vicepro-

viders, there is increasing pressure to produce evidence that the

services given are valuable to the consumers. Apart from this

fiscal accountability, a strong argument can be mounted on eth-

ical grounds that service providers intervening with families

ought to be able to demonstrate that positive outcomes have been

achieved. Furthermore, service providers also should be able to

demonstrate that the intervention has not caused any damage to

the family. Neither of these effects can be assumed, and they

cannot be assured unless some form of evaluation is conducted.

The guidelines that follow give a structure for service pro-

viders to use when conducting an evaluation of the activities they

conduct with parents. They apply particularly to clinical inter-

ventions and are suited to programs based on behavioral prin-

ciples. A variety of terms are currently used to refer to inter-

ventions with families. The term parent training is employed

primarily in the scientific literature for interventions that aim to

improve the skill of parents to promote the health, safety, and

development of their children and is used in this article. It should

be noted, however, that the guidelines can be applied just as

usefully to other parent education activities, such as simply sup-

plying parents with information.

A critical issue regarding the use of these guidelines is that

evaluation is not something that occurs separately from the par-

ent training program. Indeed, the design and implementation of

parent training programs should include evaluation as an integral

component. This evaluation should focus on a number of aspects.

First, it should examine whether the program design and imple-

mentation are based on sound theory and evidence of effective-

ness. Second, it is essential to determine the extent to which the

program objectives have been met under the training conditions.

Finally, it is important for programs to demonstrate generaliza-

tion, that is, the extent to which the parenting skills developed

through training transfer to different situations, behaviors, and

children and are maintained over time.

*Address correspondence to: Ms. J. M. Matthews, Department of Psychology and

Intellectual Disability Studies, RMIT University, P.O. Box 71, Bundoora 3083, Australia;

(03) 9925 7376; FAX (03) 9925 7303; e-mail: jan.matthews@rmit.edu.au

Key Words: parent training, program evaluation, CIPP model.

(Family Relations, 2001, 50, 77–86)

The CIPP Model of Evaluation

There are a number of approaches to program evaluation,

some of which are well suited to the broad areas of policy de-

velopment and prevention. For example, Jacobs (1988) outlined

a five-tiered model that acknowledges that various levels, or ti-

ers, of evaluation may have different audiences as well as dif-

ferent purposes. These audiences range from resource providers,

policy makers, and academic researchers to program staff and

the general public. Significantly, models such as Jacobs’ empha-

size the importance of evaluation that determines the long-term

impact of the intervention on society.

The model presented here has a narrower focus for the pur-

pose of evaluating clinical interventions. The intention is to de-

lineate a framework for program evaluation that suits the needs

of professionals who work from the perspective of the scientist

practitioner. It follows Weiss’ (1988) recommendation to ‘‘un-

pack the black box,’’ that is, ‘‘systematically gather information

about program implementation and program processes’’ (p. 7).

It also takes into account the argument of Thomas, Schvaneveldt,

and Young (1993) for the employment of multiple perspectives

when undertaking program evaluation. This considers and makes

explicit the context, assumptions, beliefs, and values associated

with the program, as well as the extent to which objectives have

been attained.

In the development of a protocol for evaluating parent train-

ing programs, the Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) model

of program evaluation (Stufflebeam, 1983) has been adapted.

Context evaluation scrutinizes the program objectives to deter-

mine their social acceptability, cultural relativity, and their tech-

nical adequacy. Input evaluation involves an examination of the

intended content of training (i.e., the skills or strategies that the

parent will learn), as well as the proposed methods that the parent

trainers intend to use to impart these skills. Process evaluation

relates to implementation of the program, that is, the degree to

which the program was delivered as planned. Finally, product

evaluation is the assessment of program outcomes. It is essential

to know whether the parent training has resulted in changes in

parent and child behavior that are consistent with the program

objectives. The following protocol, therefore, provides a frame-

work for evaluation under the headings of objectives of the par-

ent training program, content of the parent training program,

parent training methods, implementation of the parent training

program, and outcomes of the parent training program. Table 1

is a summary outline of the major areas of evaluation and serves

a checklist and reminder for practitioners undertaking the eval-

uation tasks.

Components of the Evaluation Process

The evaluation of objectives, content, methods, implemen-

tation, and outcomes of parent training accommodates Wolf’s