Published Research & Evaluation Documents Print E-mail

Considerable attention is paid to the continued development of quality control mechanisms in order to provide evidence of service efficacy.

 

Our policy is that programme evaluation is conducted by an external evaluator.

 

PILLARS published research and evaluation documents are:

 

1.      Network Research (2009); "Invisible Children"  - First year report: A study of the children of prisoners

2.      Gordon, E 2009  (2009); Evaluation of New Beginnings Programme, Stage 3

3.      Gordon, E (2006); Evaluation of the New Beginnings Programme,

         Stage 2

4.      Gordon, E (2005); Evaluation of the New Beginnings Programme,

         Stage 1

5.      Department of Corrections (2005); Reintegrative Support Services

         Pilot Programme Evaluation of Programme Outcomes

6.      Department of Corrections (2002); Evaluation of Reintegrative Support

         Services Pilot Programmes

7.      PriceWaterhouseCoopers (1998); Appraisal, Organisation Review and

         SWOT Analysis

8.      MacGibbon, L (1997); PILLARS an Evaluation

9.      MacGibbon, L (1996); Living in the Worst of Both Worlds

10.    Crime Prevention Unit (1999); The Mentoring for Children / Youth at 

          Risk Demonstration Project: Final Evaluation Report

11.    MacGibbon, L (1992); Evaluation of PILLARS

12.    Stephens, M (1990); Evaluation on PILLARS Incorporated

 

As part of our assessment and to track changes across our client base we use the following tools:

 

  • Persister Based Child Assessment (PBCA), based on the research by Kaye McLaren, 2000
  • Youth Mentor Relationship Quality (YMRQ); (Public, Private Ventures, 2002)
  • Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ); (Robert Goodman, 2001)
  • Family Assessment (PBFA), based on research by Kaye McLaren, 2000

Key findings from the report Reintegrative Support Services Pilot Programme Evaluation of Programme Outcomes (July 2005)

  • Male offenders who participated n the programme have been re-convicted and re-imprisoned at rates below the rate of male offenders generally (7% less than the comparison group), with reductions being even grater for those male offenders who fully completed the programme (16% less than the comparison group). Females have a slightly lower rate of re-imprisonment, but a higher rate of re-conviction, although this analysis is derived from a very small sample.
  • Programme providers deliver a comprehensive reintegrative service, addressing a wide range of identified reintegrative needs. In all need areas (except re-offending by other family members and social responsibility), two-thirds or more of offenders with an identified need showed some improvement or resolution in this need at exit from the programme.
  • The programme contributed to improved family functioning, good parenting and care and safety of children within the offender's family / whanau. At exit 78% who completed the programme showed improvement in family functioning, 89% showed improvement or resolution in the care and safety of their children, and 89% had taken steps to improve their parenting.

 
[ Back ]