Some of the competing issues in determining the follow-up period in prevention evaluations include how long an intervention or program has been implemented changes should be expected and the possibility of the changes diminishing or disappearing with time. The rule om appropriate follow-up times is that evaluation should look to the underlying theory for guidance and to be ideal, a follow-up time should involve the follow-up data being gathered at different intervals (Lab, 2016).
Process evaluations are prevalent even though they do not provide information on project goals’ success due to several reasons. The first reason according to Lab (2016) is that conducting a process evaluation can set the stage for an outcome study as they tend to show whether there has been a correct implementation or not. Further, they are prevalent because they have the ability to provide insight into the context of operation of the intervention. Finally, such evaluations are prevalent because of their inability to fail.
This statement is true as it reflects the truth about there being no rule on an appropriate follow-up time in prevention evaluations. The statement shows that follow-up times do vary depending on the changes that are projected to affect crime prevention methods. Further, the assertion about the three types of evaluations is true since the evaluations help in determining the efficacy of the crime prevention programs and interventions which enable the authorities to reevaluate them.
The statement is true as far as a rule on follow-ups is concerned. It underscores the fact that the evaluation process is a multifaceted one that needs a broad approach meaning there cannot be a single rule for the appropriate follow-up time. For, basing the evaluations on a single rule would not produce reliable or valid results that authorities can Furthermore, this statement echoes the reality that exists in the crime evaluation since the existence of a single follow-up rule on evaluations would not result in the realistic evaluation.
Reference
Lab, S. P. (2016). Evaluation and crime prevention. In Steven, P.L., Crime Prevention: Approaches, Practices, and evaluations. New York: Routledge
