505 Evaluation Final Project
-
Upload
brian-mitchell -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of 505 Evaluation Final Project
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
1/28
An Evaluation of Canine-Assisted
Therapy at
Our Lady of Peace Hospital /
Childrens Peace Center
By Brian Mitchell
EDTECH 505-4172
Summer, 2011
Dr. Ross Perkins
August 1, 2011
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
2/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page 2
Table of Contents:
Learning Reflection ___________________________________________________ 3
Executive Summary _____________________________________________________ 4
Purpose _______________________________________________________________ 5
Background ___________________________________________________________ 6Evaluation Design ______________________________________________________ 9
Results ________________________________________________________________ 10
Discussion _____________________________________________________________ 17Conclusion & Recommendations __________________________________________ 18
AppendicesAppendix A. Evaluators Program Description _________________________ 19Appendix B. Evaluation Timeline ____________________________________ 20
Appendix C. Patient Survey ________________________________________ 21
Appendix D. Staff Survey __________________________________________ 24Appendix E. References ___________________________________________ 28
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
3/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page 3
Learning Reflection
Before taking this class, I thought that I already knew a lot about the process of evaluation.In some cases, there was a lot that I did already know. However, what I have learned more thananything is how informal my knowledge of evaluation really was. To me, the data collection and
analysis were the entire process. Now I realize that there are so many more parts to a good,formal evaluation.
I have learned that evaluation is almost a hybrid between research and instructional design.A good evaluation will have many of the same characteristics that an instructional design will
have. This includes things like learner, audience, or stakeholder descriptions, objectives, etc. At
the same time, a good evaluation will have many of the same things as a research project, like
results, discussion, conclusion, etc.
During the process of conducting this evaluation, one of the things I discovered is howimportant it is to narrow the focus of the evaluation. There are so many different aspects to a
program and so many different ways and types of data gathering that it can quickly become amassive undertaking. A good focus will help keep the evaluation on task and to look only atthose things sought by the person or organization requesting the evaluation. In the process of
this evaluation, I realized that my focus was far too broad, and thus the results are a little more
scattered than they should be.
I discovered that my favorite part of the evaluation process is probably the least favorite of
many people. That is the collection and analysis of data. Of course, this entire process is madeso much easier by the modern tools available, like online surveys and the data analysis tools of
modern spreadsheets. Regardless, I take great fascination in taking what seems like a series of
disjointed responses and looking for the patterns that emerge from the data to form a cohesive set
of results.
In reality, I am not sure how often I will go through a formal evaluation process quite asextensively as we have in this project. Most of the evaluations I will be doing call for a far less
formal procedure. However, it is good to know that when it comes to evaluating a major
program for an organization that expects a formalized report, I will have the skills andknowledge necessary to give them what they want.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
4/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page 4
Executive Summary
The current animal-assisted therapy program at Our Lady of Peace has been in place forabout three months. Right now, there is only one dog participating. Her name is Lucy, and sheis the pet of a units Program Coordinator. While Lucy does spend most of her time on that unit,
she does travel around to others, as well. Right now Lucy comes about 1-2 times per week, butthere is no regular schedule to her visits.
The goal of this survey is to evaluate the effectiveness of Lucys interactions on patient care.Surveys were done with 28 patients and 8 staff members. The surveys dealt primarily with
rating scales regarding the participants impressions of Lucy and her effects on the patients. The
staff surveys were more complex and included more questions than the patient surveys.
The results of the evaluation show that the program seems to be a great success. Patients and
staff alike noticed improvements in the happiness and stress levels of the patients when Lucy isaround. There are mixed results on whether Lucy helps improve patient relationships or gets
them to share more. However, the patients seem to have a great love and fondness for Lucy,which in itself has a strong therapeutic effect that the staff did notice.
There is a bit of tension, because one of the staff members is afraid of dogs. This has caused
some problems in the work environment. However, even the staff member acknowledges thebenefits to the patients and said that he/she is able to avoid Lucy when needed.
There seems to be a consensus among patients and staff that it would be nice if Lucy could
come more often and on a more regular schedule. This is something that should be worked out.
The success of this program also warrants an investigation into a possible expansion of the
program with more dogs and units. This is something that could be investigated with WAGS.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
5/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page 5
Purpose
This evaluation is being conducted at the request of a Program Coordinator in one of thelong-term care units of Our Lady of Peace. Animal-assisted therapy has been used in the past inthe hospital. However, this is the first time that a dog belonging to someone in programming
management is being used on a regular and long-term basis. The coordinator requesting theevaluation is the owner of the dog being used for the therapy. She wishes to analyze the successof the program to this point, both in the interest of improving it and in the interest of recording
the results of the program for hospital management. In an effort to provide full disclosure from
myself, as the impartial evaluator, it should be noted that the coordinator of the program is alsomy wife. However, there is no conflict of interest, since her job is not dependent on the success
of the pet therapy program. Thus, I have no vested interest in whether the program continues or
not.
The goal of this evaluation is to determine the extent to which this program of canine
interaction in the long-term inpatient psychiatric treatment of adolescents is effective as a
therapeutic tool. As discussed later in this report, there is a wealth of academic research in thefield of animal-assisted therapy (AAT), so the effectiveness of such interaction, in a general
sense, is already well-documented. However, the long-term care units at Our Lady of Peacepresent a unique environment for the use of this therapy. This evaluation will look at how well
the therapy works with the children in this setting, who have a wide variety of physiological,
mental, emotional, and social issues.
This evaluation will also be used to look for ways the use of canine-assisted therapy can be
improved in this setting. Specifically addressed will be the schedule and frequency ofinteraction, the effects on patients and staff, and whether the program should be expanded to
other units or with more animals.
The goal of any program at a hospital like Our Lady of Peace is ultimately what is best for
those in treatment. Thus, this evaluation will pay particular attention to the effects on the
patients. However, staff impressions are also important, in the interest of creating a safe andpeaceful work environment and in the interest of their ability to provide the best care for the
patients.
Finally, this evaluation will look at the welfare of the dog in question. It is important that
this activity be a safe an enjoyable undertaking for the dog, since a dog that doesnt enjoy thistype of interaction could potentially have negative therapeutic effects. It is also important to
look at whether this type of program produces positive health results for the dog.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
6/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page 6
Background
Program Origin and Rationale
Our Lady of Peace, a division of Jewish Hospital and St. Marys Health Care, is one of the
largest, private non-profit psychiatric hospitals in the United States. The hospital treats a widerange of emotional, behavioral, and psychiatric disorders, and also chemical dependency. While
both adults and children receive treatment, the majority of the hospital is comprised of the
Childrens Peace Center, which specializes in the treatment of children.
Animal-assisted therapy (AAT) has been shown to have tremendous benefits in the treatment
of psychiatric patients, especially with children. Friesen (2010) points to the work of BorisLevinson, who in 1969 found that a therapy dog acted as a social lubricant between the
therapist and the child, which allowed for a more relaxed environment conducive to self-
disclosure (p. 262).
Friesen also points out a 1997 study by Limond, et al. which found that students tend to be
more attentive, more responsive, and more cooperative with an adult when a dog is present. Hegoes on to cite other studies which showed that children have experienced increased alertness
and attention span, and an enhanced openness and desire for social contact. Finally, Friesen
discusses how children have an acceptance of dogs because they perceive the animals to be non-judgemental (Friesen, 2010, p. 262).
Brodie and Biley (1999) also point out some of the benefits of AAT. They cite a 1985 studyby Francis et al. that found work with animals to reduce depression (p. 330). They go on to cite
examples of studies that found AAT to decrease stress and loneliness and strengthen relational
bonds. They also cite a 1981 study by Katcher which showed decreased blood pressure as aresult of AAT (p. 331). Lastly, they refer to a similar study by Baun, et al. which showed that a
larger reduction in blood pressure resulted from interacting with a dog with which a bond has
form, over one with no bond (p. 331).
That is just a small sampling of a wealth of research regarding the therapeutic benefits gained
from AAT. It is clear that the research does support the benefits of having a canine therapyprogram in place. The Baun study also supports the notion of having the same dog come
repeatedly, so that patients may form a relationship with it, thus increasing the therapeutic
effects.
Program Goals and Standards
The animal-assisted therapy program at Our Lady of Peace is operated in conjunction with
Wonderful Animals Giving Support (W.A.G.S.). Dogs and their owners go through an extensivetraining program and must past a rigorous evaluation before being certified. The training and
evaluation insure that the dogs obey basic obedience commands, are approachable and friendly,
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
7/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page 7
and show no signs of aggression. Their handlers must also be evaluated to be sure they have
complete control of the dog and that treat the dog properly. The dog and handler must then go
through a mentored visit at a health facility as the final stage of their evaluation. Only dogscertified as therapy dogs are permitted to work with the patients.
The animal-assisted therapy program at Our Lady of Peace has the following goals:
To improve the patient relationships with staff and with each other To improve patient self-esteem To promote empathy in the patients To decrease stress levels in the patients To help patients learn to handle stress in a healthy manner To help patients learn to have trust for others To help patients feel more comfortable sharing personal feelings To give the patients a healthy avenue of enjoyment To improve the experience of hospitalization by giving the patients something to look
forward to
To insure the health, safety, happiness, and well-being of the therapy dog
Previous Programs
Animal-assisted therapy is not new to the hospital. However, with past programs, theanimals would just visit on a periodic basis, around once a month. The animals were brought by
volunteers from the WAGS program. With the current program, the dog is brought once or more
per week by a licensed social worker employed at the hospital who has expertise in therapy and
an established relationship with the patients.
While the previous program was successful, in order to get the most benefit, staff concluded
that the interaction with patients needed to take place on a more regular basis. The fact that the
volunteers who brought the animals had no developed relationship with the patients alsoinhibited the therapeutic effects of the visits.
Program Participants
In the WAGS program, only the certified handler is allowed to be in charge of the dog while
it is interacting with patients, and that handler must be in complete control of the dog at all times.In this case, the handler is also the units Program Coordinator and a licensed social worker and
recreational therapist. Other staff do interact with the dog, but in incidental ways.
The patients at Our Lady of Peace who participate in the animal-assisted therapy program
range in age from nine to seventeen years old. They are all hospitalized in the inpatient long-term care program. They have a variety of diagnosed mental health issues. The problems with
which they struggle include alcohol and drug abuse, aggression issues towards themselves,
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
8/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page 8
others, or property, victims and/or perpetrators of physical, sexual, or animal abuse, autism, and
victims of neglect. Many of the patients have issues relating to others in healthy ways. Because
most private health insurance plans have very limited mental health coverage, a large number ofthe patients have been signed over as wards of the state by their parents. This allows them to be
eligible for government health coverage.
The therapy dog, Lucy, works with patients in several different units, including those with
autism and those in the forensic units, which means that they have histories of being violent.
Program Description
The therapy dog, Lucy, is brought to the hospital at least once a week and most weeks she is
there two or three times. She was certified in April, 2011, which means she has been workingwith the patients for approximately three months. The days and frequency that Lucy comes to
the hospital is dependent upon the school and programming schedule and activities for any given
week.
Lucy visits several units on each visit, including the standard long-term care units, the autism
units, and the forensic units, which house patients with histories violence. Lucys visits withpatients includes them physically and socially interacting with her in a small group setting. The
patients work with her to do tricks and try to teach her new ones. There is also lots of time for
them to interact with her through petting and playing. Lucy will sometimes interact with thepatients during their process groups. These are small group settings which help the patients
examine and discuss the decisions they make and the ways they interact with others. Often, the
therapist will frame discussions to include Lucy in an effort to help the patients share or relatebetter.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
9/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page 9
Evaluation Design
While the AAT program being evaluated here does indeed have some stated objectives, theshort time frame of this evaluation and the unquantifiable nature of the objectives make a goal-based evaluation model difficult or impossible. Therefore, this particular evaluation is better
suited to the systems analysis model (Boulmetis & Dutwin, 2005, p. 90).
The systems analysis model looks at the program as a whole, including the impact on the
patients, the impact on the staff, the resources involved with operating the program, and theoverall benefit of the program, as a result of the above impacts.
In order to accomplish this, surveys were created for both staff and patients. Both surveysconsisted primarily of quantitative questions of scale regarding the respondents impressions and
satisfaction with the program. Questions of scale in terms of agreement with certain benefits of
the program were also included. Finally, there were opportunities for the respondents to addtheir own comments about both the dog and the program as a whole.
The staff surveys were more involved and included questions about their experience withAAT, their knowledge of research in the field, and their impressions of the therapeutic effects on
the patients. There were also some questions about staff satisfaction with the program.
Patient surveys asked many of the same questions, but framed them in the first person and
simplified the language to make them easier to understand. This was necessary both because ofthe ages of the respondents and because of their generally lower intelligence levels.
In terms of both patients and staff, surveys were the only realistic way to collect data. Apsychiatric hospital, especially one with children, has strict privacy and security measures in
place, making it nearly impossible for an outsider to enter the units and question either staff or
patients in an interview setting.
The surveys were distributed by the program coordinator to both staff and patients. She thencollected them after they finished. An interview with the coordinator was also conducted in
order to clarify some of the hospital, treatment, and AAT program information. She was also
questioned regarding the patient surveys and their ability to accurately answer the questions
and/or to be able to take the survey seriously. She clarified some of the answers that werereported by both staff and patients. The surveys were to be anonymous, but several of the
patients and even a few of the staff chose to identify themselves. During the data analysis, this
information was ignored.
Finally, in order to evaluate the health and well-being of the therapy dog, a physical exam bythe dogs veterinarian was conducted three months into the program. The dog was also required
to undergo an exam in order to be certified for the program. So the two examinations were
compared in an effort to evaluate the impact of the program on the dogs health.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
10/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
10
Results
Patients
Interacting with Lucy
82%
4% 7%
7%
0%
Increases Happiness
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
75%
18%
7%
0% 0%
Reduces Stress
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
11/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
11
46%
25%
11%
7%
11%
Improves My Relationships
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
71%
11%
4% 7%
7%
Improves My Coping Skills
5 - Agree
4
32
1 - Disagree
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
12/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
12
50%
29%
11%
4%7%
Makes Me More Open to Sharing
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
75%
11%
0% 11%4%
Makes This a Better Place
5 - Agree
4
32
1 - Disagree
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
13/28
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
14/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
14
38%
13%
0%
25%
25%
Makes them more cooperative
with staff
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
38%
13%
38%
13%
0%
Makes them more cooperative
with each other
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
15/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
15
63%
0%
38%
0% 0%
Has a positive therapeutic effect
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
38%
13%13%
38%
0%
Makes them more open to
sharing personal feelings
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
16/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
16
Lucys presence has had a
63%
25%
13%
0% 0%
Positive effect on patient
environment
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
38%
13%
0%0%
50%
Positive effect on work
environment
5 - Agree
4
3
2
1 - Disagree
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
17/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
17
Dog Welfare
After having Lucy inspected by the vet, it seems that the only real concern is weight gain. She has
gained several pounds since the program began. This seems to be the result of the number of treats
Lucy gets when doing tricks at work. Lucy also seems greatly fatigued when she finishes the day. This isalso something to consider. Overall, Lucy seems to look forward to going to the hospital and also
seems to really enjoy her experience there.
Discussion
There seems to be an overwhelmingly positive response to Lucys work as a therapy dog.This is especially true among the patients. Over and over again, the patients commented on how
much they love Lucy and how happy she makes them. A large majority of patients and staffalike said that Lucy makes the patients happier and reduces their stress. The majority of the staffalso thinks the program produces a positive therapeutic effect. A majority of both groups also
said that Lucys presence makes for a better environment for the patients.
When it comes to other benefits, both the staff and patients presented mixed views as to
whether or not Lucys work makes the patients more cooperative with each other or with staff.
There were also mixed results among the staff about whether the program makes the patientsmore willing to share their feelings. However, half of the patients said that they feel more
comfortable sharing.
The only real negative result came from the staff. One staff member indicated that he/shehas a large fear of dogs, and it has caused some problems in the workplace. Several other staff
members commented on the tension resulting from this. However, the same staff member also
said that he/she does not have contact with Lucy, because she avoids her whenever possible.This staff member also acknowledged the positive benefits for the patients. Several questioned
why Lucy couldnt come on days when the staff member was off work. However, in questioning
the program coordinator, there is only one day every other week when that happens.
Comments from both sides expressed interest in having Lucy come to the hospital more
often. Most of the staff were glowing in their comments. There were things said like, Lucy
gives them hope, because they look forward to her coming. Several commented on how happy
Lucy makes the patients and how much they look forward to her coming.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
18/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
18
Conclusions & Recommendations
Immediate Conclusions
I think that the program has been an overwhelming success. The survey results have verystrong things to say about Lucy and the program. My suggestion would be to come up with a
regular schedule of 2-3 days per week for Lucy to come. Both kids and most staff suggested that
she come more often. The tension caused by the staff members fear is a concern. It doesnt
seem reasonable to only bring Lucy once every other week, when most think that she shouldcome more than once a week. My recommendation would be work out a schedule of when Lucy
will be there, so that the staff member always knows and can avoid her. It is an unfortunate
situation, but the benefits to the patients, which should be the most important consideration seemto far outweigh the fear of one person. This is especially true when that person is able to avoid
contact with Lucy. It might also be helpful to visit other units on certain days when that staff
member is around.
As far as Lucys health is concerned, it might be helpful to try to use more verbal and
physical praise as a reward, rather than treats. If that doesnt work, and no healthier treats can befound, then her food ration on days that she works should be cut back, in order to maintain a
healthy weight. As far as fatigue, it would be good to try to stagger the days, so she has at least
one day of rest in between her work days.
Long-Range Planning
Because the program seems to be such a great success, it seems that the hospital wouldbenefit from an expansion of the program. The coordinator might consider talking to WAGS to
see if more dogs could visit the hospital on a regular basis. Because of the documented benefitsof a developed relationship with the dogs, it might also be good to get word out to otheremployees with dogs to go through the WAGS program to be certified. Then they, too could
bring their dogs in to work. OLOP is a huge hospital, with a lot of units. It would be almost
impossible to have too many dogs for a program like this. It would be ideal if each unit couldhave its own dog that visited on a regular basis. This would take some coordination with WAGS
and would probably require other dogs to go through the program.
Evaluation Insights
The biggest thing that would have improved this evaluation is more time. It would have
been nice if more staff and patients could be surveyed. It would also be better to compare datafrom different units. Most of the data here came from the primary unit where Lucy works. If
there were a way to do personal interviews with the staff, this would also have improved the
results. I realize that doing so with patients would be impossible, but there is no reason that itcould not be done with staff. I think the evaluation could have also benefited from narrowing its
focus. There were too many immeasurable objectives. It would have been better to narrow those
down into something more quantifiable. Overall, I think the evaluation went very well andyielded some valuable results.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
19/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
19
Appendices
Appendix A Evaluators Program Description
This evaluation will look at a newly implemented pet therapy program at a psychiatric
hospital in Louisville, KY. The program has been instituted in a residential unit for children.Right now, there is only one dog being used in the program. The dog is certified by a pet therapy
organization (WAGS). It is used in group and individual therapy sessions and is under the
control of a Program Coordinator who is a certified social worker and recreational therapist.
Evaluation Questions
1. Is this program an effective therapy tool?2. What are the therapeutic benefits to this program?3. Are there any risks or problems associated with a dog in a hospital setting?4. Is the dog being used in the most effective and efficient way possible?
Stakeholders
Patients receiving therapy with the dog Staff who interact with/care for the dog The dog being used Staff who have no direct interaction with the dog but work in the units where the dog is
being used
Patients who have no direct interaction with the dog but are in the same units where thedog is being used
Hospital management WAGS staff who helped train and certify the dog
Data Collection
Data will be collected through surveys and personal interviews. The majority of the data willbe qualitative, in the interest of determining the effectiveness of the program. There will be some
quantitative data collected in regard to the amount of time the dog is used, number of patients
and staff involved, etc.
Challenges
Data collection from patients will be the primary challenge. Many of the patients havediagnosed social disorders, meaning they may not have the emotional capacity, intellect, or
truthfulness to give an accurate assessment of the program. However, the high training level ofthe staff that allows them to give accurate assessments of therapeutic benefits will help to offset
this challenge. The program itself has a challenge, mainly in the form of one staff member who
has an extreme phobia of dogs.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
20/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
20
Appendix B Evaluation Timeline
Date(s) Task
6/29/2011 Meet with program coordinator to discuss EPD and program and evaluation needs
6/30/2011 Revise Evaluation questions and EPD
7/3 - 7/9 Conduct academic and medical research on pet therapy
7/10 - 7/13 Create survey and interview questions
7/14/2011 Discuss surveys with program coordinator
7/15/2011 Revise surveys and interview questions
7/16 - 7/20 Program coordinator distributes surveys and conducts interviews (privacy policies
do not allow evaluator to enter units)
7/21 - 7/24 Data analysis
7/25 - 7/28 Report draft writing
7/29 - 7/31 Report revision
8/1/2011 Report Due
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
21/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
21
Appendix C Patient Survey
Our Lady of Peace / Childrens Peace Center
Pet Therapy Survey - Patients
Please take a few minutes to fill out this survey on the effectiveness of pet therapy, based on your
experience with Lucy. We welcome your feedback and your answers will be anonymous and kept
confidential. Thank you for your participation.
How do you f eel about d ogs in general?
1 2 3 4 5
Bad Good
Have you ever ow ned a pet?
Dog Cat Other None
How has Lucy affected your f eelings about d ogs?
1 2 3 4 5
Madeworse
Improved
What is your general feeling about Lucy?
1 2 3 4 5
Poor Excellent
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
22/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
22
Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following:
When I m around Lucy, I feel happier
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucy makes me feel m ore relaxed
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucy helps me to get along better w ith others
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
I feel like having Lucy around helps me cope wit h my probl ems bett er
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucy helps me feel more comfor table sharing how I feel
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Having Lucy around m akes this a bett er place
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
23/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
23
Additional Feedback
Are there any oth er good things you w ould like t o say about Lucy?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Are there any negative t hings you wou ld like t o say about Lucy?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
I s there anything you w ould do to im prove Lucys work or the pet t herapy program?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Do you have any other comm ents about your experience wit h Lucy or pet th erapy in
general?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for taking the time to fill out our survey. We rely on your feedback to help us improve ourservices. Your input is greatly appreciated.
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
24/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
24
Appendix D Staff Survey
Our Lady of Peace / Childrens Peace Center
Pet Therapy Survey - StaffPlease take a few minutes to fill out this survey on the effectiveness of pet therapy, based on your
experience with Lucy. We welcome your feedback and your answers will be anonymous and kept
confidential. Thank you for your participation.
What i s your age range?
18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+
What is your hi ghest level of education?
High School Some College Associate or similar
degree
Bachelor or similar
degree
Graduate
degree
What i s your impr ession of dogs in general?
1 2 3 4 5
Unfavorable Favorable
Do you have a pet at home?
Dog Cat Other None
How has Lucy affected your imp ression of dogs?
1 2 3 4 5
NegativeEffect
PositiveEffect
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
25/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
25
Prior to your experience wit h Lucy, what w as your aw areness of pet t herapy?
Never heard of it
Passing knowledge
Slightly experienced
Very experienced
What is your know ledge of pet therapy research?
1 2 3 4 5
None Extensive
Knowledge
How oft en do you directly int eract w ith Lucy?
Never
Monthly
Several times a month
Weekly
Several times a week
What is your general impr ession of Lucy?
1 2 3 4 5
Poor HighlyFavorable
What is your general impression of Lucys int eraction w it h patient s and staff?
1 2 3 4 5
Poor HighlyFavorable
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
26/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
26
Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following:
Lucys int eracti on wi th pati ents makes th em happier
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucys interaction w it h pati ents decreases their stress level
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucys interaction w ith patients makes them more cooperative w ith staff
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucys interaction w ith patients makes more cooperative w ith other patients
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucys int eracti on w it h patient s has a positi ve therapeutic effect
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucys int eracti on w it h patient s makes them m ore open to sharing personal feelings
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
27/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
Page
27
Lucys presence has had a positive effect on patient environm ent
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Lucys presence has had a positive effect on st aff w orkin g environm ent
1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Agree
Additional Feedback
Are there any other positive eff ects you have noticed from Lucys therapy w ork?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Are there any negative effects you have noti ced from Lucys therapy w ork?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
I s there anything you w ould do to im prove Lucys work or the pet t herapy program?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Do you have any other comm ents about your experience wit h Lucy or pet th erapy in
general?
_______________________________________________________________________________
-
7/31/2019 505 Evaluation Final Project
28/28
OLOP Canine-Assisted Therapy Evaluation
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for taking the time to fill out our survey. We rely on your feedback to help us improve ourservices. Your input is greatly appreciated.
Appendix E References
Boulmetis, J. & Dutwin, P. (2005). The ABCs of Evaluation: Timeless Techniques forProgram and Project Managers. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Brodie, S. J. & Biley, F. C.. (1999). An exploration of the potential benefits of pet-facilitated
therapy.Journal of Clinical Nursing, 8(4), 329-337. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2702.1999.00255.x
Friesen, L. (2010). Exploring Animal-Assisted Programs with Children in School and
Therapeutic Contexts.Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(4), 261-267. doi:10.1007/s10643-
009-0349-5
Jalongo, M., Astorino, T., & Bomboy, N. (2004). Canine Visitors: The Influence of Therapy
Dogs on Young Children's Learning and Well-Being in Classrooms and Hospitals.EarlyChildhood Education Journal, 32(1), 9-16. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.