Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click Here for More Information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, E. H.
Right arrow Articles by Freddolino, P. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, E. H.
Right arrow Articles by Freddolino, P. P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Evaluation Review, Vol. 17, No. 3, 331-352 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9301700305

Tracking and Follow-Up Methods for Research On Homelessness

Evan H. Cohen

Washtenaw Interventions, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Carol T. Mowbray

Wayne State University

Deborah Bybee

Michigan State University

Susan Yeich

Michigan State University

Kurt Ribisl

Michigan State University

Paul P. Freddolino

Michigan State University

To conduct comprehensive treatment effectiveness studies, evaluators must frequently track, locate and interview service recipients long after program participation has ended. For some populations, this is an arduous task. But, despite wide variations in retention rates, the published literature from follow-up studies rarely provides information on their tracking, locating, or interviewing techniques. The present report concerns a 12-month follow-up study of individuals who were homeless and mentally ill, which achieved a remarkably high retention rate—over 70%. Quantitative information is presented on client characteristics related to locatability and agreement to be interviewed, as well as qualitative information on successful techniques, from a focus group session with research interviewers.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 American Journal of EvaluationHome page
D. J. Rog
Using Evaluation as a Tool for Treatment Improvement: A Look Back at the Work of Carol Mowbray
American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2006; 27(1): 28 - 30.
[PDF]

Home page
 Psychiatr. Serv.Home page
C. Clark and A. R. Rich
Outcomes of Homeless Adults With Mental Illness in a Housing Program and in Case Management Only
Psychiatr Serv, January 1, 2003; 54(1): 78 - 83.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Applied Behavioral ScienceHome page
C. M. Sullivan, M. H. Rumptz, R. Campbell, K. K. Eby, and W. S. Davidson II
Retaning Participants in Longitudinal Community Research: A Comprehensive Protocol
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, September 1, 1996; 32(3): 262 - 276.
[Abstract] [PDF]