Can a training program delivered behind prison walls really make a difference? Preliminary findings from a current research project point to a resounding, “YES.”
I am engaged in a research project to evaluate a program of World Impact called The Urban Ministry Institute (TUMI). TUMI’s graduate seminary-level training, delivered behind prison walls (and in urban classrooms outside prison walls), is equipping men and women for leadership roles in ministry around the world.
Based on a pilot study of 15 focus group interviews and 31 quantitative and qualitative survey results, we have been able to draw some initial conclusions about how TUMI fares in terms of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model (explained below).
In other articles, we have discussed participant Reactions, Learning, Behavior, and Results to some degree. More will follow as we complete the evaluation with current participants and with those who have graduated.
In one article, we looked at criminogenic factors, factors that increase the risk of returning to prison once released. In a second article, we looked at how TUMI is working behind bars to combat those criminogenic factors and build protective factors to achieve positive outcomes.
In this report, I want to share what I’ve learned so far about what participants said in response to one question: “What do you like about TUMI?” by applying the Kirkpatrick Model of program evaluation.
The Kirkpatrick Model of program evaluation is a globally recognized model for evaluating the results of training and learning programs like onboarding, product and program launches, leadership development, safety, security, and more. The Model is applicable to almost every program you can think of evaluating: “We have not encountered an industry or program where the model will not work,” it says on their website.
According to Kirkpatrick’s Model, we assess the following four areas:
Given that the Kirkpatrick Model is suitable for use “anywhere,” and given that I have been charged with evaluating a prison theological education program, I applied the Kirkpatrick Model to my work on this project.
I’d like to discuss responses to the question, “What do you like about TUMI?” through the Kirkpatrick Model lens. I’ll share a few representative responses, and then I’ll highlight my initial conclusions.
Representative responses to “What do you like about TUMI?”
Through these few comments from the preliminary study, we can start to see how TUMI participants find the training to be “favorable, engaging, and relevant.”
We see how they are acquiring the intended knowledge and attitudes.
We see how participants are equipped to apply what they learned during training to their everyday life and work.
We see how targeted outcomes are being met through the training.
World Impact/TUMI seeks to equip men and women as leaders who are transformed and who can transform their communities, whether that is within prison walls or the communities to which they return following incarceration.
Using Kirkpatrick’s Model to evaluate TUMI’s prison theological training program, although we’ve only touched the surface of what participants have to say, we can see an overwhelmingly positive evaluation result emerging from the data.
TUMI is bringing hope to those who are incarcerated, it is changing lives, and it is transforming communities.