Methodological challenges of collecting evaluation data from traumatized Clients/Consumers - A comparison of three methods

This project integrates elements of responsive evaluation and participatory evaluation to compare three evaluation data collection methods for use with a hard-to-find (HTF). traumatized., vulnerable population: rape victims seeking postassault medical forensic care. The first method involves on-site, in-person data collection, immediately postservices; the second, telephone follow-up assessments, I week postservices: and the third, private, self-administered surveys completed immediately postservices. There are significant differences in response rates across methods: 88% in-person, 17% telephone, and 41% self-administered. Across all phases, clients Gave positive feedback about the services they received and about all three methods of data collection. Follow-up analyses suggested that nonresponders did not differ with respect to client characteristics, assault characteristics, or nursing care provided. These findings Suggest that evaluations with HTF service clients may need to e integrated into on-site services because other methods may not yield sufficient response rates.