Training Evaluation: Implementing Effective, Victim-Centered Practices and Policies Regarding Sexual Offending


(OT189-A) Evaluation – Implementing Effective, Victim-Centered Practices and Policies Regarding Sexual Offending

Training Name: Implementing Effective, Victim-Centered Practices and Policies Regarding Sexual Offending

Learning Objectives

As a result of this training, participants will be able to:
1) Explain the reasons why certain sexual offender management practices and policies have become popular with community members and lawmakers. 
2) Describe the ways in which current sex offender management practices may not be victim centered or may not support victim interests. 
3) Analyze the unintended, and intended, impacts of sexual offender management and treatment practices that may undermine sexual offender rehabilitation.  
4) Consider sexual offender management policy and practice with regard to the interests of offender rehabilitation, victim centeredness, and community safety.
5) Explain the benefits and costs of current sexual offender management policy and practice from the perspectives of the community and policymakers, those who offend, and those who are victimized. 
6) Describe controversial harm prevention-based sexual offender management policies and practices and identify recommendations for practice and policy change.

I certify that I am the above-named person completing this form and that the information I submit here is accurate.
1. How much did you learn as a result of this CE program? 5 = Very much, 1 = Very little
2. Rate the quality of the program content 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
3. Rate how current/relevant the program content is 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
4. How useful was the content of this CE program for your practice or other professional development? 5 = Extremely Useful, 1 = Not Useful at all
5. Rate the instructor’s knowledge and expertise of the subject (Christopher Lobanov-Rostovsky, LCSW) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
6.1. Rate the instructor’s teaching ability (Christopher Lobanov-Rostovsky, LCSW) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
7.1. Would you agree that learning objective #1 was met?
Learning Objective #1: “Explain the reasons why certain sexual offender management practices and policies have become popular with community members and lawmakers.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.2. Would you agree that learning objective #2 was met?
Learning Objective #2: “Describe the ways in which current sex offender management practices may not be victim centered or may not support victim interests.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.3. Would you agree that learning objective #3 was met?
Learning Objective #3: “Analyze the unintended, and intended, impacts of sexual offender management and treatment practices that may undermine sexual offender rehabilitation.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.4. Would you agree that learning objective #4 was met?
Learning Objective #4: “Consider sexual offender management policy and practice with regard to the interests of offender rehabilitation, victim centeredness, and community safety.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.5. Would you agree that learning objective #5 was met?
Learning Objective #5: “Explain the benefits and costs of current sexual offender management policy and practice from the perspectives of the community and policymakers, those who offend, and those who are victimized.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.6. Would you agree that learning objective #5 was met?
Learning Objective #5: “Describe controversial harm prevention-based sexual offender management policies and practices and identify recommendations for practice and policy change.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
8. Rate how well the program met your expectations (according to the promotional materials) 5 = Very well, 1 = Not well at all
9. Rate the quality of the provided course materials 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
10. Rate the quality of the facilities (in-person) or technology (online). 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
11. Rate how well disability accommodations were met, if requested. 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
12. Rate the ease of the registration process 5 = Very Easy, 1 = Very Difficult
13. Rate the instructor’s (Christopher Lobanov-Rostovsky, LCSW) responsiveness to questions 5 = Very Responsive, 1 = Not responsive*
14. Rate the program staff’s responsiveness to questions 5 = Very responsive, 1 = Not responsive at all