Final answer:
The question pertains to the adherence of programs from a Johns Hopkins project to established program evaluation principles. These principles ensure useful results, maintain a simple and doable process, and align evaluations with program efforts, reflecting challenges in community psychology and public service evaluation.
Step-by-step explanation:
The student’s question appears to be inquiring about how well programs from a specific Johns Hopkins project adhere to recognized principles of program evaluation. Unfortunately, the reference to the “Johns Hopkins project” is a bit unclear, but evaluating programs for efficacy is typically a task in program evaluation, a field that intersects areas like social policy, health, and community psychology. From the provided context, we can assume the programs possibly pertain to public agencies or initiatives that strive for social betterment or service provision and must be appraised for their effectiveness, adherence to principles, and impact.
The principles outlined for effective program evaluation include: (1) ensuring evaluation results are useful, (2) maintaining simplicity and feasibility in the evaluation process (evaluation is simple and doable), and (3) aligning evaluation efforts with the program efforts. The mention of local and national community impact suggests the evaluations were meant to gauge the effectiveness of programs possibly linked with social improvement initiatives or educational programs.
Regarding the case studies mentioned, different aspects are illustrated: the importance of transparent communication and collaboration (positive in the first case), the consequences of lacking stakeholder commitment (negative in the second case), and the challenges of receiving constructive feedback (negative in the third case). These instances reflect the real-world complexities of evaluating programs, particularly when involving government, academia, and nonprofits.