Evaluation Proposal Essay Example for Free

Evaluation Proposal EssayAbstractThe driving force that stimulates the founders and leaders of the class LAs ruff to aggressively seek military ratings for the design is its genuine concern to be effective and efficient in delivering the goals of the program to disadvantage children, rather than a legislative requirement.The managements initiative of professionalizing practitioners in the subsequently discipline program, rangeicularly the staffs allow for make a signifi screwt impact on LAs BEST, because these individuals be the key players in the performance and everyplaceall support system that the program provides for the disadvantaged children participating in this subsequently school program. As the staffs are the ones involved in giving tutelar care and making the skill environment/activities more(prenominal) engaging for the children.There are many ratings that were done for after school program as discussed by Scott-Little, Hamann Jurs (2002, p. 394) usua lly it is the children that are evaluated. Yet for the program to be effective, there is a need to evaluate the staff.This evaluation proposal is being submitted to meet that need, a methodological search has been designed to gather information that depart guide management to create staff development sessions that will affirm and promote best practices for the program. It was likewise designed to gather perceptions of professionalism of the staff and to articulate the bosom knowledge and skills required by staffs in after school programs and how these may be acquired and updated, as well. display In 2002, Congress passed into law the No Child left hand Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. The passage of this act has significantly amended the Elementary and Secondary pedagogy Act to expand State and local accountability and flexibility, and to stress the adoption of research-based practices. (Mahoney Zigler, 2006) It also contained a number of new provisions that specifically affected t he program of twenty-first Century Communities Learning Centers (21st CCLC) that was authorized under Title IV, Part B, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).It gave the States the responsibility to focus on the 21st CCLC program with specific purposes (1) to provide opportunities for academician enrichment, particularly to students in high-poverty areas and those who attend low-performing schools. And to help the students meet State and local standards in core academic subjects such(prenominal) as reading and mathematics (2) to offer students a broad array of additional services, programs, and recreational activities, that are designed to reinforce and complement the regular academic program of participating students and (3) to offer families of students served by community learning centers opportunities for literacy and related educational development. At the same time, centers help working parents by providing a respectable environment for students during non-sch ool hours, or periods when the school is not in session. (The Law, 2006). interpretation of the ProgramIt was in 1988 (Factsataglance.2.doc, 2007) when former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley created a program to address the development concern of the community regarding the alarming increase of violent crimes that are mostly attributed to street gangs the rising numbers of school drop outs, and the proliferation of illegal drugs being apply by minors.In the belief that it was the citys fundamental moral obligation to help these individuals, Bradley created a 55-member Mayors Education Council, consisting of leaders coming from the business, education, child care, government, entertainment and industry sectors of the community. These leaders were tasked to structure and implement the program which was called LAs Better Educated Students for Tomorrow or LAs BEST. LAs BEST is an innovative after school program that provides a safe and supervised learning environment for children ages 5 - 12 years old immediately after the close of for each one school twenty-four hours until 6pm without cost to parents. Working parents of inner-city children, particularly those belonging to the low-income family groups, are anxious about the safety of their children during the hours after school day.As explained by Riggs Greenberg (2004) these hours are considered high gamble based on studies of previous researchers, especially if minors are left unsupervised. Many parents fear their children will be exposed to and /or be influenced by people with destructive behaviors exacerbated by poverty. And the children themselves have expressed their fears and threats on their well being in their immediate environment or neighborhoods when inter visual senseed according to Huang, Gribbons, Kim, Lee bread maker (2000, p. 20).Goals of the Program The LAs BEST program has been designed to provide custodial care, and to provide activities to meet specific educational, social, and motivation al goals. (Huang et al, 2000) The programs goals can be concisely summarized as 1) to provide a safe supervised environment for the participants during the hours after the close of each school day until 6pm, and 2) to develop the learning experience of the participants through a lordly support system in place that would address the participants academic, social and motivational needs.Brief exposition of the theory goat the programThe theory behind the program is that when caring, responsible adults are connecting with the children in the hours after the close of each school day, these adults make the place safe to be for the children after school, and make the learning environment and activities more engaging for the children, and are considered as a key player in making a positive impact on the childrens academic achievements, enhanced social skills and emotional maturity.And in order for a program to deliver high quality service, antecedence should be given on professionalizin g and training the staffs involved in the program particularly to the staff that will provide custodial care and learning activities to the children.Description of the ClientWith this in mind, this program evaluation is being done for LAs BEST with the aim of giving management an overview of the current skill take within the after school program of LAs BEST commenting on both skills, experience and training undertaken by staffs providing custodial care and learning activities to children.Information will also be self-possessed on employers expectations of skills needed by the staffs employed in this program both at present and in the future. The reason that this information is being gathered is to determine if there is a gap between the current skills level and the duties required to competently manage and implement the program. The information from this evaluation will be used to identify priority areas to be addressed in a proposed Staff Development Framework that LAs BEST wishe s to develop.Evaluation MethodologyEvaluation/enquiry methodological design employedResearch for this evaluation will be conducted in two parts, the first part being 1) a writings check of information available from LAs BEST commenting on current skill levels of the staffs providing custodial care and learning activities to the children. The literature review summarizes findings of research to be conducted into training, qualifications, and skill levels of the staffs in LAs BEST, 2) Informal interview of participants while gathering the literature review and, 3) Observational research commencing on site selection and interaction with participants.The second part will be the aspect proper using the structure questionnaire for the skill audit survey 1) gathering information from managers/supervisors participants and 2) gathering data from staff participants.Implementation measuresThe literature review summary will supplement information drawn from the second part of the research, the skill audit survey and, combined, will give a more accurate view of the current skill level of the staffs.The second part of the research for this opus will be conducted through a targeted survey of managers and supervisors in LAs BEST and their respective staffs. A survey of eight questions concerning the skills of staff in relation to the duties they perform will be gathered from the managers and supervisors. While another survey of 14 questions will be gathered from the staffs.Outcome measuresFindings from the two areas of research will be contrasted to find notable areas of commonality and discrepancy and the results of this comparison will be included in this evaluation. Issues that will be raised during the survey will also be included.Evaluation questions to be addressed through a targeted survey of managers/supervisors.How many staffs are involved in custodial care in your program?What are the learning activities that your program utilizes and how many staffs are discu ssion each activity?Of the staffs nominated in question 1 and 2, how many have completed or undergoing training? maneuver levels of training undertaken by staff.Indicate whether staff, in the future, plan to undertake training and at what level.What duties are required of your staff?Identify areas in which staffs need to acquire skills.Do you have a workforce plan? Is professionalizing the staff identified as a training need within the plan?Evaluation questions to be addressed through a targeted survey of staffsWhat is your current employment type? (Please tick one that apply)__Full Time __Part Time __Casual __Permanent __Contract__ Job Share __Flexible Hours __Other (please specify) _________________On average how many hours per week do you work?__1 to 10 hours __31 to 40 hours __more than 60 hours__11 to 20 hours __41 to 50 hours__21 to 30 hours __51 to 60 hoursHow long have you held your current position?__ little a year __3 to less than 7 years __more than 10 years__1 to less than 3 years __7 to 10 yearsWhat is your current job title? ____________________Does a formal (written) description of your current position exist?__Yes __Yes, but it is not up to date__Yes, I would be willing to provide a copy __NoWhat duties form part of your role on a regular basis? ___________________What skills do you use on a regular basis? ____________________________How does your employer support your professional development?What is the highest level of education you have completed?How relevant has your educational background been to your current position?How have you kept yourself informed about after school issues over the past 12 months?How many years have you worked in this industry?Do you have a question that you feel should be included in future staff surveys?Do you wish to be contacted in regard to any issues you may have raised within your response to this survey? theatre poseor/Supervisor ParticipantsManager/Supervisor participant surveys are designed to articul ate staff observation and assess areas to determine and address the different needs of staff. garner constructive feedback will guide management to create staff development sessions that will affirm and promote best practices in the program.Staff ParticipantsHiring new after school staff member who are fully prepared is rare to find. The reasons are most newly hired staff just graduated from college and are completely new to the field another reason is the hired staff is experienced in a traditional recreational program and/or in an education set-up and is immersed in a school culture that is totally different from an after school culture. The staff participant surveys are designed to articulate the core knowledge and skills needed by the staffs in after school programs and how these may be acquired and updated, and how staffs perceive professionalism.Study Implementation Procedures ejection management Before commencement the evaluation formally, the following tasks are needed 1) A meeting between the evaluators and LAs BEST management will have to be set-up to communicate and explicate the evaluation proposal to reach an agreement on the scope of work to be done, timelines and deliverablesand to invite what other issues or concerns the management would want to include that is congruent to the evaluation, 2) the evaluation team must make themselves familiar with the program by making ocular visitation of the sites, interviewing managers/supervisors and staffs and take note of proposed modifications in the evaluation design to assimilate these individuals issues or concerns that is congruent to the evaluation. These proposed modifications will have to be communicated and explicated to LAs BEST management and upon their approval will be incorporated to the evaluation design prior to launch. lay recruitment This proposal aims to make an exhaustive evaluation of all elementary schools across the City of Los Angeles that are included in the LAs BEST program, wh ich are 147 sites as stated in LAs BEST literature. (Overview.2.doc, n.d.) info collection and data entryThe data collection tools that will be used in this evaluation are 1) existing data or statistics from record files of LAs BEST that would yield demographic information as well as other personal data of the participants, 2) direct observation of participants during surveys and actual on site visitation, 3) survey questionnaires, and 4) informal interview.All surveys are structured to provide information on two major areas how the managers/supervisors view the staffs and how the staffs view themselves with regards to, 1) the knowledge and skills needed by after school staffs and 2) the degree of professionalism of after school staffs. All data collected will be documented.Data analysis and reportingCollected data will be analyzed through calculating percentages and descriptive statistics. After data has been analyzed and interpreted, an evaluation report will be prepared comprisin g of 1) an executive summary, 2) an introduction which describes the program, its components, the target population, and the goals and objectives of the program,3) a methodology which describes how the program was actually implemented as well as how the data was collected, what instruments were used to collect the data and how the data was analyzed, 4) the results section of the data analysis containing concrete data, 5) a discussion section explaining how the data was interpreted, provides answers to evaluation questions, 6) discloses any problems or issues encountered in the evaluation, 7) suggestions on what could be done in the future to improve other similar evaluations, and 8) a recommendations section where recommendations are made based on findings.Study TimelineThe overall project management timeline of the evaluation proposal is presented in the table below (see Table 1). The appropriate timelines for each task within each evaluation phase is also specified. Our goal is to begin the evaluation in May 2007 and conclude with the final reporting in October 2008.Table 1 Project Management Timeline EvaluationPeriodPhaseTaskPhase 1(Pre-Test)Meeting between evaluators andLAs BEST ManagementMay 2007 to July 2007Increase familiarity with sitesMay 2007 to July 2007 weighing and approval of modificationsMay 2007 to July 2007Phase 2(Test 1)Site recruitment (147 sites)August 2007Literature ReviewAugust 2007 to October 2007Informal interview of participantsAugust 2007 to October 2007Observational researchAugust 2007 to October 2007Phase 3(Test 2)Survey Questionnaire Managers/SupervisorsSeptember 2007Survey Questionnaire StaffsOctober 2007 to December 2007Phase 4Data Collection/Data Entry/Data abstractMay 2007 to March 2008ReportingJanuary 2008 to April 2008Phase 5Presentation of Final Report to LAs BEST ManagementMay 2008ReferencesFactsataglance.2.doc. (2007). LAs BEST. Retrieved April 26, 2007. From http//www.lasbest.org/resourcecenter/index.phpHuang, D., Gribbo ns, B., Kim, K., Lee, C. Baker, E. (2000). A Decade of Results The Impact of the LAs BEST After School Enrichment Program on Subsequent Student Achievement and Performance. UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation. Retrieved April 26, 2007 from http//www.lasbest.org/resourcecenter/ucla.phpMahoney, J. Zigler, E. (2006). Translating science to policy under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Lessons from the national evaluation of the 21st-Century Community Learning Centers. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 27, 282294Overview.2.doc. (n.d.). LAs BEST. Retrieved April 26, 2007. From http//www.lasbest.org/resourcecenter/index.phpRiggs, N. Greenberg, M. (2004). After-School Youth Development Programs A Developmental-Ecological specimen of Current Research. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 7, (3) September 2004.Scott-Little, C., Hamann, M. Jurs, S. (2002). Evaluations of After-School Programs A Meta-Evaluation of Methodologies and Narrative Synthesis of Findings . American Journal of Evaluation 23 387. Retrieved April 25, 2007 from http//aje.sagepub.comThe Law (2006) perspective of Non-Public Education (ONPE) The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. US Department of Education. Retrieved May 3, 2007 from http//www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg55.html