Evaluation, Government Performance and Results Act and Performance Reports FY06 ERCM Initial Grantee Meeting December 7, 2006, San Antonio, TX U.S. Department.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Management Plans: A Roadmap to Successful Implementation
Advertisements

A Roadmap to Successful Implementation Management Plans.
Donald T. Simeon Caribbean Health Research Council
The WINSS School Improvement Planning Tool: An Overview.
Exercise Swaps Community Emergency Response Team.
SMART: Developing Effective Goals and Objectives Presented by Barry Nagle Evaluation and Action Research Associates (EARA) Fairfax, VA March 2009.
New and Emerging GEAR UP Evaluators
1 Commonwealth of Virginia 2012 Strategic Planning Workshop The Executive Progress Report and National Rankings September 17 and 27, 2012 Office of the.
HOWARD UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES Strategic Planning Retreat, 2005.
High-Quality Supplemental Educational Services And After-School Partnerships Demonstration Program (CFDA Number: ) CLOSING DATE: August 12, 2008.
Sam Lopez, NPD Program Manager, OELA
Service Agency Accreditation Recognizing Quality Educational Service Agencies Mike Bugenski
A brief overview What is program evaluation? How is an evaluation conducted? When should it be used? When can it be used? Used with Permission of: John.
COLLEGE SPARK WASHINGTON 2012 Community Grants Program Application Webinar 12/22/201110:00 AM 1/4/20122:00 PM.
Reporting Results for Pesticide Programs Robin Powell, EM Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe Environmental Department.
Logic Modeling for Success Dr Kathryn Wehrmann Illinois State University.
PHAB's Approach to Internal and External Evaluation Jessica Kronstadt | Director of Research and Evaluation | November 18, 2014 APHA 2014 Annual Meeting.
How to Write Goals and Objectives
HELPFUL TIPS FOR UNIT PLANNING Office of Institutional Effectiveness.
Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report School Accreditation Bayard Public Schools November 8, 2011.
© 2014 Public Health Institute PROPOSAL WRITING.
Trini Torres-Carrion. AGENDA Overview of ED 524B Resources Q&A.
Developing Earmark Grant Performance Measures: Grant Proposal Section 3 Deanna Khemani.
Performance Monitoring and Evaluation: Site Visits, Reporting, and the Government Performances and Results Act FY07 REMS Initial Grantee Meeting December.
1 Susan Weigert, Project Officer GSEGs Overview of GSEG Management.
Centers for International Business Education—Technical Assistance.
ORC TA: Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant Program HRSA U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Health Resources & Services Administration.
The mission of the Office of Migrant Education is to provide excellent leadership, technical assistance, and financial support to improve the educational.
Webinar April 19, 2011 HazMat Grant Program: HMEP Application Guidance Overview and Explanation of the Sample Application for the HMEP Grant Program for.
Prevention-Mitigation Fiscal Year 2010 Initial Grantee Meeting December 8 – 9, 2010, Santa Monica, California Arthur Cummins Director Safe and Healthy.
Grant Management Seminar 1 District 7950 Grant Management Seminar.
The County Health Rankings & Roadmaps Take Action Cycle.
Final Reports, No-Cost Extensions and Close Outs FY06 ERCM Final Grantee Meeting August 4, 2007, Washington, DC U.S. Department of Education, Office of.
Learning Outcomes Assessment in WEAVEonline
The Evaluation Plan.
Toolkit Series from the Office of Migrant Education Webinar: Program Evaluation Toolkit August 9, 2012.
Slide 1 D2.TCS.CL5.04. Subject Elements This unit comprises five Elements: 1.Define the need for tourism product research 2.Develop the research to be.
Overview of the SPDG Competition Jennifer Doolittle, Ph.D. 1.
Strategic Planning Session David Rudder, Ph.D. Rudder Consultants, LLC. May 17, 2006.
Fundamentals of Evaluation for Public Health Programs ROBERT FOLEY, M.ED. NIHB TRIBAL PUBLIC HEALTH SUMMIT MARCH 31,
Course on Data Analysis and Interpretation P Presented by B. Unmar Sponsored by GGSU PART 2 Date: 5 July
ADM 677 Crisis Management in Educational Settings Karen McCuiston Kentucky Center For School Safety.
1 PROJECT EVALUATION IT’S ALL ABOUT STUDENTS. 2 In partnership, we help America’s students stay in school and graduate by: Reducing gaps in college access.
Charter School 2015 Annual Finance Seminar Grant Management Office of Grants Fiscal September 11, 2015.
IES Statistical and Research Methodology in Education Grant Program (84.305D) 2010 Program Meeting.
AdvancED District Accreditation Process © 2010 AdvancED.
General Grant Writing Tips. Research the problem/need and the program before beginning the grant proposal Review research on similar problems/needs and.
SIG Day 2009 Jennifer Doolittle OSEP July 20, 2009.
Office of Special Education Programs U.S. Department of Education GRANT PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR CONTINUATION FUNDING.
Tracking national portfolios and assessing results Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in West and Central Africa June 2008, Douala, Cameroon.
1 EMS Fundamentals An Introduction to the EMS Process Roadmap AASHTO EMS Workshop.
District Accreditation Completing the Standards Assessment Report July 20, 2010.
Monitoring Afghanistan, 2015 Food Security and Agriculture Working Group – 9 December 2015.
School Development Goal Development “Building a Learning Community”
Welcome and Introduction Emergency Management for Schools June 4-5, 2008 ~ San Francisco, California U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug-Free.
Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report School Accreditation Sugar Grove Elementary September 29, 2010.
1 SPDG Jennifer Coffey 323A State Personnel Development Grants SPDG Webinar on Grant Performance Report for Continuation Funding Jennifer Coffey Office.
WASH Rotary Grants District 5450 WASH Global Grants 1 Presented by Carolyn Schrader.
1 DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS TO ENSURE STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES RECEIVE A QUALITY HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Performance Measurement, Program and Project Evaluation.
ACF Office of Community Services (OCS) Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Survey of Grantees Satisfaction with OCS Survey of Eligible Entities Satisfaction.
[Presentation location] [Presentation date] (Confirm ABT logo) Building Bridges and Bonds (B3): An introduction.
Selection Criteria and Invitational Priorities School Leadership Program U.S. Department of Education 2005.
Tier 1 Positive Behavior Support Response to Intervention for Behavior Faculty Overview.
GRANT PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR CONTINUATION FUNDING FY 2013 Office of Special Education Programs U.S. Department of Education.
Developing a Monitoring & Evaluation Plan MEASURE Evaluation.
Rose Ann M. Renteria, PhD, MPA AED Center for Health Communication No. 847 (Government Evaluation TIG) Session: Think Tank Room Texas A.
Closing Session Emergency Management for Schools June 4-5, 2008 ~ San Francisco, California U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug-Free.
325K: COMBINED PRIORITY FOR PERSONNEL PREPARATION Webinar on the Annual Performance Report for Continuation Funding Office of Special Education Programs.
Disaster and Emergency Planning
Tara Hill and Sara Strizzi
Presentation transcript:

Evaluation, Government Performance and Results Act and Performance Reports FY06 ERCM Initial Grantee Meeting December 7, 2006, San Antonio, TX U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools 400 Maryland Avenue, SW / Washington, DC Tara Hill Michelle Sinkgraven Sara Strizzi Program Analysts, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools

2 Session Objectives Review the importance of evaluation Discuss key evaluation components Discuss creating performance measures and an evaluation plan Highlight the Emergency Response and Crisis Management (ERCM) Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) measures for FY 2006 grantees Explain how to collect data and report on the GPRA measures on the ED 524B form

3 Why Evaluate ERCM Projects? Because evaluation…. Is a way to gather school-based and community data to help improve emergency management plans Uncovers new information or consequences that were not anticipated Involves multiple stakeholders in the process and creates buy-in for emergency management planning

4 What Evaluation Does… Determines if a grant project is accomplishing the performance objectives Supports decision-making in the district and community Provides data for communicating to stakeholders the benefits and purpose of the emergency management plan Builds a knowledge base about what does and does not work in an emergency management plan Helps the U.S. Department of Education report on progress

5 What Evaluation Does NOT Do… Attempt to judge a program, project, or school system subjectively Aim to represent a false picture of program success for administrators or funders

6 Creating an ERCM Evaluation Plan: Key Components Key questions to consider Who will conduct your evaluation? Who are the key stakeholders in your grant project and your overall emergency management efforts? Have you captured the appropriate data at the beginning of your project? What are your key project objectives?

7 Reviewing Project Objectives ERCM grant objectives Project-specific objectives and performance measures Drawn from needs assessment As reflected in grant applications Based on individual school and district issues Government Performance and Results Act measures

8 Project-Specific Objectives & Performance Measures Project Objective: A specific, measurable statement about what the project will achieve. Hint: Start the objective with the word "To" followed by a verb. For example, "To increase the number of bus drivers trained in CPR from 5 bus drivers to 25 bus drivers.

9 Project-Specific Objectives & Performance Measures (continued) Performance Measure: A value or characteristic that can be used to determine the extent to which the objective has been achieved. For example, the # of bus drivers trained in CPR between September 1, 2006-March 31, 2008.

10 Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) What is GPRA? Purpose of the GPRA ED's response to GPRA GPRA measures for the ERCM Program Measure 1 Measure 2 Measure 3

11 What is GPRA? The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 requires all federal agencies to manage activities with attention to outcomes. Agencies must: State intended accomplishments Identify the resources required Periodically report to Congress

12 Purpose of the GPRA Continuous monitoring of program outcomes results in: Improved accountability for expenditures using public funds Informed Congressional decision making through use of objective information Government focus on results

13 U.S. Department of Education's Response to GPRA Develop a strategic plan for Plan reflects the Department's goals and priorities Department goals: Goal 1: Create a Culture of Achievement Goal 2: Improve Student Achievement Goal 3: Develop Safe Schools and Strong Character Goal 4: Transform Education into an Evidence-based Field Goal 5: Enhance the Quality of and Access to Postsecondary and Adult Education Goal 6: Establish Management Excellence

14 What are the ERCM GPRA Measures? Measure 1: Demonstration of increased number of hazards addressed by the improved school emergency response plan as compared to the baseline plan. Measure 2: Demonstration of improved response time and quality of response to practice drills and simulated crises. Measure 3: A plan for, and commitment to, the sustainability and continuous improvement of school emergency response plans by the district and community partners beyond the period of Federal financial assistance.

15 Measure 1 Demonstration of increased number of hazards addressed by the improved school emergency response plan as compared to the baseline plan.

16 Measure 1: Increased Number of Hazards Definitions: Hazards: Broadly defined as potential threats to the school / school district whose date or time of occurrence cannot be predicted. Examples include: Terrorist attack Tornado Earthquake Chemical spill Unlawful entry by unlawful person Criminal activity Addressed: Written plan is in place that responds to hazards Baseline plan: Emergency plan in place prior to grant award date

17 Data Needed for Measure 1 Number of hazards addressed by the improved school emergency plan Number of hazards addressed by the baseline plan Measure can include information on number of hazards at the district level and at the school level

18 Completing the 524B Sample scenario: ABC School District had a basic emergency plan in place prior to the grant that addressed fires, tornadoes, and unlawful entry. At the end of the grant, the district addressed three additional hazards: terrorist attack, bomb threat, and active shooter.

19 Completing the 524B Box 1.a. Performance Measure: Number of hazards addressed by the improved school emergency response plan as compared to the baseline plan. Measure Type: GPRA Quantitative Data: Step 1: Enter 999 in all data fields Step 2: Provide numerical answers to each of the following in the "Explanation of Progress" section:  Number of hazards addressed in original (baseline) plan  Number of hazards addressed in final plan  Number of additional hazards addressed by final plan  Formula: # of hazards in final plan - # of hazards in baseline plan

20 Completing the 524B Form Additional information to include in the "Explanation of Progress" section: Provide a narrative that explains what the numbers mean and how they were calculated. Be specific and list additional hazards that have been addressed. Describe any barriers that prevented you from meeting your goal, if applicable.

21 FAQs Can I count facilities improvements as hazards that my school/school district has addressed? What if our district did not include funds to address hazards that were uncovered in our vulnerability assessment? Do I need to report school-by-school data on the 524B? My application is for a consortium of school districts. How should I report data for this measure—do I aggregate or report on a district- by-district basis?

22 Measure 2 Demonstration of improved response time and quality of response to practice drills and simulated crises.

23 Measure 2: Improved Response Time and Quality of Response Definitions: Response Time: The number of minutes and seconds it takes to respond to a practice drill or simulated crisis. The type of response depends on the type of drill staged. Drills include, but are not limited to: Fire drill Lockdown Community-wide emergency response drill Hazardous weather drill Active shooter drill Shelter-in-place drill Evacuation

24 Measure 2: Improved Response Time and Quality of Response Definitions, continued: Demonstration of improved response time: A quantifiable decrease in the amount of time it took to respond to a practice drill or simulated crisis that was staged at the beginning of the performance period and the end of the performance period. Quality of response: To respond to this portion of the measure, attach a copy of the after-action report for each drill and clearly state what has been done to make improvements in quality.

25 Data Needed for Measure 2 Response time: Baseline (Drill #1): Response time to drill conducted at the beginning of the performance period or before the grant was awarded. Drill #2: Response time (to same type of drill) at the end of the performance period. Quality of response: A thorough narrative description of the drills documenting lessons learned and a plan for addressing any shortcomings. Attach an after-action report for each drill.

26 Completing the 524B Sample scenario: ABC School District conducted a tornado drill. An after-action report highlighted confusion about designated safe areas. In response to the report, students were briefed and shelter-in-place signs were hung around school. A few months later, a second tornado drill was conducted. The after-action report attributed the 3 minute, 16 second reduced response time to the changes implemented from the lessons learned in the first (baseline) drill.

27 Completing the 524B Box 1.a. Performance Measure: Demonstration of improved response time and quality of response to practice drills and simulated crises. Measure Type: GPRA Quantitative Data: Step 1: Enter 999 in all data fields Step 2: Provide numerical answers to each of the following in the "Explanation of Progress" section:  Actual time for drill #1 (baseline drill)  Goal (target) time for drill #2  Actual time for drill #2  Difference between drill time #1 and drill time #2

28 Completing the 524B Additional information to include in the "Explanation of Progress" section: Provide a narrative for the data provided, explaining what the numbers mean and how they were calculated Be specific, include information about what went right and wrong and how times were calculated Provide the rationale for the drill #2 goal/target and when it was established (I.e. upon completion of drill #1) Describe any barriers that prevented you from meeting the goal for drill #2, if applicable Include a qualitative analysis of each drill, such as an after- action report

29 FAQs Do I need to compare similar types of drills for reporting purposes? Does my first (baseline) drill need to occur during the grant performance period or can we use data from a prior drill or simulation? What if our grant application specifies running a variety of drills only once? Can I report on community-wide crisis drills?

30 Measure 3 A plan for, and commitment to, the sustainability and continuous improvement of school emergency response plans by the district and community partners beyond the period of Federal financial assistance.

31 Measure 3: Plan for and Commitment to Sustainability and Continuous Improvement Definitions: Plans: The emergency management plan developed under the ERCM grant.

32 Data Needed for Measure 3 Provide the answer to the following question: "Do we have a plan for, and commitment to, the sustainability and continuous improvement of school emergency response plans by our district and community partners beyond the period of Federal financial assistance?" A simple "yes" or "no" is not sufficient. A copy of the plan should be provided with your final report. In addition, an objective analysis of whether or not the plan meets this measure should be provided.

33 Completing the 524B Box 1.a. Performance Measure: A plan for, and commitment to, the sustainability and continuous improvement of school emergency response plans by our district and community partners beyond the period of Federal financial assistance. Measure Type: GPRA Quantitative Data: Target, Raw Number: YES Actual, Raw Number: YES, if your district has met this standard. If not, NO.

34 Completing the 524B Explanation of Progress: Provide a detailed answer to the question, "Do we have a plan for, and commitment to, the sustainability and continuous improvement of school emergency response plans by our district and community partners beyond the period of Federal financial assistance?" Provide proof of your plan. This could include, but is not limited to, the following:  Copies of updated Partner Agreements  Timelines/agenda for upcoming community partner meetings/drills after the grant period is over  Your district's completed emergency plan

35 FAQs Do I need to submit a copy of my district's completed emergency plan with my final report? What are some ways a district might demonstrate sustainability? Do I need to submit signed copies of all Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) at the conclusion of the grant period?

36 QUESTIONS