1. Performance and Progress 2005/2006

2. Introduction  Data collected during 2005/2006 fiscal year.  Who did our programs serve?  Did programs reach the intended populations?  Did programs meet service goals?  Did children and families meet outcome goals?  Lessons learned.

3. Service Data  Children’s Investment Fund programs served 12,179 children and 3,124 parents/caregivers during the last fiscal year.  Programs exceeded service goals and served 13% more children than projected.

4. Who Did We Serve? Gender and Age Group  Programs served roughly the same number of boys and girls.  School aged children (age 9-15) make up the majority served (51%).

5. Who Did We Serve? Race/Ethnicity

6. Who Did We Serve? Primary Language

7. Who Did We Serve? Poverty Level

8. Outcome Data Outcome Goal Areas: Early Childhood and Child Abuse –Child development –Child health –Parenting/family functioning –Child stability and welfare Outcome Goal Areas: After- School and Mentoring –School attendance –School behavior –Academic achievement –Developmental assets

9. Outcome Data Limitations  The data we are reporting are descriptive, not causative.  Many data points provide information on progress made while children are enrolled.  Percentages reported apply only to the portion of programs tracking the outcome and those clients who met a participation threshold.  64% the children served met participation thresholds set by grantees for outcome tracking.

10. Early Childhood and Child Abuse Program Data  Grantees needed technical assistance in data collection and reporting.  Gathering Data: Technical Assistance Project with Portland State University.

11. Child Development  80% of children screened met developmental milestones.  20% who were not on track made progress on meeting milestones while enrolled. 78% of these children were referred to additional services.  Children screened showed the most risk in language/ communication development.

12. Child Health  86% of children screened for current immunizations were up to date.  84% of children were screened for health and wellness needs.

13. Parenting and Family Functioning  85% of parents increased social supports.  83% of parents increased appropriate parenting practices.  77% of parents increased knowledge of ways to manage child behavior.  93% of parents increased knowledge of child development.  79% of parents increased appropriate parent-child interactions.

14. Child Stability and Welfare  99% of children attending child care centers or preschools with access to mental health counselors were not removed from care due to behavioral problems.  97% of families who were referred to the child abuse hotline for suspected abuse or neglect were not re-reported within 90 days of completing services.  91% of children experienced an increase in stability.

15. After-School and Mentoring Program Data  82% of identified program participants attended Portland Public Schools.  PPS, David Douglas, Reynolds and Centennial School Districts all provided data on academic achievement variables.  PPS also provided data on attendance, behavior variables, and progress on grades.

16. School Attendance (PPS Only)  49% of program participants improved school attendance in the 2005/2006 school year.  74% of program participants attended 90% of school days.

17. School Behavior (PPS Only)  79% of program participants decreased behavior referrals  64% of program participants decreased serious behavior referrals (those that resulted in a suspension or expulsion)

18. Academic Achievement: Grades (PPS Only)  33% improved reading/English grades  31% improved math grades

19. Academic Achievement: Percentage of Students Meeting State Standards in Reading and Math (All Districts Reporting) Subject2004/052005/06 Reading/English74.9%77.8% Math72.8%75.3%

20. Academic Achievement: Percentage of Students Moving to a Higher Performance Category (All Districts Reporting)  34% of program participants moved to a higher performance category in reading or stayed at “exceeds.”  38% of program participants moved to a higher performance category in math or stayed at “exceeds.”

21. Academic Achievement: Progress toward Meeting State Standards (PPS Only)  Of the students who were not meeting state standards in reading, 52% moved to a higher performance category.  Of the students who were not meeting state standards in math, 53% moved to a higher performance category.

22. Outcome Data Analysis  First year of data collection for many grantees.  First year results will assist grantees in making future outcome projections for their program participants.  Technical assistance necessary when grantees must gather, analyze and report data.  Need for strategies to increase level of participation in programs.

23. Considerations for the Future  Need for common intermediate outcomes for after-school and mentoring programs.  CHIF would need to provide technical assistance to help after-school and mentoring programs to collect, analyze and report data on intermediate outcomes.  SUN system task force is considering joint evaluation strategies.