Download
1 / 23
230 likes | 312 Views
Performance and Progress 2006/2007. Data collected during 2006/2007 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. Introduction. Service Data.
E N D
Data collected during 2006/2007 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. Introduction
Service Data • Children’s Investment Fund programs served 15,710 children and 2,712 parents/caregivers during the last fiscal year. • Programs exceeded service goals and served 14% more children than projected.
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%).
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 Outcome Data
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. • 6,644 of the children served (45%) met participation thresholds set by grantees for outcome tracking.
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. • After TA, grantees more effective in data collection and reporting • Data collection and reporting still time consuming and costly for grantees.
Child Development • 82% of children screened met developmental milestones. • 18% who were not on track made progress on meeting milestones while enrolled. 90% of these children were referred to additional services. • Children screened showed the most risk in language/ communication development.
Child Health • 95% of children screened for current immunizations were up to date. • 87% of children were screened for health and wellness needs.
Parenting and Family Functioning • 81% of parents increased social supports. • 73% of parents increased appropriate parenting practices. • 72% of parents increased knowledge of ways to manage child behavior. • 81% of parents increased knowledge of child development. • 86% of parents increased and demonstrated appropriate parent-child interactions.
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. • 93% 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. • 90% of vulnerable children experienced an increase in stability.
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.
School Attendance(PPS Only) • 51% of program participants improved school attendance in the 2006/2007 school year. • 73% of program participants attended 90% of school days.
School Behavior(PPS Only) • 46% of program participants decreased behavior referrals • 68% of program participants decreased serious behavior referrals (those that resulted in a suspension or expulsion)
Academic Achievement:Grades(PPS Only) • 31.4% improved reading/English grades • 26.3% improved math grades
Academic Achievement:Percentage of Students Meeting State Standards in Reading and Math(All Districts Reporting)
Academic Achievement: Percentage of Students Moving to a Higher Performance Category (All Districts Reporting) • 24% of program participants moved to a higher performance category in reading or stayed at “exceeds.” • 26% of program participants moved to a higher performance category in math or stayed at “exceeds.”
Academic Achievement: Progress toward Meeting State Standards(PPS Only) • Of the students who were not meeting state standards in reading, 33% moved to a higher performance category. • Of the students who were not meeting state standards in math, 37% moved to a higher performance category.
Outcome Data Analysis • Technical assistance is necessary when grantees must gather, analyze and report data. • Programs need money, time, and expertise dedicated to program reporting and evaluation. • Need for strategies to increase level of participation in programs.
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. • CHIF should provide ongoing technical assistance to early childhood and child abuse prevention programs for producing high quality program reports. • SUN system task force is considering joint evaluation strategies.
