Plan an honest evaluation

Plan an honest evaluation — guided practice

Choose a measure and denominator that match the outcome.

Reset facts for the fictional proposal: River Learning Fund accepts registered community nonprofits, a request up to $1,500, six weeks and 20 local learners; it prioritizes accessible evening participation. It requires a narrative of at most 400 words, budget, measurable outcome and evaluation plan by June 30 at 17:00. Bridge Club is a fictional registered nonprofit. Its survey invited 40 members and received 24 responses: 16 preferred evenings and 8 reported transport costs as a barrier; those groups may overlap and are not a town-wide sample. Proposed project: six evening sessions across six weeks for 20 learners. Target: at least 16 of 20 enrolled learners pass all three assessment tasks by the final session. Budget: materials $200, transport $400, facilitator $600, access supports $200, evaluation $100, total $1,500. Fictional program assessment checklist: T1 Schedule a 30-minute meeting when Mina is free 09:00–10:00 and Omar is free 09:30–10:30; pass only for 09:30–10:00, within both availability windows. T2 Compare 10 folders: Alpha $2 each plus $5 delivery; Beta $2.20 each plus $1 delivery; no other charges or differences. Pass only when both totals ($25 and $23) and lower-cost choice Beta are correct. T3 Draft a confirmation from record B7: Elm room, June 18, 10:00–11:00, 8 attendees. Pass only when the ID, room, date, full time span and headcount all match. Overall demonstration success requires all three task passes. The same task criteria are used at entry and at the final session; record each task as Pass, Retry or Missing using a fictional learner ID. These are supplied assessment cards and answer criteria, not activities with real participants. Use a text editor, a free document editor, or paper. Start from the following fictional records; they reset this lesson even if your earlier answer differed. Outcome target: 16 of 20 enrolled learners demonstrate three tasks by final session. Proposed method: use the same three-task checklist at entry and end, record anonymous IDs and dates, count success only when all three tasks are demonstrated. Fictional pilot for practice: 20 enrolled, 16 completed the final check, 14 met all three tasks. Four missing final checks are recorded as missing, not assumed successful.

1. 1. Align the checklist

   Name the required performance unit.

   You should see: One learner succeeds only when all three tasks are demonstrated.

   A common criterion supports comparable judgments.

2. 2. Choose denominator

   Use enrolled learners for the target rate.

   You should see: 14 of 20 = 70%.

   Changing to completers would answer a different question.

3. 3. Report missing data

   Record four missing final checks separately.

   You should see: 4 missing; reasons not inferred.

   Missing records cannot be silently converted to success.

4. 4. Compare with target

   Compare the pilot count 14 with target 16.

   You should see: Target missed by 2 learners; investigate barriers and instruction.

   Honest results can guide improvement even when a target is missed.