Jump to:Page Content
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Deborah Morgan of KIDS COUNT describes how the initiative used an integrated self-assessment evaluation design to incorporate strategic communications into its long-term vision to improve child well-being.
Sarah Brown, Director of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, describes the unique way in which the Campaign has enlisted the support of “unusual suspects” in its efforts to improve child well-being and reduce child poverty.
HFRP offers the Covering Kids strategic communications campaign as an example of how a strategic communications campaign can be strengthened by using a research and evaluation framework.
The Fall 2000 issue, the first of a series of two dedicated to the field of out-of-school time and after school, addresses the challenges and possibilities for evaluating after school programs in the new era of accountability. The issue includes an interview with National Institute on Out-of-School Time founder Michelle Seligson, articles relating on-the-ground experiences with evaluation, and our new column, “Ask the Expert.”
HFRP provides a quick run-down of 12 current out-of-school time program evaluations.
An introduction to the first issue on Out-of-School Time by HFRP's Founder & Director, Heather B. Weiss, Ed.D.
Linda Lausell Bryant, Director of Training at Partnership for After School Education, describes their New York City-based coalition committed to quality after school programs.
The New & Noteworthy section features an annotated list of papers, organizations, initiatives, and other resources related to the issue's theme of Out-of-School Time.
Karen Horsch and Kathleen Hart of HFRP summarize HFRP's conversations with after school evaluators, researchers, and stakeholders to map the out-of-school time field.
HFRP asked Michelle Seligson, founder of the National Institute on Out-of-School Time, about the history of the out-of-school time field, the challenges it currently faces, and the role evaluation and research play.
Laurie Olsen, Executive Director California Tomorrow, highlights the importance of addressing issues of access and equity in the evaluation of after school programs.
Using a participatory/empowerment evaluation approach with Save the Children, Linda Morrell and Kenneth Terao from the Aguirre Group offer reflections and lessons learned from their experience.
Karen Walker, director of community studies at Public/Private Ventures (P/PV), reveals what evaluation approaches can be used to understand the connection between academic outcomes and program activities.
These Web documents were produced by HFRP as part of its initial efforts to “map” the out-of-school time field, and detail federal funding streams for out-of-school time programs and related programming alongside their accountability requirements and evaluations. A summary section offers a narrative description of each funding stream. Funding streams are classified as major or minor depending on the amount of money they make available for out-of-school time efforts.
Free. Available online only.
The out-of-school time field has grown rapidly over the past decade, with a constant influx of new voices and approaches. This publication is a summary, but far from a complete review, of organizations active in out-of-school time, grouped by topical area.
Free. Available online only.
Ellen Taylor-Powell from the University of Wisconsin-Cooperative Extension examines the challenges of collaboratives, and how they stretch us to think about evaluation in new ways.
Michael Scriven, past president of the American Evaluation Association, shares some of his insights about the challenges facing evaluation, evaluation as a distinct discipline, and links between evaluation and practice, including organizational learning.
Julia Coffman of Harvard Family Research Project writes about using a logic model approach to evaluate a large and diverse foundation initiative.
This issue of The Evaluation Exchange includes several articles on methodological topics, particularly those involving complex initiatives or problems. Topics inlcude the logic model approach to evaluate large and diverse foundation initiatives, the difference between cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis, the challenges to evaluation in the coming years, and community action research.
Donna Peterson, Mary Marczak, Sherry Betts, and Erik Earthman, The University of Arizona Institute for Children, Youth and Families, write about their evaluation of the Children, Youth and Families At Risk (CYFAR) National Initiative.
An introduction to the first issue on Methodology by HFRP's Founder & Director, Heather B. Weiss, Ed.D.
Jill Chopyak, Executive Director of the Loka Institute, details her organization's work on community action research.
James Edwin Kee, professor at George Washington University, discusses the purposes, strengths, and limitations of benefit-cost and cost-effectiveness analyses to determine the relative costs and benefits of the programs.
JuNelle Harris of Harvard Family Research Project reveals the results of the recent satisfaction survey of The Evaluation Exchange readers.
The New and Noteworthy section features an annotated list of papers, organizations, initiatives, and other resources related to the issue's theme of Methodology.