Arizona Cooperative Extension Proposal Requests - Working Group Award

Title:		Program Evaluation Research and Support
Program Area(s):		Family, 4-H, Youth & Community Human Nutrition, Health & Food Safety Environment, Water, Land & Natural Resources Plant Systems
County affiliate(s):		Cochise - Kim McReynolds Cochise - Susan Pater Gila - Sabrina Tuttle Greenlee - Melvina Adolf Maricopa - Kai Umeda Maricopa - Monica Pastor Maricopa - Patty Merk Maricopa - Sharon Hoelscher Day Pima - Dan McDonald Pinal - Rick Gibson
On-campus or Experiment Station affiliate(s):		Ag Education - Jack Elliot Entomology - Dawn Gouge Extension Administration - Lisa Lauxman Extension Administration - Sheila Merrigan Maricopa AC - Al Fournier Natural Resources - George Ruyle Norton School - Lynne Borden Other: Nancy Crocker, Water Resources, Maricopa Co.
Lead Faculty:		Maricopa AC - Al Fournier
This Working Group was previously funded:		Yes
	University fiscal year:	FY2007
This Working Group is connected to a State Initiative:		No
	Which one?
Budget amount requested (up to $2,000.00):		$1,200.00
Budget amount approved (up to $2,000.00):		$1,200.00
Situation/issue: Program evaluation (PE) is central to effective programplanning, improvement and documentation of program outcomes and impacts.Ability to track and communicate program impacts (e.g., on APRs) also affectsfaculty member s professional success. Many grant applications require aneffective plan for evaluation and the ability to identify and measure(quantitative and qualitative) indicators of program success. However, mostextension specialists and county agents are subject experts, and few havetraining or expertise in effective PE research methods. Furthermore, withlimited program resources available, faculty may find it difficult to dedicatesufficient time and money into evaluation processes. Currently, there is nofull-time specialist in evaluation at CALS. There is a need for some level offaculty support to help improve program evaluation practices. A core group of existing faculty with experience andinterest in program evaluation formed a working group in 2006 to begin toaddress these issues. In its first year of funding, the multidisciplinaryProgram Evaluation Research and Support (PERS) working group conducted anonline program evaluation needs assessment of Extension faculty statewide. Dataindicate that the majority of responding faculty (53%) feel it is veryimportant to improve their PE skills.
Inputs including budget: * Time and energy of working group members, and of specialists and agents participating in needs assessment and otherwise providing input to the working group. * $1,200 in working group funds is requested to support WG meetings (travel and logistics), professional develop opportunities and other potential expenses related to desired outcomes.
Outputs: Planned Activities, 2008-2009: * Conduct 2 working group meetings (one face-to-face meeting, additional meetings may be via conference technology). Email and telephone communications to support WG activities. * It is clear that a wealth of existing resources are available for Extension program evaluation, including tools from other land grants and resources developed in-house by many of us for our individual programs. Our group will coordinate with other faculty to organize and corral these resources onto a single clearinghouse website as an educational outcome. The website will include specific examples from our own faculty as well as links to nationally recognized needs assessment and evaluation resources. The group will further discuss strategies for increasing faculty awareness of program evaluation and strategies for supporting these efforts. We will continue to communicate and partner with Professional Development Working Group as needed to ensure complimentary function and no duplication of efforts. Participation: The initial target audience for our efforts is CALS Extension faculty, including campus and county faculty working in all departments and disciplines. Ultimately, program participants and other stakeholders will benefit from program improvements.
State at least one educational product: As an organization, we lack dedicated personnel to support program evaluation practice among extension faculty. Our major focus for this year will be on the assessment of program development and evaluation tools, resources, examples and links that will be organized and made available on a general program evaluation website for Extension. This will include but expand on existing resources currently available through the Program Development and Assessment website. The availability of program evaluation tools, examples and models will be a valuable asset to encourage and enhance evaluation of extension programs.
Short-term outcomes: * Tools and resources for effective program evaluation will be evaluated by the PERS WG and other faculty and made available to faculty by posting them on a single website. * Increased faculty awareness of PE benefits and of the working group as a resource to support PE efforts; this will occur as a result of communications from our group about our activities and resources (as developed). * Enhanced collaboration between campus and county faculty on issues related to PE. * Opportunities for working group members to share ideas and serve as a sounding board for program evaluation design and implementation issues.
Medium-term outcomes: * Availability of PE tools/templates and resources and their use by faculty will help increase the frequency, quality, and usefulness of program evaluation and help generate measurable outcomes and impacts. * Educational activities will enhance faculty skill in PE and improve documentation & communication of program outcomes and impacts. * Clientele will benefit from improved programs. * Improved documentation will aid CALS administrators and program leaders in federal reporting.