Final Evaluation Report 2013

1. Final Evaluation Report2013

2. Purpose This evaluation was done to ensure accountability for its delivery. Accountability includes meeting program objectives and evaluating the effectiveness of the program. One main purpose of accountability measures is to identify successes and failures of the performance of a program.

3. Evaluation Findings: The findings of this evaluation can be used to: • Strengthen relationships; • Strengthen the project design and delivery; • Maintain a record of the project’s progress; and, report on the project’s outcomes to other stakeholders

4. Introduction/Statistics: • 16 Ready for School sessions ran from April 2012- August 2013 • 9 schools (locations) • Number of parent/caregivers = 239 • Number of children = 217 • Number of siblings = 100

5. Methodology: • Data Sources: The data for analysis in this study comes from quantitative and qualitative methods: • 202 Pre/Post Evaluation reports (completed by parents/caregivers who participated in the two-week sessional of the program) 85% Response rate. • 16 Parent Focus Group Surveys (average of 12 parents in each group) • 10 Partner Surveys • 3 Staff Focus Group Survey (19 staff members in total)

6. Methodology: Quantitative Data Pre/Post Parent Evaluation survey results: • What affect does RfSC activities have on the parents’/caregivers’ perceptions of: a) their children’s behaviour (level of independence in completing a task) associated with school readiness, and b) their own knowledge of existing support systems (Canadian School System).

7. Methodology: Quantitative Data • Pre/Post Parent Evaluation survey (Part 1): • Please circle the child’s current level of independence in completing the following tasks: Evaluation Scale: 1 - Adult does for child -------------------------------10 - child does on their own

8. Methodology: Quantitative Data Pre/Post Parent Evaluation survey (Part 2): • Please circle your current level of knowledge on the Canadian School System: Evaluation Scale: 1 – I don’t know anything about this topic -----------10 – Very Knowledgeable

9. Methodology: Quantitative Data Evaluation Process: • Values were assembled in a data spreadsheet. • Comparison was performed to measure the difference between the pre and post program responses. • Simple statistical operations like average and percentage were used. For example, for the task: Separates from parent without getting upsetif: Pre-evaluation =5 Post evaluation = 10 Difference =50% improvement in this behaviour

10. Methodology: Qualitative Data • Qualitative Data Tools: • Parent/Caregiver Focus Groups (202); • Community Partners Questionnaire (10) • Staff Questionnaire/Focus Group(19) • Follow-up Phone calls (50)

11. Methodology: Qualitative Data • Parent Focus Group Questions: • 6 questions in the areas of: • Location/hours • Program Staff • Parent Workshops • Children’s program • Changes in child’s behaviour over the 2 week session • Parent/Caregiver connections

12. Methodology: Qualitative Data • Community Partners Questionnaire: • 6 questions in the area of: • Overall experience with RfSC • Communication between RfSC and your agency/school • Feedback from parents • Challenges experienced as a partner • Improvements for next year • Dream/vision for RfSC?

13. Methodology: Qualitative Data • Staff Questionnaire and Focus Group: • Questions in the area of: • Suggestions for next year with respect to training • Most important thing children learned • Suggestions to increase independence, communication and social skills • Most useful part of the program for parents • Experience with our community partners • Dream for Ready for School Connects

14. Methodology: Qualitative Data • Evaluation process: • All surveys/questionnaires were analyzed. • Emerging trends were established. • Trends were interpreted to measure the effectiveness of the RfSC program and its activities.

15. Findings Quantitative Data: Pre/Post Parent Evaluation Surveys: • Impact on Children: • An overall average of 79% of parent/caregivers reported an increase in level of independence after participating in RfSC activities. • Highest increase was 95% which was found at Oakridge. • Lowest overall average was 53% increase which was found at Crescent Town Session 4. • Subtask: Separating from Parents - parents reported seeing the most improvement in their children.

16. Findings: Percentage of parents reporting increase in level of independence: Continued next page->

17. Findings: (Con’d) Percentage of parents reporting increase in level of independence:

18. Findings

19. Findings

20. Findings: Change in level of independence: Separating from Parents

21. Findings: Quantitative Data: Pre/Post Parent Evaluation Surveys: • Impact on Parent/caregiver: • 78% of parents/caregivers reported an increase in knowledge in Canadian School System after participating in RfSC workshops. • Highest average increase - 96% (Pauline PS) • Lowest average increase - 55%(Rose Ave session 1) • Subtask: Importance of parent involvement – reported as most improved – 25%

22. Findings Parents/caregivers reported an increase in their knowledge of the Canadian School System at the end of the two-week RfSC session.

23. Findings

24. Findings Change in level of knowledge of Importance of Parent Involvement

25. Recommendations Overall RfSC Program: • Better outreach/promotion plan: • provide the school with a detailed information package about RfSC. • hold an orientation session for all stakeholders (School secretary, Vice-Principal, EY/Family & Parenting centers staff, Daycare staff, etc.) to attend.

26. Recommendations: Children’s Programming: • Staff recommended taking the time to establish rapport with community partners especially when it involves sharing a common space. • discuss expectations, and possibly draw up a mutually fulfilling contract that all parties can agree upon. • i.e.. Availability of indoor space and outdoor space, room setup, use of equipment/materials, etc. Make sure both parties are communicating and checking in regularly with one another to ensure expectations are being met.

27. Recommendations Parent/Caregiver Workshops • Both workshop facilitators and parents/caregivers have reported that the time allotted for the workshops is not sufficient for the amount of information that needs to be covered. • Presenters should ask participants prior to presenting what they would like to know. By customizing the presentation to the needs and interests of the participants, • allow them plenty of time to ask questions.

28. Recommendations • Parents prefer presentation style that is interactive, stimulating, lots of visual materials • Standardize presentation workshops to provide all presenters at all locations with an outline/template of an effective structure to delivering an interactive workshop

29. Recommendations Program Evaluation improvements: • Staff members can discontinue completing the Pre/post Evaluation form for children due to the difference in perspective being negligible.

30. Recommendations Kindergarten Teacher Post-Program Survey: • This evaluation tool was introduced this year in order to provide additional follow up information from the perspective of the children’s kindergarten teacher they were placed in September. • tool was not implemented uniformly across all locations and it was quite challenging to get back completed surveys from the kindergarten teacher. • strategies/methods in obtaining this critical information should be investigated further.

31. Recommendations (Lastly…) Partner Survey: • Tool could undergo a transformation: • Include an area that identifies the respondent’s role (i.e.. Principal, workshop facilitator, OEYC Manager, teacher, etc.) • Should be reviewed from the perspective of different respondents to see which questions are applicable to which role.

32. Follow – up check-ins with Families: • Data analyzed was from 44 families(four school locations: Danforth Gardens, Oakridge, Carlton Village, and Pauline) • 78%response rate • 92% of parents reported having no concerns with their child’s school, teacher or classmates. • The most important things families learned: • Canadian School System • School Expectations and Routines • Nutrition • Dealing with Separation • Behaviour Management

33. Follow – up findings: Cont’d • 70 % of parents accessed recommended services or resources. • 66% of families visited their local library. • 68% of families were connected to either local recreational programs at community centers or participated in OEYC. • 52% of parents still see/interact with other families from the program.

34. Recommendations for future follow-up work: • Utilize standardized questions that are asked at all locations. Ensure the same questions are being asked at every location. • Ensure questions are being responded to correctly and completely. When asking parents the questions, read each question carefully, record the response, then reread the question to make the question was responded to correctly. i.e.. How is your child adjusting? Were you able to access any of the services or resources that were recommended to you this summer? Which ones? • Explore ways to increase family participation in accessing resources that were recommended to them in the summer program.