1 / 24

Florida’s Outcome-Based Evaluation Program

Florida’s Outcome-Based Evaluation Program. Technical Session LSTA Coordinators’ Annual Conference November 16-17, 2000. Access for All: Libraries in Florida’s Future; A Plan for the Continued Development of Florida’s Libraries. Goals: Direct digital Internet access

verne
Download Presentation

Florida’s Outcome-Based Evaluation Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Florida’s Outcome-Based Evaluation Program Technical Session LSTA Coordinators’ Annual Conference November 16-17, 2000

  2. Access for All: Libraries in Florida’s Future;A Plan for the Continued Development of Florida’s Libraries • Goals: • Direct digital Internet access • Telecommunications networks for Florida Library Network • Technology to facilitate distance learning • Address critical issues that impact Florida’s communities

  3. Eligible Types of Libraries • Public Libraries • Multitype Library Cooperatives • Academic Libraries • Special Libraries • School Libraries

  4. Categories for 20000 • Adult or Family Literacy • Born to Read • Library Services to Older Adults • FloriNet Connectivity • Library Automation • Linking Libraries

  5. Categories for 2001 • Access for Persons Having Difficulty Using Libraries • Library Technology Connectivity and Services

  6. TraditionalProject Measurement:

  7. Outcomes Measurement

  8. Sample Common Outcomes • Parents read to their children • Older adults use information to enhance their lives • Older adults learn to use computers • Public uses technology to get information • Public learns to use technology

  9. Indicators • Show that the outcomes have been achieved- “Number of parents who read daily to their children” • Ties to the common outcome- but indicator may be project specific • Each outcome has at least one indicator

  10. Setting Targets • Most programs cannot establish targets in the first year of collecting data • We suggested that only ongoing projects set targets

  11. Training And AssistanceProvided for 2000-2001 • LSTA Grant Writing Workshops • Capacity Building Workshops • Liaison Consulting Assistance

  12. First Year Expectations • Refine outcome models • Tools listed on midyear report • Annual report describing outcomes • Exemplary Project Recognition Program

  13. Timetable for Evaluation • 1st Year logic models not scored • Outcome-based grants began October 2000 • 2nd year grants • Models will be scored • Targets should be set for continuing projects

  14. Evaluation Personnel • State and Federal Grants Office • Research Office • Liaison Consultants’ Role • RFP for outside evaluation

  15. Strategies Timeline • 1998 • Bureau of Library Development gets United Way training • Directors’ Conference Presentation • Florida participates in first IMLS pilot project

  16. Strategies 1999 • OPPAGA Review- liked outcome concept • October Directors’ Conference -- Sadlon and Associates presented program • Born to Read Capacity Building Workshop- each group worked on an outcome plan at workshop

  17. Strategies 2000 • LSTA Grant Writing Workshop- new format and application • Grants submitted in March all had logic models which were not scored but were required • Panel at Directors’ Conference gave positive feedback • November 2000 Capacity Building Workshop

  18. Challenges • Initial resistance from State Library staff • We were comfortable with older goals/objectives and outputs • Concerns: • That it was just another fad • Would be intrusive • Would be more work • Governing agencies would not understand the language

  19. Successes • BLD staff finally understood it • BTR Capacity Building Workshop and Grant Writing workshops were turning points- THE FIELD GOT IT! • Logic model helps grant writing process • Accountability • We know that the programs make a difference!

  20. Our Commitment for Support • Help libraries understand the difference between outputs and outcomes • Help libraries focus on the impact their projects have on the public-their outcomes • Encourage libraries to create the systems needed to measure and use the data

  21. Our Support System • Liaison consultants • work with libraries in their area • Research Office • Survey design and pre-testing • Work on indicators • Continued Workshops

  22. Additional Needs • State Library needs to know what other states are doing • Need ideas for support to libraries and how to make it better

  23. Need for Success: • Support of administration • A champion for the project • Outside help • Nurturing approach for those who apply for grants

More Related