Summative Evaluation Report 2014-2015 · Summative Evaluation Report 2014-2015 Prepared By: Crystal Taylor, M.B.A., Ed.S. CEO/Lead Evaluator ... 29 5.3.7 Objective 7 ..... 30 5.3.8

Summative Evaluation Report 2014-2015

Prepared By: Crystal Taylor, M.B.A., Ed.S. CEO/Lead Evaluator

21st Century Community

Learning Centers

Orange County Public Schools &

Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida –

Hungerford Elementary School

This report was prepared for Orange County Public Schools and the

Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida in regards to their 2014-2015 21st

Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) grant.

The writing contained in this evaluation may not be reproduced, transmitted, published or broadcast without

prior written permission of D & C Education Company, LLC dba EduMatrix. Any questions regarding this

evaluation may be directed to Crystal Taylor, CEO of EduMatrix.

www.edumatrixUSA.org

http://www.edumatrixusa.org/

Orange County Public Schools/Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida (JRL/Hungerford)

Summative Evaluation Report 2014-2015 1

Table of Contents 1.0 Overview and History .......................................................................... 4

2.0 Student Characteristics ..................................................................... 11

2.1 Total Student Enrollment and Attendance ......................................... 11

2.2 Student Demographics ........................................................................ 12

3.0 Program Operations ............................................................................. 14

3.1 Summer Operation .............................................................................. 14

3.2 School Year Operation ......................................................................... 15

4.0 Staff Characteristics ............................................................................. 16

4.1 Staff Demographics .............................................................................. 16

4.2 Student-to-Staff Ratio ......................................................................... 17

4.3 Staff Training ........................................................................................ 17

4.4 Staff Turnover ...................................................................................... 17

4.5 Certified Teachers ................................................................................ 17

5.0 Objectives and Outcomes ................................................................ 18

5.1 Objectives and Activities ...................................................................... 18

5.2 Data Collection Methods ..................................................................... 21

5.2.1 Measures and Data Collected ...................................................... 21

5.2.2 Data Collection Timeline .............................................................. 21

5.2.3 Data Quality ................................................................................. 22

5.2.4 Continuous Assessment ............................................................... 22

5.2.5 Student Inclusion ......................................................................... 22

5.3 Data Analysis and Results: Progress Toward and Achievement of

Objectives ............................................................................................ 23

5.3.1 Objective 1 ................................................................................... 23



5.3.2 Objective 2 ................................................................................... 24

5.3.3 Objective 3 ................................................................................... 25

5.3.4 Objective 4 ................................................................................... 26

5.3.5 Objective 5 ................................................................................... 28

5.3.6 Objective 6 ................................................................................... 29

5.3.7 Objective 7 ................................................................................... 30

5.3.8 Objective 8 ................................................................................... 31

5.3.9 Objective 9 ................................................................................... 32

5.3.10 Objective 10 ............................................................................... 33

5.3.11 Objective 11 ............................................................................... 33

5.3.12 Objective 12 ............................................................................... 34

5.3.13 Objective 13 ............................................................................... 34

5.3.14 Objective 14 ............................................................................... 35

5.4 Other Findings ...................................................................................... 37

5.4.1 Reading Report Card Data ........................................................... 37

5.4.2 Math Report Card Data ............................................................... 39

5.4.3 Science Report Card Data ............................................................ 41

5.4.4 2014 FCAT Reading Data.............................................................. 43

5.4.5 2014 FCAT Math Data .................................................................. 43

5.4.6 Parent Survey Data ...................................................................... 44

5.4.7 Teacher Survey Data .................................................................... 46

5.4.8 Student Survey Data .................................................................... 47

5.5 Student Success Snapshot .................................................................... 48

5.6 Overall Findings for Each Objective ..................................................... 49

5.6.1 Objective 1 ................................................................................... 49

5.6.2 Objective 2 ................................................................................... 49

5.6.3 Objective 3 ................................................................................... 49

5.6.4 Objective 4 ................................................................................... 50

5.6.5 Objective 5 ................................................................................... 50

5.6.6 Objective 6 ................................................................................... 50



5.6.7 Objective 7 ................................................................................... 51

5.6.8 Objective 8 ................................................................................... 51

5.6.9 Objective 9 ................................................................................... 52

5.6.10 Objective 10 ............................................................................... 52

5.6.11 Objective 11 ............................................................................... 52

5.6.12 Objective 12 ............................................................................... 53

5.6.13 Objective 13 ............................................................................... 53

5.6.14 Objective 14 ............................................................................... 53

6.0 Progress Towards Sustainability .................................................. 54

7.0 Lessons Learned and Recommendations ................................. 57



1.0 OVERVIEW AND HISTORY

Introduction

Orange County Public Schools (OCPS)/Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida (BGCCF) received

funding to operate the 21st Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) grant project for the

2014-2015 project year (August 1, 2014 – July 31, 2015), which is the fourth year of the five

year funding period that was initially awarded by the FDOE. This report will include the results

of the Summative Evaluation that was completed for the 2014-2015 21st CCLC project year. The

Summative Evaluation is considered the year-end report and informs the center and other

stakeholders about the progress that has been made during the 2014-2015 project year, while

also driving decision-making regarding program improvement and sustainability. Student

characteristics, program operations, staff characteristics, objectives and outcomes, and the

sustainability plan will be detailed in the report along with a variety of tables and charts that

visually represent relevant program data.

21st Century Community Learning Centers

21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) are funded programs that have to operate in

accordance to what is stated in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) as

amended through Title IV, Part B. According to the RFA for Discretionary Continuation

Programs, Florida Department of Education and the Bureau of Family and Community

Outreach, the purpose of the program funding is to develop and create community learning

centers that provide academic and enrichment opportunities during non-school hours for

children that attend low performing high poverty schools, as well as their families. This

program helps students meet state and local standards in core subjects, including Reading and

Math. It also offers enrichment activities to students that complement the academic program

offerings and provides literacy and education services to the families of children in the program.

Schools (Kindergarten-12th grade) that are eligible for Title I School-Wide Program Services, or

that have at least 40% of students receive free or reduced lunch, are eligible for the

21st CCLC program.

In the ESEA Section 4205(b), 21st CCLC programs must be designed and developed using the

Principles of Effectiveness. This section states that “for a program or activity developed

pursuant to this part to meet the Principles of Effectiveness, such program or activity shall –



(A) Be based upon an assessment of objective data regarding the need for before and after

school programs (including during summer recess periods) and activities in the schools and

communities;

(B) Be based upon an established set of performance measures aimed at ensuring the

availability of high quality academic enrichment opportunities; and

(C) Be based upon scientifically-based research, if appropriate, that provides evidence that the

program or activity will help students meet the state and local student academic achievement

standards. (Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Family and Community Outreach, RFA

for Discretionary Continuation Programs, Project Year 2015-16)

Approved activities for a 21st CCLC program are identified in the ESEA Section 4025(a) which

states, “Each eligible entity that receives an award under this part may use the award funds to

carry out a broad array of before and after school activities (including during summer recess

periods) that advance student academic achievement”, including –

(1) remedial education activities, academic enrichment learning programs, providing additional

assistance to students to allow the students to improve their academic achievement

(2) math and science education activities

(3) arts and music education activities

(4) entrepreneurial education programs

(5) tutoring and mentoring programs

(6) after school activities for LEP students that emphasize language skills and academic

achievement

(7) recreation activities

(8) telecommunications and technology education programs

(9) expanded library service hours

(10) program that promotes parental involvement and family literacy

(11) program that provides assistance to students who have been truant, suspended, or

expelled to allow them to improve their academic achievement

(12) drug and violence prevention programs, counseling programs, and character education

programs. (Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Family and Community Outreach, RFA

for Discretionary Continuation Programs, Project Year 2015-16)



Program Description

The Orange County Public Schools/Boys & Girls Club of Central Florida’s 21st CCLC program was

operated at the Hungerford Elementary School site during the 2014-2015 school year. The

approved after school funding for this site included serving 120 K-5 students after school and 60

students on weekends/holidays. The program was approved to operate for 168 days and 15

hours per week after school. On weekend/holidays, the program was approved to operate for

12 days at 5 hours per day on Saturdays and 11 hours per day on holidays. For the 2014

summer program, this site was open for 36 days serving approximately 120 students per day (K-

5 and middle school students) for 55 hours per week.

For the 2014-2015 project year the 21st CCLC

program at this site targeted 3 key outcome

areas—academic success, good character &

citizenship, and healthy lifestyles.

The program combined the required

academic & personal enrichment

components into relevant learning

experiences for the students by use of

Project-Based Learning (PBL). Four PBL

Project Plans were implemented to help

students improve their core academic

skills—reading/literacy, math, & STEM—while improving their abilities to make healthy choices

regarding risky behaviors, character development, health and nutrition, and sedentary versus

active lifestyles. Adult Family Services provided opportunities for constructive

parenting/personal enrichment skills building.

The Hungerford Elementary School (Title I school) site provided

at-risk students with opportunities for academic enrichment,

personal enrichment and tutorial services to support students in

meeting state and local standards in reading, math and science. All

students in the program were afforded the opportunity to receive all

services and no students were denied admission due to special need

or disability, provided they could be safely accommodated in the

program.

The 21st CCLC program implemented four PBL Projects during the school year. Each PBL

Project’s focus had corresponding themes which were woven throughout all other personal



enrichment activities. Parent events were also integrated into each PBL Project, so parents had

the opportunity to share with their children in all PBL Project end results.

PBL Project #1 (It’s Reigning Cards) gave students the opportunity to join Alice in

Wonderland as she chased the White Rabbit and journeyed into a topsy-turvy world

that got more intriguing with every word and page. This literature experience helped

students generate their own topsy-turvy creation made from playing cards. Students

used Alice’s story to study language arts, learned what puns were, searched the text for

specific words, and more. Additionally, math and engineering engaged students as they

designed and built their own 3-D Card Houses to display for parents. Students also

participated in a Math Game Card Tournament.

PBL Project #2 (A is for

App) allowed students to

explore age-appropriate

apps for reading/literacy,

math, and science

Comprehension to find out

what makes a good app

truly “good”. They

expanded their

organizational and

communication skills by creating both a brochure and a PowerPoint activity to

showcase their favorite apps. In addition, they explained why they thought those apps

would help other youth better understand math, science, and engineering.

PBL Project #3 (“Duck” Tape Dynasty) allowed students to

create animal habitats from duct tape–commonly referred to

as “Duck” Tape. Students learned about the term habitat,

identified animals that lived in different environments, and

discovered what was unique about each animal habitat.

Through the processes of research and inquiry students

selected an animal and created that animal’s habitat using

duct tape in many colors and prints to mimic animal

camouflage. While learning about animals, students also

studied the environment and all of the factors that impacted

animal habitats, from weather to man.

PBL Project #4 (Math Mechanics & Marathons) allowed students to collaborate as

teams to create their own team race car, a car powered only by their hands and feet, so

they could learn more about the science of running. For the Math Mechanics Marathon

each team had to run their race car through a prescribed route. Running speed did not



determine the winner, but math knowledge did. Each team successfully answered a

math problem to advance to the next “pit stop” on the route. For personal enrichment,

students learned about the importance of physical fitness and other healthy habits.

They incorporated reading into running and math. In addition, they were able to enjoy

books such as Slow Days Fast Friends, Pellie Runs a Marathon, Kids Running: Have Fun,

Get Faster & Go Farther, & Corvette. Students learned about distance and measuring

while also completing activities that targeted the math and engineering mechanics of

building their race cars.

All 4 PBL Projects culminated with an interactive Parent Night Showcase so that parents could

see what their children had been working on.

BGCCF also offered a Parent Leadership, Empowerment, & Development Institute (The LEAD

Institute) conducted by Dr. Clara L. Walters, a respected instructional leader, published author,

and retired OCPS administrator & principal. Dr. Walters has been implementing parent

programs for the BGCCF 21st CCLC programs since

FY 2012-13. Parent attendance has increased with

each new module delivered, as word of this

program’s usefulness and practical applications has

grown. The LEAD Institute's Theme for 2014-15

was “Focus on the Family and Its Influence in a

Child's Success”. Additional modules focusing on

more informal parent-child collaborative projects

rather than parent-only workshops were also

offered during the 2014-15 school year in order to

attract even greater parent participation.

Participants were exposed to research-based

parenting principles along with activities to

reinforce learning and practical application

strategies for home use. The LEAD Institute’s

mission was to ensure that parents, guardians, and

caregivers of students in the 21st CCLC program

acquire the knowledge, skills, attitude, &

motivation needed to improve the quantity and

quality of their involvement in their children’s lives

at home, at school, and in the community. Roles

and responsibilities to develop a family

environment that cultivates a clear parenting vision and blueprint for parent effectiveness were

discussed at parent-only workshops. Parents also worked together with their child on a



facilitated project that allowed them to learn by experience about the use of parental authority,

parental involvement, parental leadership, and parental power. Effective parenting has a direct

correlation to parent/guardian personal skills; therefore, the Institute includes adult

enrichment topics to improve focus, motivation, leadership and health. Additionally, parents

took a personality test to learn how to more effectively communicate not only with their own

children but also with their child's teachers. They were able to use their newly learned

communication skills to help them better understand people in all facets of their lives, including

in their workplaces.

Parents had a great opportunity to use some of their newly gained skills by participating in the

four Parent Night events that were tied to the culmination of each PBL Project cycle. These

interactive events gave parents a chance to become involved in the learning that was taking

place within their children’s 21st CCLC afterschool experience.

During months when LEAD Institute workshops did not take place, other Adult Family Service

activities were offered and included classes in: technology training, healthy lifestyles, fitness

activities, and financial literacy. All activities were promoted to Club members though fliers,

posters, and Club staff announcements within each Club site and at the 21st CCLC program’s

targeted schools. Data from a pre- and post-knowledge assessment survey and a satisfaction

survey was collected at the end of each workshop session that provided valuable feedback

which was used to make curriculum decisions, direct instruction, and improve instructional

practices.

SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Timely) objectives were chosen to

strategically meet the 21st CCLC program goals. The academic objectives directly teach

students 21st century skills and content. All of the identified strategies within the assessment

plan align with the Florida Standards and are research-based which show evidence of

effectiveness. Each assessment method was chosen to best measure and analyze the student’s

progress on meeting the stated objective. It was also used to drive instructional decision

making, provide recommendations for improvements, and be a predictor of student academic

success. Most importantly, the program worked to prepare students and their adult family

members by giving them the knowledge and skills they need to strive and succeed in life.



Program Evaluation Formative evaluations provide the program with feedback from both formal (i.e., surveys,

objective performance measurements, progress monitoring reporting) and informal (i.e.,

program and classroom visits, meetings, conference calls) assessments throughout the year.

This type of feedback promotes continuous growth and improvement. The summative

evaluation reflects the program’s overall annual performance, recommendations for program

improvement, and reporting outcomes. Quantitative and qualitative data were both analyzed

using a mixed methods research design. Various types of data was collected to provide a

thorough understanding about program findings versus quantitative or qualitative data alone.

Mixed methods data analysis was included in the collection and analysis of independent and

dependent variables and the relationships between these variables was defined. Triangulation

through the mixed methods research design approach allowed for a complete and strong

evaluation of quantitative and qualitative program data. Program evaluation best practices was

utilized throughout the evaluation process and included defining patterns in collected

evaluation data, disaggregating program data , analyzing site visit results and providing

feedback (qualitative), establishing academic and enrichment connections (quantitative data)

and using evaluation results to make recommendations. This led to relevant recommendations

for program improvement regarding data collection efforts, completeness of data and

connecting program implementation to grant outcomes.

Data was collected at various times throughout the year for evaluation. The data source used

for evaluation was the objective assessment (report card grades, test scores, etc.) that is tied to

each grant objective. Data was analyzed using data collection and statistical software for test

statistics, and to conduct significance tests, correlations, standard deviation and an inductive

and deductive analysis. Collected data results were disaggregated as follows: number of days

for student attendance, student enrollment by age, gender, ethnicity, grade level, school,

free/reduced lunch status, program academic activities, number of family member

activities/workshops offered and attended, description of family member offerings, frequency

of attendance and number of family members that took the assessments. Evaluation activities

were scheduled around the program schedule and did not interfere with program offerings. All

qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were discussed in advance to ensure this.

As part of the evaluation plan an outcomes and implementation analysis was conducted to

assess program impact. Student recruitment strategies, program activities, student retention,

participation, program operational plans and sustainability are all factors that are considered

during the implementation analysis. Formative evaluation results were used to inform the



program how it was progressing at mid-year. Summative evaluation results were used to

develop this report and inform the program, stakeholders and community members about the

overall performance of the program (from beginning to end of year).

2.0 STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS

This section provides information about the students served by the program, including

demographics, enrollment, and daily attendance.

2.1 Total Student Enrollment and Attendance

Table 1 below details the number of total enrolled and regularly participating students that

attended the program during the 2014 summer program only, the 2014-2015 school year only

and for both summer and school year.

Table 1. Student Enrollment: Total and Regularly Participating Students for Summer 2014 and

School Year 2014-2015.

Site Name

Total Enrolled Attending

(at least one day)

Regularly Participating Enrollment

(30 days or more)

Summer

Only

School

Year

Only

Both

Summer

AND

School

Year

Total Summer

Only

School

Year

Only

Both

Summer

AND

School

Year

Total

Hungerford Elementary

22 63 107 192 19 42 90 151

Note. Unduplicated counts shown. Students attending/enrolled in both operation periods are only reported

under Summer AND School Year. Only Summer + Only School Year + Summer AND School Year = Total.



2.2 Student Demographics

Tables 2-9 below detail the number of total enrolled and regularly participating students that

attended the program during the 2014-2015 school year and includes information about their

gender, age range, limited English proficiency status, disability status, race/ethnicity, grade

level and free or reduced lunch status. If the program did not have the information for any of

these specific areas or the parent or target school did not provide this information to the

program, those student numbers are included in the tables below under the “DK” (Don’t Know

or Could Not Be Determined) columns.

Table 2. Student Demographics for Total Participating Students (All Students Served) and

Regularly Participating Students.

Site Name

Total Participating Students Regularly Participating Students

Gender Age

Range

Gender Age

Range Male Female DK* Male Female DK


91 78 23 6-15 70 60 21 6-15

*DK = Don’t Know/Could Not Be Determined.

Table 3. Students with Special Needs: Total Participating Students.

Site Name

Limited English

Proficient

Identified with

Disability

Yes No DK* Yes No DK


7 163 22 3 167 22


Table 4. Students with Special Needs: Regularly Participating Students.

Site Name

Limited English

Proficient

Identified with

Disability

Yes No DK* Yes No DK


7 124 20 0 131 20




Table 5. Student Race and Ethnicity: Total and Regularly Participating Students.

Site Name

Total Participating Students Regularly Participating Students

Am

eric

an In

dia

n/

Ala

ska

Nat

ive

Asi

an/

Pac

ific

Isla

nd

er

Bla

ck o

r

Afr

ican

Am

eric

an

His

pan

ic o

r La

tin

o

Wh

ite

or

Cau

casi

an

Am

eric

an

Un

kno

wn

**

Am

eric

an In

dia

n/

Ala

ska

Nat

ive

Asi

an/

Pac

ific

Isla

nd

er

Bla

ck o

r

Afr

ican

Am

eric

an

His

pan

ic o

r La

tin

o

Wh

ite

or

Cau

casi

an

Am

eric

an

Un

kno

wn


0 0 149 7 0 36 0 0 111 7 0 33

* Ethnicity categories are non-exclusive; students can be identified under multiple ethnicities.

** Unknown = Racial/ethnic group is unknown or cannot be verified.

Table 6. Student Grade for Total Participating Students.

Grade In School* PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total

Hungerford Elementary 0 29 37 36 31 29 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 192

* Grade levels are exclusive, as students can only be in one grade level. The total number of

students where grade level is unknown are not indicated, but can be derived from this table.

Table 7. Student Grade for Regularly Participating Students (School Year Only)

Grade In School* PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total

Hungerford Elementary 0 21 25 27 24 14 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 132

* Grade levels are exclusive, as students can only be in one grade level. The total number of

students where grade level is unknown are not indicated, but can be derived from this table.

Table 8. Free/Reduced Lunch Status of Total Participating Students.

Site Name Free or Reduced-Price Lunch

Yes No DK


155 15 22




Table 9. Free/Reduced Lunch Status of Regularly Participating Students.

Site Name Free or Reduced-Price Lunch

Yes No DK


122 9 20


3.0 PROGRAM OPERATIONS

The program operations information is detailed in sections 3.1 and 3.2 below which includes

2014 summer operations data and 2014-2015 school year operations data.

3.1 Summer Operation

The following table includes information about the 2014 summer program for this grantee.

Table 10. Summer 2014 Operation.

Site Name

Total

number of

weeks THIS

site was

open:

Typical

number of

days per

week THIS

site was open:

Typical number of hours per week THIS site

was open on:

WEEKDAYS WEEKDAY

EVENINGS WEEKENDS


7.2 5 55 N/A N/A



3.2 School Year Operation

The 2014-2015 school year operations information is detailed in table 11 below which includes

information about the total number of weeks, days and days per week the sites were open, the

typical number of hours per week the sites were open, and the total number of days each site

operated.

Table 11. School Year 2014-2015 Operation.

Site Name

Total #

weeks

THIS site

was

open:

Total #

days

THIS

site

was

open:

Typical

# days

per

week

THIS

site

was

open:

Typical # hours per

week THIS site was

open:

Total # days THIS site

operated:

Bef

ore

Sch

oo

l

Du

rin

g Sc

ho

ol

Aft

er S

cho

ol

Wee

ken

ds

/

Ho

liday

s

Bef

ore

Sch

oo

l

Du

rin

g Sc

ho

ol

Aft

er S

cho

ol

Wee

ken

ds/

Ho

liday

s


168 168 5 15

HOLIDAYS:

11 HRS/DAY

SATURDAYS:

5 HRS/DAY

168 12



4.0 STAFF CHARACTERISTICS

This section provides information on the composition of staff at each site including staff

demographics, ratio of staff to students, staff quality (training and certifications), and turnover.

4.1 Staff Demographics

The following tables detail the staffing type for each site and includes information about

whether those staff were paid or considered volunteers for the 2014-2015 school year

program.

Table 12. Regular Staff by Paid and Volunteer Status (Hungerford Elementary School)

Staff Type* Summer of 2014

2014-2015

School Year

Paid1 Volunteer Paid1 Volunteer

School day teachers (former and substitute) 6 0 6 0

Center administrators and coordinators 1 0 1 0

Youth development workers and non-school day

staff with college degree or higher 13 0 9 0

Other non-teaching school day staff 6 0 6 0

Parents 0 0 0 0

College students 0 0 0 0

High school students 0 0 0 0

Other community members 1 16 1 16

Other non-school day staff with some or no college 0 0 0 0

Other** (Transportation) 1 0 1 0 1For all staff categories except “Other”, report only staff paid with 21st CCLC funds.

* These categories represent the regular responsibilities of program staff during the regular school

day.

** Use this category if data do not fit in specific categories provided



4.2 Student-to-Staff Ratio

The student-to-staff ratio at each site was 10:1 for academic enrichment and 20:1 for personal

enrichment activities.

4.3 Staff Training

All 21st CCLC staff received professional development training during the 2014-2015 project

year including the following workshops:

Discovery Education 2014 Assessments

Classroom Feud: FSA Writing

How to Write an Opinion Essay

Study Buddy Training

Meeting agendas and sign-in sheets were submitted to the 21st CCLC state office during the

2014-2015 program year as one of the required monthly deliverables.

4.4 Staff Turnover

During the 2014-2015 project year one program assistant and one certified teacher left the

program and were replaced.

4.5 Certified Teachers

There was a total of 6 certified teachers that worked for the 21st CCLC program during the

2014-2015 school year and 6 certified teachers that worked for the 2014 summer program. All

teachers were certified.



5.0 OBJECTIVES and OUTCOMES

This section provides information on program objectives, how those objectives are measured,

data analysis methods, progress toward objectives, and finding implications and

recommendations.

5.1 Objectives and Activities

There were fourteen grant objectives that the program used to guide the teacher instruction

and parent involvement initiatives during the 2014-2015 school year. In the table below, each

objective is listed with the corresponding description of activities for each objective.

Table 13. Objectives and Description of Activities

Objective Description of Activities

Objective 1: 75% or regularly

participating students will

maintain or improve their reading

skills as demonstrated by

Discovery Education Assessments

and grades.

a) Homework Assistance

b) Reading Computer Based Activities

c) Differentiated Instruction

d) Classroom Instruction/PBL Projects targeting reading

skills

Objective 2: 75% or regularly


maintain or improve their reading



and grades.


b) Reading Computer Based Activities


d) Classroom Instruction/PBL Projects targeting reading

skills

Objective 3: 75% of regularly


maintain or improve their math



and grades.


b) Math Computer Based Activities


d) Manipulatives

d) Classroom Instruction/PBL Projects targeting math

skills





maintain or improve their math



and grades.


b) Math Computer Based Activities


d) Manipulatives

d) Classroom Instruction/PBL Projects targeting math

skills



maintain or improve their science

skills as demonstrated by such

measures as teacher assessments,

teacher created pre, mid and post

tests (for students K-2), or

Discovery Education

Assessments/grades (for students

grade 3 and above)


b) Real World Experiments

c) Classroom Instruction/PBL Projects targeting science

skills

d) Investigations








Discovery Education


grade 3 and above)




skills

d) Investigations








Discovery Education


grade 3 and above)




skills

d) Investigations

Objective 8: 70% of 21st CCLC

students’ parents/guardians who a) Discussion and role play scenarios



participate in family programming

offered will increase their

knowledge of how to support

their child’s learning and be

involved in their child’s life.

b) Presenting knowledge & strategies for use in parental

authority

c) Parental involvement, parental leadership, and

parental power

d) Exploring power dynamics and effective conflict

resolution


students’ parents/guardians will

attend a minimum of one 21st

CCLC family program/event during

the grant year.

Family programming such as:

a) LEAD Institute parenting workshops

b) Family nights,

c) PBL project showcases

d) Parent/child interactions


students’ parents/guardians who

participate in family programming

offered will demonstrate

motivation/interest in family

involvement throughout the year.

a) Discussion and role play scenarios

b) Illustrations of parental power

c) Writing and Creating schedules, to-do-lists and

calendar for effective time management

d) Visioning and Creating Short and Long Term Goals

e) Parenting Vision & Effectiveness

Objective 11: At least 70% of

parents/guardians participating in

21st CCLC services will report

satisfaction with the adult family

member services, as

demonstrated by (1) adult

attendance at provided services

and (2) adult satisfaction surveys.

Family programming such as:

a) LEAD Institute parenting workshops

b) Family nights

c) PBL project showcases

d) Parent/child interactions

Objective 12: 75% of students

(attending 30 or more days) will

show an increase in physical

fitness abilities as measured by

improvement in two or more of

the 5 parts of the President’s

Challenge Physical Fitness Test.

Sports & fitness activities such as:

a) basketball

b) volleyball

c) flag football

d) soccer

Games room activities such as:

e) foosball

f) billiards/pool, carpet bowling

Triple Play activities such as:

g) Jump Rope

h) Walk/Run





increase their knowledge of good

nutrition and healthy habits, as

measured by pre, mid and post

tests in Triple Play’s Healthy

Habits program.

Triple Play Healthy Habits program activities:

a) You Are What You Eat

b) Stamp out Portion Distortion

c) Fluids and Hydration

d) Your Body-All Systems Go!

Objective 14: 75% of students

(attending 30 days or more) will

show an increase in knowledge of

both healthy and risky lifestyle

behaviors and choices as

measured by pre, mid, and post

tests in SMART Moves and

prevention program modules.

SMART Moves prevention program module activities:

a) Discussion and role playing

practicing resistance and refusal skills

b) Developing assertiveness

c) Strengthening decision-making skills

d) Analyzing media and peer influence

5.2 Data Collection Methods

The method of data collection was based on the actual data that was being collected for each

objective. The program staff collected the required data throughout the year and submitted

the data to the External Evaluator for evaluation. A variety of methods were used to collect the

data including obtaining district and program level student assessment information,

standardized state assessment data, surveying students, parents and teachers, and the

collection of parent attendance information from program workshops.

5.2.1 Measures and Data Collected: Student, parent and teacher data was collected

and assessed for the program. Student data was obtained from FAIR and Performance

Matters assessments given by the school district for reading, math and science content

areas. Student assessments for technology, physical fitness, healthy lifestyle choices

and art and culture were collected, as well as, parent workshop sign in/out sheets and

student, parent and teacher surveys. Report card grades and 2014 Florida

Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) scores were also obtained from the district and

evaluated.

5.2.2 Data Collection Timeline: Assessments were administered and data was collected

by the program throughout the year. Baseline data was collected close to the start of

the program, mid-year data was collected in December 2014/January 2015, and end-of-

year data was collected in May/June 2015. If additional data needed to be collected due



to students being absent on the day that assessments were being given, they were able

to take the assessment upon their return which may have occurred outside of the

aforementioned time periods.

5.2.3 Data Quality: Data quality used in this evaluation received an average rating. The

program collected most of the appropriate data that was required by the grant for each

objective, but was also missing a significant amount of data. Missing data cannot be

evaluated and therefore leads to not meeting grant objectives that are tied to the

missing data. A high standard for data quality and collection will need to be set at

program start for the upcoming project year. Program leadership will need to play an

integral role in helping to ensure that the expectations are set and met. The manner in

which data was collected would be considered sufficient for evaluation purposes, as

well. However, more data needed to be collected in order to receive a high rating in

data quality overall.

5.2.4 Continuous Assessment: The program was advised to continuously assess

students throughout the year to help students learn the targeted concepts and retain

more information, which can lead to better performance on assessments. Teachers

performed comprehension checks and reviews for students during the year to help

them meet each student-related grant objective, however not all grant objectives were

met. Monitoring quarterly report card grades, progress reports and administering short

quizzes or mini-assessments on a regular basis are all forms of continuous assessments

for students that help teachers stay aware of how students are performing on a more

regular basis. It is recommended that the program place additional emphasis in this

area to help students perform at an even higher academic level and show greater

academic gains by the end of the program year.

5.2.5 Student Inclusion: Students were not excluded from the student-related objective

assessments and parents were not excluded from the parent-related objective

assessments. All students and parents had equal opportunity to complete their

individual assessments during the project year. Students, parents and teachers were

also not excluded from being invited to take the program surveys at the end of the year.

If any students left the program during the year, they would not have been able to take

any assessments that were administered during the time in which they were absent. In

addition, if students did not have two time points worth of data for an objective, their

data was not able to be evaluated for that particular objective because progress could

not be evaluated with only one score.



5.3 Data Analysis and Results: Progress Toward and Achievement

of Objectives

5.3.1 Objective 1: 75% or regularly participating students will maintain or improve their reading

skills as demonstrated by Discovery Education Assessments and grades.

Objective Assessment Plan:

“75% of the regularly participating students will maintain or improve reading skills as measured by

standardized progress monitoring tool (Discovery, AIMES Web) from the beginning to end of academic

year”

Success Criterion:

Students will improve their Reading skills by 5 scale score points or higher

88% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in reading proficiency as measured by the

Discovery Education Assessment during the current year. The success criterion was found using the pre

and post-test scores, attained at the beginning and end of the year respectively. The success criterion

required that the change in the reading score be increased by a minimum of 5 score points. 95 students

had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 84 students met the criterion. Please refer to the table

below for statistics related to this objective.

Table 14: Hungerford Standardized Reading Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min Max M SD

Pre-Test Scores 95 1159 1544 1336.3 94.3 Post-Test Scores 95 1250 1763 1510.9 121.3 Difference or Change in Score

95 -61 559 174.6 131.0

*Indicates total number of students with usable data, i.e. students with both preliminary and end-of-

year data

Across all grades, students improved reading assessment scores by an average of 174.6 points over the

course of the year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score across all sites is 131.0, which is

indicative of the representation of the overall changes of score within the data set based on the

calculated mean (M). A lower scale value standard deviation in relation to the mean is representative of



a lower deviation from the calculated average of difference in test scores across the entire data set. A

higher scale value standard deviation represents a high deviation of differences in test scores from the

calculated average throughout a larger sample of the overall data set.

Table 15: Hungerford Reading Score Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained

Score Increased Met Goal (5+)

9.5% 0% 90.5% 88%




“75% of the regularly participating students will maintain or improve reading skills as measured by

Grades from Quarter 1 to Quarter 4”

Success Criterion:

Maintain a reading grade of C or above or improve reading grade

79% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in reading proficiency as measured by

grades from Quarter 1 to Quarter 4. The success criterion was found using the Q1 and Q4 report card

grades attained at the beginning and end of the year respectively. The success criterion required that

the students improve their grades by at least one letter grade, or maintain the same letter grade from

Q1 to Q4 at a ‘C’ or above. This excluded grades K and 1 from this assessment, as the grading structure

in these levels does not include a ‘C’ grade. 89 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 70

students met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for statistics related to this objective.

Table 16: Hungerford Students Reading Report Card Improvement (% of students)

Total Students Improved Grade (%)

Maintained C+ Grade (%)

Met Goal (%)

95 32.5% 43.2% 79%



Chart 1: Hungerford Reading Report Card Grade Letter Improvements, Q1 to Q4

5.3.3 Objective 3: 75% of regularly participating students will maintain or improve their math



“75% of the regularly participating students will maintain or improve mathematics skills as measured by

standardized progress monitoring tool (Discovery, AIMES Web) from the beginning to end of academic

year”

Success Criterion:

Students will improve their Math skills by 5 scale points or higher

99% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in mathematics proficiency as measured by

the Discovery Education Assessment during the current year. The success criterion was found using the

pre and post-test scores, attained at the beginning and end of the year respectively. The success

criterion required that the change in the math score be increased by a minimum of 5 score points. 94

students had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 93 students met the criterion. Please refer to the

table below for statistics related to this objective.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

DecreasedGrade

MaintainedGrade

Increased by 1 Increased by 2

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



Table 17: Hungerford Objective Standardized Math Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


94 -97 515 216.8 141.1


year data

Across all grades, students improved mathematics assessment scores by an average of 216.8 points over

the course of the year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score across all grades is 141.1, which is






Table 18: Hungerford Math Score Student Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained


1.0% 0% 99.0% 99%




“75% of the regularly participating students will maintain or improve mathematics skills as measured by


Success Criterion:

Maintain a math grade of C or above or improve math grade



74% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in mathematics proficiency as measured by







Table 19: Hungerford Student Math Report Card Improvement (% of students)



Met Goal (%)

89 34.8% 39.3% 74%

Chart 2: Hungerford Math Report Card Grade Letter Improvements, Q1 to Q4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

DecreasedGrade

MaintainedGrade


2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



5.3.5 Objective 5: 75% of regularly participating students will maintain or improve their science

skills as demonstrated by such measures as teacher assessments, teacher created pre, mid and

post tests (for students K-2), or Discovery Education Assessments/grades (for students grade 3

and above).


“75% of the regularly participating students will maintain or improve Science skills as measured by

standardized monitoring tool (Discovery, AIMES Web) from beginning to end of academic year.”

Success Criterion:

Students in grades 3-5 will improve their Science skills by 5 scale score points or higher

100% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in science proficiency as measured by the

Discovery Education Assessment during the current year. The success criterion was found using the pre

and post-test scores, attained at the beginning and end of the year respectively. The success criterion

required that the change in the science score be increased by a minimum of 5 score points. 50 students

had sufficient data to measure the criterion. All students met the criterion. Please refer to the table

below for statistics related to this objective.

Table 20: Hungerford Standardized Science Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


50 21 373 194.4 96.1


year data

Throughout grades 3 through 5, students improved science assessment scores by an average of 194.4

points over the course of the year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score is 96.1, which is








Table 21: Hungerford Science Score Student Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained


0% 0% 100% 100%




and above).


“75% of the regularly participating students will maintain or improve Science skills as measured by

Curriculum-based Assessment from the beginning to end of academic year.”

Success Criterion:

Students in grades K-2 will achieve a 70% or higher on curriculum-based assessments

98% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in science proficiency as measured by

teacher-created, curriculum based assessment during the current year. The success criterion was found

using student post-test scores, obtained at the end of the year. The success criterion required that

achieve a score of 70% or higher. 50 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 49 students

met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for statistics related to this objective.

Table 22: Hungerford Curriculum-Based Science Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min (%)

Max (%)

M (%) SD (%)

Post-Test Scores 50 55 100 87.5 9.5 *Indicates total number of students with usable data, i.e. students with both preliminary and end-of-

year data

Throughout grades K-2, students earned an average science assessment score of 87.5%. The standard

deviation (SD) of scores earned is 9.5, which is indicative of the representation of the overall changes of

score within the data set based on the calculated mean (M). A lower scale value standard deviation in



relation to the mean is representative of a lower deviation from the calculated average of difference in

test scores across the entire data set. A higher scale value standard deviation represents a high

deviation of differences in test scores from the calculated average throughout a larger sample of the

overall data set.




and above).


“75% of the regularly participating students will maintain or improve science skills as measured by


Success Criterion:

Maintain a science grade of C or above or improve science grade

77% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in science proficiency as measured by







Table 23: Hungerford Student Science Report Card Improvement (% of students)



Met Goal (%)

88 34.1% 43.2% 77%



Chart 3: Hungerford Science Report Card Grade Letter Improvements, Q1 to Q4

5.3.8 Objective 8: 70% of 21st CCLC students’ parents/guardians who participate in family

programming offered will increase their knowledge of how to support their child’s learning and

be involved in their child’s life.


“70% of the parents of regularly participating students will demonstrate parents increasing knowledge

as measured by Pre-Post Assessment/Survey from pre to post intervention”

Success Criterion:

Achieve a score of 70% or higher on post-test

98% of parents with sufficient data indicated an increase in their knowledge of how to support their

child’s learning based on an assessment during the current year. The success criterion was found using

parent post-test scores, obtained at the end of the year. The success criterion required that parents

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

DecreasedScore

MaintainedScore

Improved by1

Improved by2

Improved by3

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



achieve a score of 70% or higher. 61 parents had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 49 parents

met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for statistics related to this objective.

Table 24: Hungerford Parent Survey Statistics

# of Workshops Attended

# of Parents Avg Score (%)

# Met Goal % Met Goal

1 39 81.5% 30 76.9% 2 17 90.6% 14 82.4% 3 5 100% 5 100%

Based on the post-test score data, parents who attended more workshops throughout the school year

scored higher on average on the assessments. All parents who attended three workshops achieved

100% scores on the assessment.

5.3.9 Objective 9: 25% of 21st CCLC students’ parents/guardians will attend a minimum of one

21st CCLC family program/event during the grant year.


“25% of the parents of regularly participating students will achieve attendance in family activities as

measured by Sign In/Out Sheets during the current year.”

Success Criterion:

Get average minimum of 24 parents in attendance

Of 170 students enrolled, 61 parents attended at least one family activity during the current year.




programming offered will demonstrate motivation/interest in family involvement throughout

the year.


“50% of the parents of regularly participating students will demonstrate motivation/interest in family

involvement as measured by Satisfaction Survey from pre to post intervention.”

Success Criterion:

50% of parents surveyed demonstrate motivation/interest in family involvement.

100% of parents with sufficient data indicated motivation/interest in family involvement based on

Satisfaction Survey results during the current year. The success criterion was found using parent post-

test scores, obtained at the end of the year. 60 parents had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 60

parents met the criterion by responding to the survey affirmatively.

5.3.11 Objective 11: At least 70% of parents/guardians participating in 21st CCLC services will report

satisfaction with the adult family member services, as demonstrated by (1) adult attendance at provided

services and (2) adult satisfaction surveys.


“70% of the parents of regularly participating students will demonstrate family satisfaction as measured

by Pre-Post Assessment/Survey from pre to post intervention.”

Success Criterion:

70% of parents surveyed demonstrate satisfaction with adult family member services

100% of parents with sufficient data demonstrated satisfaction with adult family member services based

on post-test survey results during the current year. The success criterion was found using parent post-

test scores, obtained at the end of the year. 60 parents had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 60

parents met the criterion by responding to the survey affirmatively.



5.3.12 Objective 12: 75% of students (attending 30 or more days) will show an increase in

physical fitness abilities as measured by improvement in two or more of the 5 parts of the

President’s Challenge Physical Fitness Test.


“75% of the regularly participating students will improve fitness as measured by Pre-Post

Assessment/Survey from the beginning to end of academic year.”

Success Criterion:

Improve in two or more of five parts of President’s Challenge Physical Fitness Test

84% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in two parts of the President’s Challenge

Physical Fitness Test, based on Pre, Mid, and Post assessment scores throughout the current year. The

success criterion required that increase scores in at least two parts of the President’s Challenge Physical

Fitness Test. Using data completed at the beginning, midway, and end of the year, those students who

showed improvement at any point in the year in both parts were considered meeting the success

criterion. 131 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 110 students met the criterion.

Please refer to the table below for information related to this objective.

Table 25: Physical Fitness Assessment Information

# Students Improved # Students Did Not Improve

Part 1 114 17 Part 2 123 8 Both Parts 110 21

Of the 131 students who provided sufficient data to measure the success criterion, 84% increased in

both parts of the fitness assessment throughout the year.

5.3.13 Objective 13: 75% of regularly participating students will increase their knowledge of

good nutrition and healthy habits, as measured by pre, mid and post tests in Triple Play’s

Healthy Habits program.




“75% of the regularly participating students will improve knowledge of healthy lifestyle choices as

measured by Pre-Post Assessment/Survey from pre to post intervention.”

Success Criterion:

Achieve a grade of 20 or above on final post-test in Triple Play’s Healthy Habits

100% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in knowledge of healthy lifestyle choices

during the current year. The success criterion was found using student post-test scores, obtained at the

end of the year. The success criterion required that achieve a score of 20 or higher. 127 students had

sufficient data to measure the criterion. 127 students met the criterion. Please refer to the table below

for statistics related to this objective.

Table 26: Hungerford Triple Play’s Healthy Habits Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


year data

Throughout all grades, students earned an average score of 84.6 on the Triple Play’s Healthy Habits

post-test. The standard deviation (SD) of scores earned is 12.0, which is indicative of the representation

of the overall changes of score within the data set based on the calculated mean (M). A lower scale

value standard deviation in relation to the mean is representative of a lower deviation from the

calculated average of difference in test scores across the entire data set. A higher scale value standard

deviation represents a high deviation of differences in test scores from the calculated average

throughout a larger sample of the overall data set.

5.3.14 Objective 14: 75% of students (attending 30 days or more) will show an increase in

knowledge of both healthy and risky lifestyle behaviors and choices as measured by pre, mid,

and post tests in SMART Moves and prevention program modules.


“75% of the regularly participating students will increase decision-making skills as measured by Pre-Post

Assessment/Survey from pre to post intervention.”



Success Criterion:

Achieve a grade of 70 or above on final post-test in SMART Moves program

94% of students with sufficient data indicated an increase in decision-making skills as they pertain to

healthy and risky lifestyle behaviors. The success criterion was found using student post-test scores,

obtained at the end of the year. The success criterion required that achieve a score of 70 or higher. 127

students had sufficient data to measure the criterion. 120 students met the criterion. Please refer to the

table below for statistics related to this objective.

Table 27: Hungerford SMART Moves Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


year data

Throughout all grades, students earned an average score of 93.0 on the SMART Moves post-test. The

standard deviation (SD) of scores earned is 11.4, which is indicative of the representation of the overall

changes of score within the data set based on the calculated mean (M). A lower scale value standard

deviation in relation to the mean is representative of a lower deviation from the calculated average of

difference in test scores across the entire data set. A higher scale value standard deviation represents a

high deviation of differences in test scores from the calculated average throughout a larger sample of

the overall data set.



5.4 Other Findings

Findings from the student, family member, and teacher end-of-year surveys, as well as detailed

information about student performance on the 2014 FCAT are included below. Information

about student 2014-2015 report card grades for each grade level have also been included in

this section.

5.4.1 Reading Report Card Data

The tables below reflect the reading report card data for all regularly participating students in

the 21st CCLC program located at each site.

Report card letter grade improvement was attained by measuring the degree to which students changed

their individual letter grades in the reading subject area between the first and fourth quarters of the

school year. A total of 120 students reported enough data to determine letter grade improvements. Of

those students, 38% increased their letter grade by 1 or more, and 7% increased their letter grade by 2

or more.

Chart 4: Reading Report Card Improvements (by Grade Level)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



Chart 5: Reading Report Card Improvements by 1 Letter Grade (All Grade Levels)

Chart 6: Reading Report Card Improvements by 2 Letter Grades (All Grade Levels)

29%

16%24%

18%

8%5%

Reading Report Card Improvements by 1 Letter Grade (All Grade Levels)

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

25%

37%

38%

Reading Report Card Improvements by 2 Letter Grades (All Grade Levels)

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade



5.4.2 Math Report Card Data

The tables below reflect the math report card data for all regularly participating students in the

21st CCLC program located at each site.


their individual letter grades in the mathematics subject area between the first and fourth quarters of

the school year. A total of 121 students reported enough data to determine letter grade improvements.

Of those students, 36% increased their letter grade by 1 or more, and 6% increased their letter grade by

2 or more.

Chart 7: Mathematics Report Card Improvements (by Grade Level)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10


Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



Chart 8: Mathematics Report Card Improvements by 1 Letter Grade (All Grade Levels)

Chart 9: Mathematics Report Card Improvements by 2 Letter Grades (All Grade Levels)

24%

5%

16%22%

14%

19%

Math Report Card Improvements by 1 Letter Grade (All Grade Levels)

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

15%

14%

14%

14%

14%

29%

Math Report Card Improvements by 2 Letter Grades (All Grade Levels)

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



5.4.3 Science Report Card Data

The tables below reflect the science report card data for all regularly participating students in

the 21st CCLC program located at each site.


their individual letter grades in the science subject area between the first and fourth quarters of the

school year. A total of 120 students reported enough data to determine letter grade improvements. Of

those students, 32% increased their letter grade by 1 or more, and 8% increased their letter grade by 2

or more.

Chart 10: Science Report Card Improvements (by Grade Level)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Improved by 1 Improved by 2 Improved by 3

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



Chart 11: Science Report Card Improvements by 1 Letter Grade (All Grade Levels)

Chart 12: Science Report Card Improvements by 2+ Letter Grades (All Grade Levels)

7%

21%

10%

28%

24%

10%

Science Report Card Improvements by 1 Letter Grade (All Grade Levels)

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

15%

31%54%

Science Report Card Improvements by 2+ Letter Grades (All Grade Levels)

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



5.4.4 2014 FCAT Reading Data

The table below reflect the 2014 FCAT reading performance of all regularly participating

students in the 21st CCLC program located at each site.

Table 28: FCAT Reading Scoring Statistics by Grade

Total Tests Taken

Minimum Score Maximum Score Average Score

Grade 4 8 195 247 213 Grade 5 17 190 221 206 All Grades 25 190 247 208

Students completed 25 FCAT Mathematics tests, of which 8 students were enrolled in Grade 4 and 17

students were enrolled in Grade 5. All students achieved an average score of 208. Students in Grade 4

achieved an average score of 213, and students in Grade 5 achieved an average score of 206.

5.4.5 2014 FCAT Math Data

The tables below reflect the 2014 FCAT math performance of all regularly participating students

in the 21st CCLC program located at each site.

Table 29: FCAT Mathematics Scoring Statistics by Grade

Total Tests Taken

Minimum Score Maximum Score Average Score

Grade 4 8 178 220 202 Grade 5 17 190 230 206 All Grades 25 178 230 205

Students completed 25 FCAT Mathematics tests, of which 8 students were enrolled in Grade 4 and 17

students were enrolled in Grade 5. All students achieved an average score of 205. Students in Grade 4

achieved an average score of 202, and students in Grade 5 achieved an average score of 206.



5.4.6 Parent Survey Data

The parent survey results are detailed in the table below for all sites combined. The survey

questions are listed as a reference and parents were able to answer each question indicating if

they were very satisfied, satisfied, not sure, unsatisfied, very unsatisfied or not applicable.

Table 30: Parent Survey Results

Very Satisfied

(%)

Satisfied (%)

Not Sure (%)

Unsatisfied (%)

Very Unsatisfied

(%)

Not Applicable

(%)

How satisfied are you with this after school program as a whole?

49 45 3 0 2 2

Staff warmth and friendliness 45 47 3 2 2 2

Ability of staff to work with my child

44 44 3 5 2 2

Ability of staff to relate to me as a parent

48 42 5 2 2 2

Variety of activities offered to my child

43 48 6 0 2 2

Program meals and snacks 46 45 6 2 2 0

Safety of the program environment

42 46 8 3 0 2

Staff reached out to me as a parent

50 39 5 2 3 2

My child’s happiness with the program

49 48 2 0 0 2

Helping me become more involved with my child’s education

48 40 8 2 2 2

Child’s improvement in homework completion

40 32 6 17 3 2

Child’s improvement in getting along with others

49 45 3 2 0 2

Child’s improvement staying out of trouble

47 42 6 5 0 0

Child’s improvement of appreciation of different people or cultures

48 45 5 0 0 2

Would you recommend this program to other parents?

Yes – 91%

No – 2%

Maybe – 8%



Would you sign your children up for this program again?

Yes – 94%

No - 2%

Maybe – 5%

If this after school program was no longer available, my child would be:

Home alone – 26%

Cared for by a parent – 18%

Cared for by a sibling – 2%

Cared for by another relative – 25%

Cared for by a friend or neighbor – 0%

Participating in a different after school program – 22%

Other – 8%



5.4.7 Teacher Survey Data

The teacher (regular school day teacher) survey results are detailed in the table below for all

sites combined. The survey items are listed as a reference and teachers were able to indicate

whether the student in question made a significant improvement, moderate improvement,

slight improvement, did not need to improve, slight decline, significant decline and moderate

decline.

Table 31: Regular School Day Teacher Survey Results

Significant Improvement

(%)

Moderate Improvement

(%)

Slight Improvement

(%)

No Change

(%)

Did Not Need to Improve

(%)

Slight Decline

(%)

No Data Reported

(%)

Significant Decline

(%)

Moderate Decline (%)

Turning in homework on time

29 32 22 3 14 0 0 0 1

Completing homework to your satisfaction

33 31 19 3 13 1 0 0 1

Participating in class

34 32 13 5 15 0 0 0 1

Volunteering 31 33 14 3 20 0 0 0 0 Attending class regularly

30 32 8 1 29 0 0 0 0

Being attentive in class

33 32 15 4 17 0 0 0 0

Behaving in class

28 34 12 8 18 0 0 0 0

Academic performance

32 39 14 1 13 0 1 0 0

Coming to school motivated to learn

33 37 13 1 15 1 0 0 0

Getting along well with other students

32 36 11 4 17 0 0 0 0



5.4.8 Student Survey Data

The student (21st CCLC regular participating students) survey results are detailed in the table

below for all sites combined. The survey questions are listed as a reference and students were

able to indicate whether they definitely, somewhat or did not at all agree with what the

question was pertaining to and/or asking about. If students did not answer the question at all,

that information is also included.

Table 32: Student Survey Results

Did Not Answer

(%)

Definitely (%)

Somewhat (%)

Not At All (%)

Do you like the after school program? 2 77 18 4

Did your after school program have adults who care about you?

2 76 18 5

Did you feel safe during your after school program?

2 74 20 5

Did your after school program help you get along with others?

2 54 31 13

Did your after school program help you understand that following rules are important?

2 74 18 6

Did your after school program help you solve problems in a positive way?

2 69 18 12

Did your after school program help you with your homework?

2 79 10 10

Did your after school program help you improve your grades?

2 67 25 6

Percentage of male students that completed the survey: 57%

Percentage of female students that completed the survey: 43%

Grade levels of students that completed the survey:

K – 18%

1st – 12%

2nd – 20%

3rd – 20%

4th – 15%

5th – 16%



5.5 Student Success Snapshot

“A is for Apple, Awesome

and our spotlight 21st CCLC

student whose first name

just so happens to start

with an “A”. And just as

you might have suspected,

he is also a straight “A”

student! You can always

catch this student with

another student showing

them the ropes. Some of

the terms/phrases that describe this student are, “natural born leader”, genuine, humble,

astute and lighthearted.

At first he was amongst many of my 3rd grade students. I thought that he was most deserving

of this spotlight, in fact I planned on submitting an article that depicted the entire class of

students. But once again, he proved just why he was selected!

His zest for learning and helping others shows up day in and day out in our 21st Century

Program at Joe R Lee Branch/Hungerford Elementary. He prefers after school over the regular

school day! He indicated that he learns a lot more when he is having fun. He likes the rotations,

planned activities, the information that he learning and most of all his teacher. He really

couldn’t select one thing over another when it came making a decision of what he liked most of

all. So when I asked him how the 21st Century program make an impact on his life, he uttered

these words”:

“It's great... fun... Wonderful. I like that we have lots of fun things to do.... We get to go to

places we have never been before... I learned that it's not good to do drugs.... It's healthy to eat

the right kind of food and drink milk... I get help with my homework.... I really trust every…….

everyone and feel safe.... I like to do fun activities... I learned a lot.”

- Written By: Hungerford Elementary 21st CCLC Leadership Staff Member



5.6 Overall Findings for Each Objective

This section provides information on the program’s progress toward and achievement of each

objective.



Findings:

Objective met.

Total students with sufficient data – 95

88% met the stated success criterion

Objective Status – Meets or Exceeds Benchmark



Findings:

Objective met.






Findings:

Objective met.








Findings:

Objective not met.



Objective Status – Approaching Benchmark




and above).

Findings:

Objective met.







and above).

Findings:

Objective met.









and above).

Findings:

Objective met.





programming offered will increase their knowledge of how to support their child’s learning and

be involved in their child’s life.

Findings:

Objective met.

Total parents with sufficient data – 61





5.3.9 Objective 9: 25% of 21st CCLC students’ parents/guardians will attend a minimum of one

21st CCLC family program/event during the grant year.

Findings:

Objective met.





programming offered will demonstrate motivation/interest in family involvement throughout

the year.

Findings:

Objective met.




5.3.11 Objective 11: At least 70% of parents/guardians participating in 21st CCLC services will

report satisfaction with the adult family member services, as demonstrated by (1) adult

attendance at provided services and (2) adult satisfaction surveys.

Findings:

Objective met.






5.3.12 Objective 12: 75% of students (attending 30 or more days) will show an increase in

physical fitness abilities as measured by improvement in two or more of the 5 parts of the

President’s Challenge Physical Fitness Test.

Findings:

Objective met.




5.3.13 Objective 13: 75% of regularly participating students will increase their knowledge of

good nutrition and healthy habits, as measured by pre, mid and post tests in Triple Play’s

Healthy Habits program.

Findings:

Objective met.




5.3.14 Objective 14: 75% of students (attending 30 days or more) will show an increase in

knowledge of both healthy and risky lifestyle behaviors and choices as measured by pre, mid,

and post tests in SMART Moves and prevention program modules.

Findings:

Objective met.






6.0 PROGRESS TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY

This section provides information on strategies employed to ensure the sustainability of 21st

CCLC program and enhance the quality of the services offered.

Table 33: Partnerships and Sub-Contracts

Agency Name Type of

Organization

Sub-

Contractor

(Yes/No)

Estimated Value

($) of

Contributions

Estimated

Value ($) of

Sub-contract

Type of Service Provided

Orange

County

Public

Schools

Hungerford

Elementary

School SD Unknown Unknown

Materials and Supplies at Hungerford

Elementary School (computers,

headphones, etc)

Facilities at Hungerford Elementary

School

6 classroom spaces

2 Computer Rooms

Restrooms

Cafeteria

Media Center

Pavilion and Basketball Court and

Play Ground

Orange

County

Public

Schools

SD Unknown Unknown

120 Hot Meals 5 Days a Week for 176

days of the After School Program

3 OCPS Paid Staff members to pay

and provide this service.

SunRail

CNT Unknown Unknown

Transportation Safety Materials and

Supplies for 120 students

FREE Transportation on SunRail for

120 students and 20 staff for 1 day

within the summer.

Additional SunRail Volunteers to Ride

and Read Along with the students

Jessica

Fredricks

FPO In-kind $3600 N/A

During this past year, Rhythm Trek

was able to provide 18 student

sessions for the 21st CCLC program

resulting in an in-kind donation from

Rhythm Trek LLC of $3,600.

Interactive student sessions

Description: One-hour session

includes a mix of rhythm games,



movement activities embedded with

academic content, and hands-on

drumming to build community.

Students work together to creatively

solve problems as a team and

experience the benefits of teamwork

while flexing their creative muscles.

LEAD

Institute

FPO Yes N/A $5000

A Systematic Approach to

Developing Good Habits At Home

CLASS CONTENT

Learning Goal: Participants will be

able to define the components in the

cycle of habit and character

development. Define and apply the

family structure components that

develop positive thoughts, actions,

habits, character and success.

Learn the importance of

thinking before acting as an

important habit for survival.

Learn the relationship

between thoughts, actions,

habits, character and

destiny to be able to teach

their children to think

before they act.

Learn how to develop a

family system of operation

based on the following

components: principles and

core values, family rules,

procedures, routines,

traditions and rituals to

create a family environment

that nurtures positive

thinking, good habits and

character.

Discounted Rate of $1,000 a session

for 5 session. A decrease of $500 per

session.

Amber

Bledsoe FPO In-Kind $5000 N/A

Blank Canvas Studios

Providing Parental Development

course along with Painting

Masterpieces!



This program is designed for parents

and families alike to engage in

quality time activities with their

children.

50 easels

50 paint brushes set

200 16 X 20 Canvas

Highly Energetic and Qualified

Instructor for a total of $5,000 in-

kind donations

Amber

Bledsoe

FPO Unknown Unknown

Jump Start USA

Physical Fitness guru for KIDS!

Her program teaches students the

skills they need to be successful

when tackling any athletic format.

These skills and classes assist

students in developing and

maintaining a healthy living and

physical fitness

Mad Science

FPO Yes Unknown Unknown

Mad Science is a leading science

enrichment provider, delivering fun,

exciting and hands-on science

experiences for children 5 to 12

years old.

Rod

Bargaineer FPO Yes Unknown Unknown

Sports

Carol Cudjoe

FPO Yes Unknown Unknown

Our objective is to build positive self-

esteem while creating talented

dancers. Our studio gives novice and

trained dancers the opportunity to

express their talent and grow in a

positive, challenging, and fun

atmosphere. Our goal is to

encourage a family environment that

supports the development of

important life skills – Teamwork,

Dedication, Responsibility,

Leadership, and a Strong Self-Image.

Note: Value of subcontract must be ZERO if the agency is listed as “No” in the subcontractor column. Likewise, the

value of the subcontract must be greater than ZERO if the agency is listed as “Yes” in the subcontractor column.

Note: The USED’s federal definition differentiates between a “partner” and a “subcontractor”. A subcontractor

receives compensation (to some extent) for their services; partners do not.



7.0 LESSONS LEARNED AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

The collaboration between Orange County Public Schools and the Boys and Girls Clubs of Central Florida has proved to be positive for the 21st CCLC program located at the Hungerford Elementary School. The Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida had experience implementing this grant for three consecutive years prior to the partnership, so the organization had 21st CCLC insight and put forth a lot of effort to make this year a successful one. This year, there was only one objective that the program did not meet. It is recommended that the program continue to operate the program with fidelity and continue to work towards meeting all grant objectives in the upcoming year.



www.edumatrixUSA.org

(800) 908-2421

LISTENING

REVIEWING

ADVISING

TRAINING

MEASURING

GOALS

ACHIEVEMENT

SUCCESS

Grant Evaluation Services

Professional Development

Education Consulting

THIS EVALUATION REPORT HAS

BEEN PREPARED BY:



"Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember……

…….Involve me and I learn." - Benjamin Franklin



If you are interested in learning more about Orange County

Public Schools, Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida,

Hungerford Elementary School and/or their 21st Century

Community Learning Center (CCLC) Program please contact:

Orange County Public Schools

445 West Amelia Street

Orlando, Florida 32801

(407) 317-3200

www.ocps.net

Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida

101 East Colonial Drive

Orlando, Florida 32801

(407) 841-6855

www.bgccf.org

http://www.ocps.net/

http://www.bgccf.org/

Documents

Summative Evaluation Report 2014-2015 · Summative Evaluation Report 2014-2015 Prepared By: Crystal Taylor, M.B.A., Ed.S. CEO/Lead Evaluator ... 29 5.3.7 Objective 7 ..... 30 5.3.8