Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

65
Ain’t No Mountain Ain’t No Mountain High Enough High Enough Climbing the Peaks of Climbing the Peaks of Program Excellence Program Excellence Facilitators: Christina Borbely Kerrilyn Scott-Nakai Produced and Conducted by the Center for Applied Research Solutions, Inc. for the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs SDFSC Workshop-by-Request March 22, 2006 Ventura County Authored by Christina J. Borbely, Ph.D. Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Technical

description

Ain’t No Mountain High Enough. Facilitators: Christina Borbely Kerrilyn Scott-Nakai Produced and Conducted by the Center for Applied Research Solutions, Inc. for the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs SDFSC Workshop-by-Request March 22, 2006 Ventura County - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Page 1: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Ain’t No Mountain High Ain’t No Mountain High EnoughEnough

Climbing the Peaks of Program Climbing the Peaks of Program ExcellenceExcellence

Facilitators: Christina Borbely

Kerrilyn Scott-Nakai

Produced and Conducted by the Center for Applied Research Solutions, Inc. for the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs

SDFSC Workshop-by-Request

March 22, 2006 Ventura County

Authored by Christina J. Borbely, Ph.D.Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Technical Assistance Project

Page 2: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Trail MapTrail Map

• Why Are We Doing This– Value – Opportunities

• Opportunity for Recognition

• Advanced Program Essentials– Program Essentials– Key Considerations

• Advancing Program Through Evaluation– Methodology: Design & Instrumentation– Data Plan & Analysis– Reporting

Page 3: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Why Are We Doing This?Why Are We Doing This?

• The Value of Advancing Programs

• Opportunities for Advancing Programs

Page 4: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

ValueValue

• Replicating innovative strategies– Fill in gaps– Integrate latest science and/or practice

• Making contribution through dissemination– Participate in science-service dialog– Advance the field– Provide effective program to others

Page 5: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

OpportunitiesOpportunities

• Expansion– Demonstrate need/value of new or additional

funding– Bolster capacity to sustain programming

• Recognition– Validation from field– Potential for supplemental support/resources– Publications

Page 6: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Opportunity for RecognitionOpportunity for Recognition

Validation from the Prevention Field:

• Service to Science

• NREPP

• Exemplary Programs

Page 7: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

National Registry of Effective National Registry of Effective Prevention Programs (NREPP)Prevention Programs (NREPP)

NREPP is coordinated by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) under the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)

NREPP is:“a system designed to support informed decision making

and to disseminate timely and reliable information about interventions that prevent and/or treat mental and substance use disorders.”

http://modelprograms.samhsa.gov/template.cfm?page=nreppover

Page 8: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Original NREPP DesignationsOriginal NREPP Designations• A program will be considered “Model” if the NREPP review team

appointed your program as an effective program, and an agency agrees to participate in CSAP’s dissemination efforts. Model programs also provide training and technical assistance to practitioners who wish to adopt a program in order to ensure that the program is implemented with fidelity.

• A program is considered “Effective” if it is science-based, and produces consistently positive patterns of results. Only programs positively effecting the majority of intended recipients or targets are considered effective.

• A program will be considered “Promising” if it provides useful and scientifically defensible information about what works in prevention, but has yet to gather sufficient scientific support to standards set for effective/model programs. Promising programs are sources of guidance for prevention practitioners, although they may not be as prepared as Model programs for large-scale dissemination.

Page 9: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Evidence-Based Programs

●Conceptually Sound and Internally Consistent●Program Activities Related to Conceptualization●Reasonably Well Implemented & Evaluated

Promising Programs

●Some Positive Outcomes

Effective Programs•Consistently Positive Outcomes

●Strongly Implemented & Evaluated

Model Programs

●Available for Dissemination●Technical Assistance Available from Program Developers

Page 10: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

NEW NREPP: Eligibility CriteriaNEW NREPP: Eligibility Criteria• Open submission; review based on alignment of

intervention with NREPP priorities• SAMHSA's three Centers -- the Center for Mental Health

Services, the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, and the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment -- will establish priorities for the types of interventions to be reviewed and highlighted on NREPP.

• Priorities will be established and provided to the public annually through notices on the NREPP Web site.

• These priorities based on dialogues with treatment and prevention stakeholders as well as with SAMHSA's Federal partners

Page 11: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

NEW NREPP: Review CriteriaNEW NREPP: Review Criteria

“the sole requirement for potential inclusion in the NREPP review process is for an intervention to have demonstrated one or more significant behavioral change outcomes.”

Page 12: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

NEW NREPP: Review ProcessNEW NREPP: Review Process• A trained Ph.D.-level evaluation specialist works with

applicants to assure that adequate materials have been submitted before initiating an NREPP review.

• The evaluation specialist serves as collaborator in the application process and liaison to the reviewers.

• A scientific review of the intervention is conducted by two independent Ph.D.-level reviewers.

• Completed review summaries, including descriptive components, reviewer ratings, and explanations are provided to the applicant for approval before they are posted on the NREPP Web site.

Page 13: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

NEW NREPP: Application ProcessNEW NREPP: Application Process

Application materials include one or more of the following types of documents:

• formal evaluation reports, • published and unpublished research articles, • narrative sections of grant applications, • training materials, and • implementation or procedural manuals. • concise summary of the intervention that

includes the intervention name, a description of its main components, the population(s) targeted, and the behavioral outcomes targeted.

Page 14: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

The Exemplary Program AwardsThe Exemplary Program Awards

• The Exemplary Program Award is designated by CSAP• The Exemplary Awards program recognizes prevention

programs in two tracks: Promising Programs—those that have positive initial results but have yet to verify outcomes scientifically, and Model Programs—those that are implemented under scientifically rigorous conditions and demonstrate consistently positive results.

• The Exemplary Awards recognize prevention programs that are innovative and effective and that successfully respond to the needs of their target populations, both as Promising Programs and Model Programs.

Page 15: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Exemplary Program Award: Exemplary Program Award: Review ProcessReview Process

• A multifaceted procedure is used identify and select Promising Programs to receive an Exemplary Substance Abuse Prevention Program Award annually. All nominated programs submit to a three-level review process.

• First, state agency personnel and national organizations submit their formal nominations.

• Applications are then reviewed by experts in the field of substance abuse prevention and former Exemplary Substance Abuse Prevention Program Award winners.

• Finally, the National Review Committee reviews and scores the top applications according to eight criteria and recommends those that merit an Exemplary Substance Abuse Prevention Program Award. Final selections are made jointly by NASADAD, CADCA, and SAMHSA/CSAP.

Page 16: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Exemplary Program AwardExemplary Program AwardApplication ProcessApplication Process

• Applications for the Innovative Programs may be obtained from State Alcohol and Drug Agencies, the NASADAD/NPN Web page (www.nasadad.org) and office.

• Applicants must submit their application to their national nominating organization (see application appendix) for sign-off. Applicants should then return the original signed, completed application (including cover sheet) and three copies to the NASADAD/NPN central office in Washington, D.C. For more information about the application process, call or write:

NASADAD/NPN808 17th Street, NW, Suite 410

Washington, DC 20006Attention: Exemplary Programs

Web page: www.nasadad.orgE-mail: [email protected]

(202) 293-0090, Fax (202) 293-1250

Page 17: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Exemplary Program Award Exemplary Program Award 8 Review Criteria8 Review Criteria

• Philosophy• Background and need (program planning)• Goals and objectives• Population(s) to be served• Activities and strategies• Community coordination• Evaluation• Program management

Page 18: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Service to ScienceService to Science

• Service to Science is a national initiative supported by SAMHSA/CSAP to enhance the evaluation capacity of innovative programs and practices that address critical substance abuse prevention or mental health needs.

http://captus.samhsa.gov/northeast/special_projects/service_to_science/main.cfm

Page 19: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Service to Science AcademyService to Science Academy

• Designed to enhance capability of community-based prevention strategies, programs or practices that demonstrate effectiveness.

• Each Academy is customized to support the needs of the groups/organizations and programs accepted to attend,

• Emphasis on the development of a strong evaluation and/or research design.

• Participants receive training and technical assistance helping them move along the evidence-based continuum

Page 20: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Service to Science Academy:Service to Science Academy:Eligibility CriteriaEligibility Criteria

1. Primarily focused on ATOD prevention, but may also address the prevention of violence, HIV/AIDS, STDs, etc. Expected outcomes or areas of focus include, but are not limited to, efforts to decrease high-risk behaviors by children or adults; eliminate use of illicit drugs; reduce underage use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs, and decrease DUI/DWI rates.

2. Nominated for recognition by a State Alcohol and Drug Agency, by the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America (CADCA), or by other national organizations or their affiliates.

3. Able to document and demonstrate success in the form of quantifiable outcome data.

4. In operation for a minimum of two (2) years.

Page 21: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Service to Science Academy:Service to Science Academy:Review CriteriaReview Criteria

• Philosophy• Needs Assessment• Population Served• Goals & Objectives• Activities & Strategies• Evaluation• Program Management• Community Coordination

Page 22: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Service to Science Academy: Service to Science Academy: Application ProcessApplication Process

• The application to attend a Service to Science Academy is a modified National Association of State Alcohol & Substance Abuse Directors (NASADAD) application for Innovative/Exemplary Programs.

• Applications are reviewed by a panel who makes recommendations for acceptance to the Academy.

Page 23: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Application Criteria as Application Criteria as Program PracticeProgram Practice

Live it!

• SDFSC Santa Cruz County: Service to Science AcademySanta Cruz County submitted an application and was awarded a program slot with the current cohort for the Service to Science Academy. The Santa Cruz team will receive a series of trainings and technical assistance to assist them in moving their program towards being recognized as a model or promising program.

• SDFSC Butte County: NPN Exemplary Program AwardButte County submitted 3 of their prevention programs for review: Friday Night Live Mentoring, Friday Night Live, and Youth Nexus. Two of these programs are being recognized nationally, with only 6 programs receiving this national recognition by the National Prevention Network Research.

• Andrea Taylor, Ph.D.: NREPP Model Program StatusAndrea Taylor evolved a local program, Across Ages, an intergenerational mentoring program that promotes positive youth development and helps prevent school failure, substance abuse and teen pregnancies into to an NREPP Model Program that is implemented nation-wide. The process spanned 1991-1998.

Page 24: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Advanced Program EssentialsAdvanced Program Essentials

Put Your Finger On It…

• Logic Model• Core Components• Documented Need and Value• Defining Population• Defining Need for Service within the

Community

Page 25: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Logic ModelLogic Model

“ A logic model is a systematic and visual way to present and share your understanding of the relationships among the resources you have to operate your program, the activities you plan, and the changes or results you hope to achieve.”

(W.K. Kellogg, Logic Model Development Guide, 2004)

Page 26: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Value of a Logic ModelValue of a Logic Model

A Picture is Worth a 1000 Words

• Builds understanding about what the program is, what it’s expected to do and what measures of success will be used.

• Provides a research-based theory behind your strategies

• Promotes communication and a common understanding amongst staff and funders

Page 27: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Core Program ComponentsCore Program Components

What are the “active ingredients” in the formula for program success?

• In theory, core components must be implemented precisely as intended in order to achieve demonstrated outcomes.

• Core components cannot be adapted.

Page 28: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Define Core ComponentsDefine Core ComponentsCore components might be:

• program structure (e.g. the sequence of sessions or context of delivery),

• program content (e.g. specific concepts or skill sets), or

• method of delivery (e.g. “homework” assignments, classroom infusion, or youth-led group activities).

Page 29: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Define PopulationDefine Population• Institute of Medicine (IOM) Classifications

Universal preventive interventions are activities targeted to the general public or a whole population group that has not been identified on the basis of individual risk. Selective preventive interventions are activities targeted to individuals or a subgroup of the population whose risk of developing a disorder is significantly higher than average. Indicated preventive interventions are activities targeted to individuals in high-risk environments, identified as having minimal but detectable signs or symptoms foreshadowing disorder or having biological markers indicating predisposition for disorder but not yet meeting diagnostic levels.

Page 30: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Defining Need for ServiceDefining Need for Service– Integrating key stakeholders in process

• Bonus points for youth• Representative of community

– Strategic Prevention Framework• Needs/Resource Assessment• Strategic Planning• Evidence-based Implementation

Strategic Prevention Framework

Assessment Capacity Planning Implementation Evaluation

Assemble data collection review

team, define substance abuse

problem

Identify and define

target population for reduction/prevention

Identify risk and protective factors

Develop tentative

theory of, or pathway to, change

Identify existing

prevention resources that

target problem & risk/protective

factors

Perform gap

analysis of needs and resources

Examine internal

resources, skills,

readiness

Build

collaboration through

teaming and networking

Examine

community resources

and readiness: external capacity

Determine domain(s) of concentration and

prioritize risk and protective factors

Examine

program/intervention options

Address cultural

relevancy

Explore

fidelity/adaptation balance

Select "best-fit"

program/ intervention

Choose to innovate

Develop logic models for overall

program, components

Develop action

plans for documentation

Document,

review, improve quality

Revisit fidelity

and adaptation issues

as necessary

Report immediate & intermediate

outcomes

Outline process

evaluation from action

plans

Assess long-

term outcomes/

general impact

Communicate outcomes to

key stakeholders

to build support

Re-measure outcomes & supplement

final report if necessary

Page 31: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Key ConsiderationsKey Considerations

Advancing Programming

• What’s the yardstick?

• How do I measure up?

• Where do I want to go from here?

Page 32: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Considerations: ParticipationConsiderations: Participation

• Recruitment – Are we meeting target #s consistently?– Are we using strategic recruitment methods?

• Retention: – Do we have sufficient completion rates? – Have we defined a program graduate/drop-out?– What do we do to encourage retention?

Page 33: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Considerations: FidelityConsiderations: Fidelity

• Fidelity – To what degree are we consistently

implementing core components? Is this sufficient?

– What system do we use to reflect on areas of challenge? How does that inform our process?

– What method do we use to monitor implementation across sites? Are we vigilant enough? Does feedback get incorporated?

Page 34: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Considerations: InnovationConsiderations: Innovation

• Degree to which program is novel, cutting edge, innovative.– How is this different than what’s already available?– What aspects of the program are unique?

• Grounded but Innovative: program alignment with already-proven models of service– What proven methods are incorporated in what we

do?– Did we take an evidence-based strategy to the “next

level” or use it in a novel way?

Page 35: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Considerations: PopulationConsiderations: Population

• How culturally appropriate are services to identified population?– Program content– Program materials (e.g. translation)– Staff (training and protocol)– Tested across ethnic/cultural groups– Link to evidence-based strategies

demonstrated with specific populations

Page 36: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Considerations: MarketingConsiderations: Marketing

• Have materials/curriculum been “packaged” – Sequencing– Branding– Training protocol tested and

established/documented

Page 37: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Considerations: ReplicationConsiderations: Replication

• Protocol– Program curriculum– Training process– Evaluation

• Packaged program materials– Curriculum– Evaluation

• Strategic replication– Varied populations– Varied context

Page 38: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Advancing Programs through Advancing Programs through EvaluationEvaluation

• Rigor

• Methodology

• Data Plan & Analysis

• Reporting

Page 39: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Increasing Evaluation Rigor Increasing Evaluation Rigor Across the BoardAcross the Board

Methodology/Design

Instrumentation to Analysis

Reporting

Page 40: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Tips for Optimal Evaluation RigorTips for Optimal Evaluation Rigor

• Use external evaluator to lend credibility– Especially valuable for publishing findings

• Conduct evaluation of replication sites– Evidence of impact in varied settings; populations

• Evaluate program effect and sustainability of effect– Pre/post demonstrates immediate effects– Follow up (longitudinal) proves how those effects are

sustained.

Page 41: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Advancing MethodologyAdvancing Methodology

• Process & Outcome

• Evaluation Design

• Tips for Optimal Design

Page 42: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Role of Process and Outcome MethodsRole of Process and Outcome Methods

Process

• Allows for continuous learning about how the program is working as it is implemented

• Focuses on clearly describing and assessing program design and implementation.

• Makes it possible to answer questions concerning “why” and “how” programs operate the way they do and what can be done to improve them.

Outcome

• The outcome evaluation focuses on producing clear evidence concerning the degree of program impact on program participants.

• Assesses the immediate or direct effects of program activities (as compared to long-term impact).

Page 43: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Level of Rigor: Level of Rigor: Outcome Evaluation Design Outcome Evaluation Design

Pre and Post with Control (Random Assignment)

Pre and Post with Comparison

Pre and Post with Follow-Up Pre and Post Only

Post-Test Only—Hindsight Comparison

Page 44: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

NREPP Source of Evidence Hierarchy

Page 45: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Tip for Optimal Design: Tip for Optimal Design: Matched DataMatched Data

Making a Match– Requires tracking of individuals– Allows for analysis of individual-level impact,

not just aggregate level– Can control for “dosage” or other factors

Page 46: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Looking at the long run…

The majority of programs use a pre/post assessment schedule. – The utilization of follow-up points is

recommended based on length of program • Consider a follow up point at 1, 3, 6, 9, or 12

months after completion. • Programs with continuous enrollment vs. cohorts of

youth need – strong tracking systems– Continuous evaluation schedule (e.g. every 3 or 6

months)

Tip for Optimal Design: Tip for Optimal Design: Longitudinal DataLongitudinal Data

Page 47: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day…

Comparison groups can sometimes be fairly easy to develop

• School data • Low dosage service groups can sometimes

be utilized—make the distinction between program drop-out versus evaluation drop-out

• Use standardized measures and compare program groups to school, district, state results.

Tip for Optimal Design: Tip for Optimal Design: Comparison GroupsComparison Groups

Page 48: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Control freak!

– Controls groups require resources and may deter participants due to randomization.

• The trick is in the approach and the ability to provide services at a later date.

Tip for Optimal Design: Tip for Optimal Design: Control GroupsControl Groups

Page 49: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Advancing InstrumentationAdvancing Instrumentation

• Standardized v. Locally Developed

• Tips for Optimal Instrumentation

Page 50: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Survey OptionsSurvey Options

Pros• Already developed, lots of

choices. • Psychometrics established• Allows for comparison of

results—national, state, district levels

• Scoring and analysis sometimes available

Cons• Cost • May not be specific to your

population• May not capture novel

aspects of program

Pros• Can tap into novel program

aspects/impact• Can be tailored to

population• No cost

Cons• Don’t know reliability/validity• Doesn’t allow for

comparison

Page 51: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Tip for Optimal InstrumentationTip for Optimal Instrumentation

• Next level of locally developed measures– “performance measure”/psychometrics of

instruments • reliability & validity (done by your evaluator)

• Track at individual level – Confidential Ids– Develop comprehensive database

Page 52: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Advancing Data Management & Advancing Data Management & ProcessingProcessing

• Data Plan

• Sample Size

• Data Analysis

Page 53: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Data PlanData Plan

• Develop plan for analyzing data based on proposed outcomes (logic model)– What questions to ask of the data?– What piece of the data answers each

question?– Potential sub-group comparisons

(e.g. by gender, dosage, site)

Page 54: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Tips for Optimal Data PlanTips for Optimal Data Plan

• Specify cutoff points for baseline assessment (Defined for program)e.g. Baseline assessments are defined as those

completed prior to session 2 of the curriculum.

• Define completers vs. dropoutse.g. Parents attending 85% of sessions are defined as

program “completers”; less than 10% are defined as “dropouts”.

• Ensure matched pre/post – Individual vs. aggregate level findings

Page 55: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Planning a Sample SizePlanning a Sample Size

How Much Wood should a Woodchuck Chuck?• Sample size (N): refers to population

participating or being measured (e.g. # of participants; # of sites)

• Power: Probability of finding a true effect– Type I error: state a finding when there isn’t one (a false

positive)– Type II error: state no finding when there is one (a false

negative)

• Sample size & Power – Influences types and sensitivity of analysis– Larger sample size increases power

Page 56: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Tips for Optimal Data Plan: Tips for Optimal Data Plan: Strategic Sample SizeStrategic Sample Size

• Calculate necessary sample size for appropriate statistical power

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

http://www.macorr.com/ss_calculator.htm

• Resource limitations: consider using a strategic sub-sample

Page 57: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Data Analysis: Data Analysis: Beyond Percentage ReportingBeyond Percentage Reporting

• Means with standard deviation– SD reflects the variability of values

• Tests of significance (comparative analysis)– Correlations

As participation level increases, attendance rate significantly increases.

– Chi square analysisYouth demonstrated statistically significant

improvements in communication skills over time.

Page 58: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Tips for Optimal Data Analysis: Tips for Optimal Data Analysis: Techniques & StrategiesTechniques & Strategies

• Leverage variability in data/dosage to program advantage e.g. Youth who completed the program were more likely

to have negative attitudes toward use than youth who did not complete the program.

• Identify potential comparison data sets (e.g. school records)e.g. School records show that participating youth had

significantly fewer discipline referrals than the general student population.

Page 59: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Advancing Reporting MethodsAdvancing Reporting Methods

• Venues for Dissemination

• Cater to the Crowd

• Tips for Optimal Reporting

Page 60: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Where to DisseminateWhere to Disseminate

• Evaluation Reports

• Summary Reports

• Applications

• Grants

• Press Release

• Professional Publications

• Academic/research Publications

Page 61: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

– What information is relevant to your audience?• Note preferred models/frameworks, rhetoric• Highlight information that is of value to them

– To what extent is detail or brevity important to your audience?

– Are pieces of program information weighted differently (e.g. a reviewer point system)

– Work with your evaluator in developing a brief findings report as well as a full evaluation report

Cater to the CrowdCater to the Crowd

Page 62: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Tips for Optimal Reporting: Tips for Optimal Reporting: Frame ItFrame It

• The evaluator is responsible for providing the full and objective picture

• Program Director may choose to highlight the most positive findings when reporting to funders or stakeholders—if appropriate

• Wording can make a difference! The same findings can be written in a variety of ways—be conscious of the wording.

Page 63: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

• Say It In Pictures– The appropriate use of charts and graphs can be a

powerful tool in conveying findings.

• Bring It Home– The use of personal quotes and case examples

can be powerful when they are used to supplement key quantitative findings.

– Personal experiences make the impact real to the reader

– However, when misused they can make the evaluation seem less credible

Tips for Optimizing Reporting: Tips for Optimizing Reporting: The MessageThe Message

Page 64: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough

Climbing the Mountain: What’s Climbing the Mountain: What’s Your Next Step?Your Next Step?

• Action Planning Exercise – Defining short-term, intermediate, and long-

term goals (e.g. 1 yr, 3yr, and 5 yr goals)• Programmatic Goals• Evaluation Goals• Opportunity Goals

– How can we support you in your climb to the top?

• Customized TA and Training plans

Page 65: Ain’t No Mountain High Enough