Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2...
Transcript of Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2...
![Page 1: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
EvaluationMarilyn TownsendDecember 14, 2011
1
![Page 2: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Who…• Has evaluation outcomes?• Has shared outcomes with community partners?• Has shared outcomes with Board of Supervisors• Has shared outcomes with legislator (state or federal)
What was the response?Why evaluation?
![Page 3: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
US
US
CA
Your county**
Other counties
Other states Counties
EFNEP Outcomes**Your data makes a difference
SRSCRS
![Page 4: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
WhyisEFNEPdifferent?• EFNEP has a standardized evaluation methods/protocol. Why?
• Advantages?• Disadvantages?• Your dream evaluation system?
![Page 5: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
2010‐2011DataComparison….ImpactIndicators
#1 #2 #3 #4
CA FY 11 55% 64% 56%
CA FY 10 54% 60% 55%
EFNEP has 4 impact indicators. Based on FBC.#1 = Eat a variety of foods#2 = increased knowledge of nutrition#3 = increased ability to select low cost, nutrition foods#4 = improved practices in food preparation and safety
![Page 6: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
2010‐2011DataComparison# Agreements
CA FY 11 660CA FY 10 105
Much improvement! We have not focused on Interagency Cooperation. An agreement does not need to be a MOU.
![Page 7: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
ProgramPriorities‐ Progress
1. Increase adult milk group intake using recall dataBaseline 0.2 2015 Goal: 0.5FY 11 = 0.3 – we are getting there!
2. Improve fruit intakeBaseline 0.3 2015 Goal: 0.5FY 11 = 0.4
![Page 8: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
ProgramPriorities3. Improve % of Families with food security
[ Not running out of food at the end of the month]Baseline 46% 2015 Goal: 52%FY 11: 46% ‐ we maintained.
![Page 9: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
FY2010– 2011NEERSData
![Page 10: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Increasedourreachby12%!
# (%)
2008‐2009 2009‐2010
2010‐2011
Program families 7,983 8,065 9,034
Graduated 6,591 83%
6,504 81%
7,219 80%468
continuingTerminated 958
(12%)1,295 (16 %)
1,347(15%)
![Page 11: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Doweknowthatwearereachingourtargetaudience?
2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2009‐2010
Families without children
10% 9% 9%
<=50% poverty 16% 26% 30%
> 186% 1% 2% 2%
Income not specified
47% 27% 15%
![Page 12: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
AdultEducationLevels
2008‐2009
2009‐2010
2010‐2011
Grade 6 9% 17% 16%
Grade 7‐11 21% 27% 19%
Grade 12 or GED 23% 27% 28%
Some college 11% 12% 13%
Graduated college/post
4% 4% 4%
Education not specified
32% 12% 8%
![Page 13: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Youth2008‐2009
2009‐2010
2010‐2011
Groups 960 1,047 1,195
Total Youth 27,317 37,026 40,512
• Slight increase in 3 & 4 yrolds, but we did not know. We had a greater increase in other grades.
• 1,195 groups with 10,279 meetings = 8.6 meetings/group.
• 9,194 contact hrs/10,279 meetings = 10,279 = 54 minutes per meeting.
• Improvement in race information given, only 19% race missing vs 43% last year!
17% increase in total youth receiving nutrition
education
![Page 14: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
2010‐2011DataComparison% impFRM
% imp NP % imp FS 1 % Pos PA Change
CA FY 11 85% 91% 72% 42.7%
CA FY 10 86% 90% 73% 41%
![Page 15: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
2010‐2011DataComparisonrecalls
OilChange
Ave HEI ScoreEntry
Ave HEI ScoreExit
% Pos Food Group Change
CA FY 11 0 0 0 70.2%CA FY 10 0 0 0 65.1%
Entry to exit Grain Change
FruitChange
VegChange
MilkChange
MeatChange
CA FY 11 1 0.4 0.4 0.3 ‐0.1CA FY 10 0 0.3 0.4 0.2 ‐0.1
![Page 16: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
2010‐2011DataComparison% ImpInd #1
% ImpInd #2
% ImpInd #3
% ImpInd #4
CA FY 11 55% 64% 56%
CA FY 10 54% 60% 55%
#1 = Eat a variety of foods#2 = increased knowledge of nutrition#3 = increased ability to select low cost, nutrition foods#4 = improved practices in food preparation and safety
![Page 17: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
2009‐2010DataComparison
Cost/ part
Total Para FTE
Adult % Grad Total other family mem
CA $82.66 31.7 8,065 81% 26,237
Tier 1 $88.16 236.1 47,437 64% 142,603
National $113.21 973.1 137,737 65% 378,535
• EFNEP divides EFNEP land grant universities into seven tiers, based upon state funding allocation.
• CA is in Tier 1 and receives the second highest allocation.• FY 09‐10 EFNEP’s federal allocation: $68,070,000.• Tier 1 Univ (5): TX A & M, UC, Cornell, PennState, N Carolina
![Page 18: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
2009‐2010DataComparison% Pregnant
% w/ochildren
Ave # months
Ave # Lessons
% Urban
CA 6% 8% 2.2 8 70%Tier 1 10% 5% 3.1 7.8 63%National 11% 10% 3.4 8.4 54%
%Poverty> 50
%Poverty101‐185
%Poverty> 185+
% Poverty Unspecified
PublicAsst.Entry
CA 29.9% 10.5% 1.7% 23.2% 81%Tier 1 38.4% 10.6% 2.0% 20.7% 83%National 40% 7.9% 1.6% 27.0% 77%
![Page 19: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
2009‐2010DataComparison% impFRM
% impNP
% impFS
% Pos PA Change
Ave cost savings
CA 86% 90% 73% 41% $47.32
Tier 1 84% 89% 68% 35.5% $ 22.12
National 84% 89% 67% 29.6% $17.39
![Page 20: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
2009‐2010DataComparison
OilChange
Ave HEI ScoreEntry
Ave HEI Score Exit
% Pos Food Group Change
CA 0 0 0 65.1%Tier 1 ‐3.5 46.2 50.2 88.6%National ‐2.6 47.8 52.5 93.1%
Grain Change
FruitChange
VegChange
MilkChange
MeatChange
CA 0 0.3 0.4 0.2 ‐0.1Tier 1 ‐0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0National 0 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2
![Page 21: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
2009‐2010DataComparisonTotal Youth
Ave Y/Group
Ave # Months
% school % afterschool
CA 37,026 35 10.1 82% 14%Tier 1 143,711 34 3.5 70% 9%National 463,560 27 5 65% 4%
% Club % SpecInt. Group
% Urban % Town % City
CA 1% 3% 67% 13% 11%Tier 1 1% 19% 58% 13% 14%National 11% 19% 43% 29% 19%
![Page 22: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
2009‐2010DataComparison% P3yr % P4yr % K % Gr 1 % Gr2
CA 7% 25% 10% 7% 8%Tier 1 2% 7% 8% 13% 14%National 2% 7% 9% 11% 12%
% Gr 3 % Gr4 % Gr 5 % Gr 6 % Gr7CA 7% 8% 8% 6% 6%Tier 1 14% 14% 12% 6% 3%National 16% 14% 11% 5% 3%
![Page 23: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
2009‐2010DataComparison
% Spec Ed
% ImpInd #1
% ImpInd #2
% ImpInd #3
% ImpInd #4
CA 2% 54% 60% 55%Tier 1 1% 73% 75% 79% 65%National 1% 61% 62% 57% 54%
% Gr 8 % Gr9 % Gr 10 % Gr 11 % Gr12CA 4% 1% 1% 1% 0%Tier 1 3% 1% 1% 1% 0%National 3% 1% 1% 1% 1%
![Page 24: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
2009‐2010DataComparison
% WIC Offices served
% SNAPOffices served
# Agreements
CA 6% 16% 105
Tier 1 34% 30% 1,875
National 47% 49% 5,135
![Page 25: Marilyn Townsend - ##Dec 14 Evaluation12.13.11efnep.ucanr.edu/files/134619.pdf · Ind#1 %Imp Ind#2 % Imp Ind#3 %Imp Ind#4 CA FY 11 55% 64% 56% CA FY 10 54% 60% 55% #1 = Eat a variety](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042710/5f5b676fc7db24666e29615b/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
2011‐2013• Expectations high with new data collection tools