summative evaluation report 2014-2015 - boys & … & girls clubs of central florida –...

Summative Evaluation Report 2014-2015

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

21st Century Community

Learning Centers

Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida –

Tupperware Brands Boys & Girls Club

This report was prepared for the Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida

Tupperware Brands Boys & Girls Club 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/

Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida – Tupperware Brands Boys & Girls Club

Summative Evaluation Report 2014-2015 1

Table of Contents 1.0 Overview and History .......................................................................... 5

2.0 Student Characteristics ..................................................................... 14

2.1 Total Student Enrollment and Attendance ......................................... 14

2.2 Student Demographics ........................................................................ 14

3.0 Program Operations ............................................................................. 17

3.1 Summer Operation .............................................................................. 17

3.2 School Year Operation ......................................................................... 18

4.0 Staff Characteristics ............................................................................. 19

4.1 Staff Demographics .............................................................................. 19

4.2 Student-to-Staff Ratio ......................................................................... 20

4.3 Staff Training ........................................................................................ 20

4.4 Staff Turnover ...................................................................................... 20

4.5 Certified Teachers ................................................................................ 20

5.0 Objectives and Outcomes ................................................................ 21

5.1 Objectives and Activities ...................................................................... 21

5.2 Data Collection Methods ..................................................................... 27

5.2.1 Measures and Data Collected ...................................................... 27

5.2.2 Data Collection Timeline .............................................................. 27

5.2.3 Data Quality ................................................................................. 28

5.2.4 Continuous Assessment ............................................................... 28

5.2.5 Student Inclusion ......................................................................... 28

5.3 Data Analysis and Results: Progress Toward and Achievement of

Objectives ............................................................................................ 29

5.3.1 Objective 1 ................................................................................... 29



5.3.2 Objective 2 ................................................................................... 30

5.3.3 Objective 3 ................................................................................... 32

5.3.4 Objective 4 ................................................................................... 34

5.3.5 Objective 5 ................................................................................... 35

5.3.6 Objective 6 ................................................................................... 37

5.3.7 Objective 7 ................................................................................... 38

5.3.8 Objective 8 ................................................................................... 40

5.3.9 Objective 9 ................................................................................... 41

5.3.10 Objective 10 ............................................................................... 43

5.3.11 Objective 11 ............................................................................... 44

5.3.12 Objective 12 ............................................................................... 45

5.3.13 Objective 13 ............................................................................... 47

5.3.14 Objective 14 ............................................................................... 48

5.3.15 Objective 15 ............................................................................... 48

5.3.16 Objective 16 ............................................................................... 49

5.3.17 Objective 17 ............................................................................... 49

5.3.18 Objective 18 ............................................................................... 50

5.3.19 Objective 19 ............................................................................... 50

5.3.20 Objective 20 ............................................................................... 51

5.3.21 Objective 21 ............................................................................... 51

5.3.22 Objective 22 ............................................................................... 53

5.3.23 Objective 23 ............................................................................... 53

5.3.24 Objective 24 ............................................................................... 54

5.3.25 Objective 25 ............................................................................... 55

5.3.26 Objective 26 ............................................................................... 56

5.4 Other Findings ...................................................................................... 57

5.4.1 Reading Report Card Data ........................................................... 57

5.4.2 Math Report Card Data ............................................................... 59

5.4.3 Science Report Card Data ............................................................ 61

5.4.4 2014 FCAT Reading Data.............................................................. 63



5.4.5 2014 FCAT Math Data .................................................................. 64

5.4.6 Parent Survey Data ...................................................................... 66

5.4.7 Teacher Survey Data .................................................................... 68

5.4.8 Student Survey Data .................................................................... 69

5.5 Student Success Snapshot .................................................................... 71

5.6 Overall Findings for Each Objective ..................................................... 71

5.6.1 Objective 1 ................................................................................... 71

5.6.2 Objective 2 ................................................................................... 72

5.6.3 Objective 3 ................................................................................... 72

5.6.4 Objective 4 ................................................................................... 72

5.6.5 Objective 5 ................................................................................... 72

5.6.6 Objective 6 ................................................................................... 72

5.6.7 Objective 7 ................................................................................... 72

5.6.8 Objective 8 ................................................................................... 73

5.6.9 Objective 9 ................................................................................... 73

5.6.10 Objective 10 ............................................................................... 73

5.6.11 Objective 11 ............................................................................... 73

5.6.12 Objective 12 ............................................................................... 74

5.6.13 Objective 13 ............................................................................... 74

5.6.14 Objective 14 ............................................................................... 74

5.3.15 Objective 15 ............................................................................... 74

5.3.16 Objective 16 ............................................................................... 74

5.3.17 Objective 17 ............................................................................... 75

5.3.18 Objective 18 ............................................................................... 75

5.3.19 Objective 19 ............................................................................... 75

5.3.20 Objective 20 ............................................................................... 75

5.3.21 Objective 21 ............................................................................... 75

5.3.22 Objective 22 ............................................................................... 76

5.3.23 Objective 23 ............................................................................... 76

5.3.24 Objective 24 ............................................................................... 76



5.3.25 Objective 25 ............................................................................... 76

5.3.26 Objective 26 ............................................................................... 76

6.0 Progress Towards Sustainability .................................................. 77

7.0 Lessons Learned and Recommendations ................................. 78



1.0 OVERVIEW AND HISTORY

Introduction

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 Tupperware Brands Boys & Girls Club, a Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida club site,

served as a 21st CCLC program site during the 2014-2015 school year. The approved after school

funding for this site included serving 150 K-6 students after school and 75 students on

weekends/holidays. The program was approved to operate for 171 days and 15 hours per week

after school. On weekend/holidays, the program was approved to operate for 20 days at 10

hours per day on holidays. It is important to note that the 21st CCLC program at this site started

on January 12, 2015. Even though most 21st CCLC program in the state begin operating in

August, this program received funding well after the start of the 2014-2015 school year. The

late start made it more difficult to meet each grant objective because students had a shorter

timeframe to make the appropriate gains. However, this program worked hard to deliver the

curriculum and carry out the requirements of the grant, which is reflected in the objective

assessment outcomes in this report.

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 Tupperware Brands Boys & Girls Club served

targeted Title I schools and 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. Thro ugh 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 are used to inform the

program how it was progressing at mid-year. However, since this program started on January



12, 2015 there was no formative evaluation performed at the mid-year point, which would

usually take place in January or February. 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 your 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. Since this grant does not provide a summer program,

there will be no information listed for the summer 2014 program.

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

Tupperware BGC 0 156 0 156 0 147 0 147

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 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

Tupperware BGC 71 74 11 6-13 70 74 3 6-13

*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

Tupperware BGC 1 144 11 2 143 11


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

Site Name

Limited English

Proficient

Identified with

Disability

Yes No DK* Yes No DK

Tupperware BGC 1 143 3 2 142 3




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

Tupperware BGC 0 0 12 110 4 30 0 0 12 109 4 22

* 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

Tupperware BGC 0 14 23 24 26 25 27 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 156

* 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

Tupperware BGC 0 9 21 24 25 25 27 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 147

* 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

Tupperware BGC 145 0 11




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

Site Name Free or Reduced-Price Lunch

Yes No DK

Tupperware BGC 144 0 3


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. Since this grant does

not provide a summer program, there will be no information listed for the summer 2014

program.

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

Tupperware BGC N/A N/A N/A 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. As previously mentioned, it is important to note that the 21st CCLC program at this

site started on January 12, 2015. Even though most 21st CCLC program in the state begin

operating in August, this program received funding well after the start of the 2014-2015 school

year.

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

Tupperware BGC 20.6 103 5 15 HOLIDAYS:

10 HRS/DAY 96 7



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 this 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 (Tupperware Brands Boys & Girls Club)

Staff Type* Summer of 2014

2014-2015

School Year

Paid1 Volunteer Paid1 Volunteer

School day teachers (former and substitute) N/A N/A 6 0

Center administrators and coordinators N/A N/A 1 0

Youth development workers and non-school day

staff with college degree or higher N/A N/A 6 0

Other non-teaching school day staff N/A N/A 4 0

Parents N/A N/A 0 0

College students N/A N/A 0 0

High school students N/A N/A 0 0

Other community members N/A N/A 0 6

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

Other** (Transportation) N/A N/A 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. Three meetings took place that included a professional development session. The

information about these meetings are as follows:

Professional Development meeting – February 24, 2015

Session titled: “Five Keys to Rigorous PBL”

Professional Development meeting – March 17, 2015

Session titled: “STEM Everywhere: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math in the

Real World”

Professional Development meeting – April 7, 2015

Session titled: “How to Create Effective Lesson Plans”

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 three 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. All of the 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 twenty-six 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. It is important to

note that the verbiage of each objective is repeated for different age groups. The state

required 21st CCLC programs to report data separately for each objective and for each age

group that was targeted. In this case, there were two target age groups: elementary students

and middle school students. The data was required to be evaluated and reported separately

per objective. In the table below, after each objective statement, the age group is identified as

“ELEM” for elementary students and “MIDDLE” for middle school students. The words that are

bold within the objective statements refer to the objective assessment was used to analyze the

specific 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. (ELEM)

a) Homework Assistance

b) Reading Computer Based Activities

c) Differentiated Instruction

d) Classroom Instruction/PBL Projects targeting reading

skills











and grades. (ELEM)


skills






and grades. (MIDDLE)





skills











skills

Objective 5: 75% of regularly


maintain or improve their math



and grades. (ELEM)


b) Math Computer Based Activities


d) Manipulatives

d) Classroom Instruction/PBL Projects targeting math

skills






and grades. (ELEM)




d) Manipulatives


skills










d) Manipulatives


skills












d) Manipulatives


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 – 5)


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


in MIDDLE SCHOOL)




skills

d) Investigations












Discovery Education


grade 3 and above)


skills

d) Investigations

Objective 13: 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.

(ELEM)

a) Discussion and role play scenarios

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




offered will increase their

knowledge of how to support

their child’s learning and be

involved in their child’s life.

(MIDDLE)


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. (ELEM)

Family programming such as:

a) LEAD Institute parenting workshops

b) Family nights,

c) PBL project showcases

d) Parent/child interactions


students’ parents/guardians will

attend a minimum of one 21st


the grant year. (MIDDLE)



b) Family nights,






offered will demonstrate

motivation/interest in family


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



involvement throughout the year.

(ELEM)

e) Parenting Vision & Effectiveness




offered will demonstrate

motivation/interest in family

involvement throughout the year.

(MIDDLE)


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 19: 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.

(ELEM)



b) Family nights



Objective 20: At least 70% of

parents/guardians participating in

21st CCLC services will report


member services, as




(MIDDLE)



b) Family nights



Objective 21: 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.

(ELEM)

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


(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.

(MIDDLE)

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. (ELEM)

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!



increase their knowledge of good

nutrition and healthy habits, as

measured by pre, mid and post


Habits program. (MIDDLE)

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!


(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.

(ELEM)

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




(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.

(MIDDLE)

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. (ELEM)

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

Findings (Grade Levels K-5):

Objective met.

Total students with sufficient data – 112

97% met the stated success criterion

Objective Status – Meets or Exceeds Benchmark

97% of students in grades K thru 5 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. 112 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion, of which 109

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



Table 14: BGC Tupperware Standardized Reading Score Statistics (Grades K-5)

Total Students*

Min Max M SD

Pre-Test Scores 112 1008 1692 1397.6 134.9 Post-Test Scores 112 1353 2485 1610.9 154.0 Difference or Change in Score

112 -35 1232 213.4 151.1

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

year data

Across grades K through 5, students improved reading assessment scores by an average of 213.4

points over the course of the year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score is 151.1, 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: BGC Tupperware K-5 Student Standardized Reading Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained

Score Increased Met Goal (5+)

3% 0% 97% 97%


reading skills as demonstrated by Discovery Education Assessments and grades. (ELEM)



Grades from Quarter 1 to Quarter 4”



Success Criterion:

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

Findings (Grade Level 2-5):

Objective met.




68% 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. 77 students had sufficient data to measure the

criterion; of those, 68 students met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for statistics related

to this objective.

Table 16: BGC Tupperware Grades 2 thru 5 Reading Report Card Student Improvement (% of students)

Total Students Improved Grade (%)

Maintained C+ Grade (%)

Met Goal (%)

77 40% 48% 88%



Chart 1: BGC Tupperware Grades 2-5 Reading Report Card Letter Grade Improvements, Q1 to Q4


reading skills as demonstrated by Discovery Education Assessments and grades. (MIDDLE)



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

Findings (Grade Level 6):

Objective met.




0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2dn Grade 3rd Grade 4th Grade 5th Grade

Decreased Grade

Maintained Grade

Increased by 1

Increased by 2+



100% of students in grade level 6 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. 13 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion, and of those all students met

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

Table 17: BGC Tupperware Standardized Reading Score Statistics (Grade 6)

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


13 125 415 271.8 88.2


year data

In grade 6, reading assessment scores increased by an average of 271.8 points over the course of the

year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score is 88.2, 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 18: BGC Tupperware Grade 6 Student Standardized Reading Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained


0% 0% 100% 100%




reading skills as demonstrated by Discovery Education Assessments and grades. (MIDDLE)




Success Criterion:

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


Objective met.




75% of students in grade 6 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. 12 students had sufficient data to measure the

criterion; of which, 9 students met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for statistics related

to this objective.

Table 19: BGC Tupperware Grade 6 Reading Report Card Student Improvement (% of students)



Met Goal (%)

12 25% 50% 75%



Chart 2: BGC Tupperware Grade 6 Reading Report Card Letter Grade Improvements, Q1 to Q4

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

skills as demonstrated by Discovery Education Assessments and grades. (ELEM)


“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 score points or higher


Objective met.




0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Maintained Grade Increased by 1

6th Grade



93% of students in grades K thru 5 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. 111 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion, of which 103


Table 20: BGC Tupperware Standardized Math Score Statistics (Grades K-5)

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


111 -144 1463 223.4 180.9


year data

Across grades K through 5, students improved math assessment scores by an average of 223.4 points

over the course of the year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score is 180.9, which is






Table 21: BGC Tupperware Grades K-5 Student Standardized Math Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained


6% 1% 93% 93%




skills as demonstrated by Discovery Education Assessments and grades. (ELEM)



by Grades from Quarter 1 to Quarter 4”

Success Criterion:

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

Findings (Grade Level 2-5):

Objective met.




78% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in math proficiency as measured by





structure in these levels does not include a ‘C’ grade. 77 students had sufficient data to measure the

criterion; of those, 60 students met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for statistics related

to this objective

Table 22: BGC Tupperware Grades 2 thru 5 Math Report Card Student Improvement (% of students)



Met Goal (%)

77 29% 49% 78%



Chart 3: BGC Tupperware Grades 2-5 Math Report Card Letter Grade Improvements, Q1 to Q4


skills as demonstrated by Discovery Education Assessments and grades. (MIDDLE)



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 score points or higher


Objective met.


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2nd Grade 3rd Grade 4th Grade 5th Grade

Decreased Grade

Maintained Grade

Increased by 1

Increased by 2





100% of students in grade 6 with sufficient data indicated improvement in mathematics proficiency as



The success criterion required that the change in the math score be increased by a minimum of 5

score points. 13 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion, and of those, all students met


Table 23: WDW and UO Standardized Math Score Statistics (Grade 6)

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


13 151 511 341.2 101.1


year data

In grade level 6, mathematics assessment scores increased by an average of 341.2 points over the

course of the year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score is 101.1, 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 3.4 BGC Tupperware Grade 6 Student Standardized Math Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained


0% 0% 100% 100%




skills as demonstrated by Discovery Education Assessments and grades. (MIDDLE)



by Grades from Quarter 1 to Quarter 4”

Success Criterion:

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


Objective met.




83% of students in grade 6 with sufficient data indicated improvement in mathematics 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. 12 students had sufficient data to measure the

criterion; of which, 10 students met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for statistics related

to this objective.

Table 24: BGC Tupperware Grade 6 Math Report Card Student Improvement (% of students)



Met Goal (%)

12 33% 50% 83%



Chart 4: BGC Tupperware Grade 6 Math Report Card Letter Grade Improvements, Q1 to Q4

5.3.9 Objective 9: 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 – 5)


“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

Findings (Grade Levels 3-5):

Objective met.



0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Decreased Grade Maintained Grade Increased by 1

6th Grade




100% of students in grades 3 thru 5 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 reading score be increased by a

minimum of 5 score points. 66 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion; of those, all


Table 25: BGC Tupperware Grade 3 thru 5 Science Standardized Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


66 9 587 261.9 93.0


year data

Across grades 3 through 5, students improved science assessment scores by an average of 261.9

points over the course of the year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score is 93.0, which is






Table 26: BGC Tupperware Grade 3-5 Student Standardized Science Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained


0% 0% 100% 100%






students grade 3 and above)



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


Objective not met.



Objective Status – Limited Progress

2% of students in grades K thru 2 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. 43 students had sufficient data to measure

the criterion; of those, 2 students met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for statistics

related to this objective.

Table 27: BGC Tupperware Grades K-2 Curriculum-Based Science Assessment Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min (%)

Max (%)

M (%) SD (%)

Post-Test Scores 102 12 100 27.4 15.8 *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 27.4%. The standard

deviation (SD) of scores earned is 15.8%, 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.




students in MIDDLE SCHOOL)



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

Success Criterion:

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


Objective met.




100% of students in grade 6 with sufficient data indicated improvement in science proficiency as



The success criterion required that the change in the reading score be increased by a minimum of 5

score points. 13 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion; of which, all students met the

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



Table 28: BGC Tupperware Grade 6 Science Standardized Score Statistics

Total Students*

Min Max M SD


13 63 256 177.5 59.9


year data

In grade 6, students improved science assessment scores by an average of 177.5 points over the

course of the year. The standard deviation (SD) of change in score is 59.9, 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 29: BGC Tupperware Grade 6 Student Standardized Science Improvement (% of students)

Score Decreased

Score Maintained


0% 0% 100% 100%




students grade 3 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



Findings (Grade Levels 2-6):

Objective met.




87% of students with sufficient data indicated improvement in science proficiency as measured by





structure in these levels does not include a ‘C’ grade. Data for this objective include students in 2nd

thru 5th grades. 77 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion; of which, 67 students met


Table 30: BGC Tupperware Grades 2-5 Science Report Card Student Improvement (% of students)



Met Goal (%)

77 34% 53% 87%

Chart 5: BGC Tupperware Grades 2-5 Science Report Card Letter Grade Improvements, Q1 to Q4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2nd Grade 3rd Grade 4th Grade 5th Grade

Decreased Grade

Maintained Grade

Increased by 1

Increased by 2



5.3.13 Objective 13: 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. (ELEM)


“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

Findings (Grades K-5):

Objective met.

Total parents with sufficient data – 145



100% of parents of students in grades K-5 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 achieve a score of 70% or higher. 145 parents had sufficient

data to measure the criterion. All parents met the criterion. Please refer to the table below for

statistics related to this objective.

Table 31: BGC Tupperware Parent Survey Statistics (Grades K-5)

# of Workshops Attended

# of Parents Avg Score (%)

# Met Goal % Met Goal

2 16 93.8% 16 100% 3 101 94.1% 101 100% 4 28 97.1% 28 100%

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

achieved higher on average.




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

and be involved in their child’s life. (MIDDLE)

The result for this objective includes the analysis of data given for all grades, K through 6. Due

to the nature of the data collection, grade level was not able to be determined with

confidence for each line entry survey response. The full names of the students were not used

for all entries, therefore parent responses were not categorized into grade levels 6-8

separately.

5.3.15 Objective 15: 25% of 21st CCLC students’ parents/guardians will attend a minimum of

one 21st CCLC family program/event during the grant year. (ELEM)


“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

Findings:

Objective met.




Of 145 regularly participating students enrolled, 112 parents attended individual events on average

throughout the year.



5.3.16 Objective 16: 25% of 21st CCLC students’ parents/guardians will attend a minimum of

one 21st CCLC family program/event during the grant year. (MIDDLE)


“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

Findings:

Objective met.




Of 145 regularly participating students enrolled, 112 parents attended individual events on average

throughout the year.


programming offered will demonstrate motivation/interest in family involvement throughout

the year. (ELEM)


“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.




Objective met.




97% of parents with students in grades K thru 5 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 survey results. 143 parents had sufficient data to measure the criterion; of

which, 139 parents met the criterion by responding to the survey affirmatively.


programming offered will demonstrate motivation/interest in family involvement throughout

the year. (MIDDLE)





separately.

5.3.19 Objective 19: 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. (ELEM)


“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




Objective met.




97% of parents with students in grades K thru 5 with sufficient data indicated satisfaction with adult

family member services based on Satisfaction Survey results during the current year. The success

criterion was found using parent survey results. 143 parents had sufficient data to measure the

criterion; of which, 139 parents met the criterion by responding to the survey affirmatively.

5.3.20 Objective 20: 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. (MIDDLE)





separately.

5.3.21 Objective 21: 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. (ELEM)


“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




Objective not met.



Objective Status – Approaching Benchmark

70% of students in Grades K thru 5 with sufficient data indicated improvement in two parts of the

President’s Challenge Physical Fitness Test, based on Pre and Post assessment scores throughout the

current year. The success criterion required that the students increase scores in at least two parts of

the President’s Challenge Physical Fitness Test. Using data completed at the beginning and end of the

year, those students who showed improvement at the end of the year in both parts of the fitness test

were considered to have met the success criterion. 115 students had sufficient data to measure the

criterion; of which, 81 students met the criterion. Please refer to the chart below for information

related to this objective.

Chart 6: BGC Tupperware Grades K-5 President’s Challenge Physical Fitness Test – Achieved Criterion

Of the 81 students who achieved the success criterion, the largest percentage was in 5th grade. The

smallest percentage was Kindergarten.

7%

11%

15%

23%

20%

24% Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



5.3.22 Objective 22: 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. (MIDDLE)


“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

Findings (Grade 6):

Objective met.




79% of students in Grade 6 with sufficient data showed improvement in two parts of the President’s

Challenge Physical Fitness Test, based on Pre and Post assessment scores throughout the current

year. The success criterion required that the students increase scores in at least two parts of the

President’s Challenge Physical Fitness Test. Using data completed at the beginning and end of the

year, those students who showed improvement at the end of the year in both parts of the fitness test

were considered to have met the success criterion. 14 students in grade 6 had sufficient data to

measure the criterion; of which, 11 students met the criterion.

5.3.23 Objective 23: 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. (ELEM)


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




Success Criterion:

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


Objective not met.



Objective Status – None

0% of students in grades K thru 5 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 students achieve a score

of 20 or higher. 119 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion; of which, zero students met

the criterion.

5.3.24 Objective 24: 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. (MIDDLE)


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


Success Criterion:

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

Findings (Grade 6):

Objective not met.






0% of students in grade 6 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 students achieve a score of 20 or

higher. 14 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion; of which, zero students met the

criterion.

5.3.25 Objective 25: 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. (ELEM)


“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


Objective not met.




0% of the students in grades K thru 5 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. 116 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion; of those, zero

students met the success criterion.



5.3.26 Objective 26: 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. (MIDDLE)


“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

Findings (Grade 6):

Objective met.




0% of the students in grade 6 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. 14 students had sufficient data to measure the criterion; of which, zero students met the success

criterion.



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 113 students reported enough data to determine letter grade improvements. Of

those students, 32% increased their grade by one letter grade, 2% increased by two letter grades, and

1% increased by 3 letter grades.

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

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Increased by 1 Increased by 2 Increased by 3

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

6th Grade



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

Chart 9: Reading Report Card Improvements by 2 or More Letter Grades (All Grade Levels)

8%

6%

11%

17%

22%

28%

8%Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

6th Grade

67%

33%

4th Grade

5th 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 113 students reported enough data to determine letter grade improvements.

Of those students, 26% increased their grade by one letter grade, and 4% increased by two letter grades.

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

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Increased by 1 Increased by 2

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

6th Grade



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

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

17%

14%

17%17%

21%

14%

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

6th Grade

25%

25%

50%

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd 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 113 students reported enough data to determine letter grade improvements. Of

those students, 26% increased their grade by one letter grade, and 5% increased by two letter grades.

Chart 13: Science Report Card Improvements (by Grade Level)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Increased by 1 Increased by 2

Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

6th Grade



Chart 14: Science Report Card Improvements by 1 Letter Grade (All Grade Levels)

Chart 15: Science Report Card Improvements by 2 Letter Grades (All Grade Levels)

7%3%

17%

21%17%

14%

21% Kindergarten

1st Grade

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

6th Grade

16%

50%

17%

17%

2nd Grade

3rd Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade



5.4.4 2014 FCAT Reading Data

Table 32: FCAT Reading Scoring Statistics by Grade

Total Tests Taken

Average Score

Grade 4 20 2.4 Grade 5 27 2.1 Grade 6 14 2.5 All Grades 61 2.3

Students completed 61 FCAT Mathematics tests, of which 20 students were enrolled in Grade 4, 27

students were enrolled in Grade 5, and 14 students were enrolled in Grade 6. All students achieved an

average score of 2.3, and scores ranged from 1 to 5.

Chart 16: Completed Reading FCAT Assessments (by Grade Level)

33%

44%

23%

4th Grade

5th Grade

6th Grade



Chart 17: FCAT Reading Scores by Grade Level

5.4.5 2014 FCAT Math Data

Table 33: FCAT Mathematics Scoring Statistics by Grade

Total Tests Taken

Average Score

Grade 4 21 2.6 Grade 5 27 2.6 Grade 6 14 1.9 All Grades 62 2.5

Students completed 62 FCAT Mathematics tests, of which 21 students were enrolled in Grade 4, 27

students were enrolled in Grade 5, and 14 students were enrolled in Grade 6. All students achieved an

average score of 2.5, and scores ranged from 1 to 5.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

4th Grade 5th Grade 6th Grade

1

2

3

4

5



Chart 18: Completed Math FCAT Assessments (by Grade Level)

Chart 19: FCAT Math Scores by Grade Level

34%

43%

23%

4th Grade

5th Grade

6th Grade

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

4th Grade 5th Grade 6th Grade

1

2

3

4

5



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 34: 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?

71 27 0 0 0 2

Staff warmth and friendliness 81 17 2 0 0 0

Ability of staff to work with my child

68 31 2 0 0 0

Ability of staff to relate to me as a parent

71 24 0 2 0 3

Variety of activities offered to my child

66 25 3 0 0 5

Program meals and snacks 54 32 8 3 0 2

Safety of the program environment

73 22 3 0 0 2

Staff reached out to me as a parent

69 29 0 0 0 2

My child’s happiness with the program

75 24 0 2 0 0

Helping me become more involved with my child’s education

63 27 2 2 0 5

Child’s improvement in homework completion

51 34 3 7 2 2

Child’s improvement in getting along with others

58 36 2 2 2 2

Child’s improvement staying out of trouble

59 32 2 2 2 3

Child’s improvement of appreciation of different people or cultures

76 20 2 0 0 2

Would you recommend this program to other parents?

Yes – 98%

No – 0%



Maybe – 2%

Would you sign your children up for this program again?

Yes – 100%

No - 0%

Maybe – 0%

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

Home alone – 29%

Cared for by a parent – 12%

Cared for by a sibling – 12%

Cared for by another relative – 7%

Cared for by a friend or neighbor – 9%

Participating in a different after school program – 17%

Other – 14%



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 35: 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

21 9 12 12 35 7 0 2 2

Completing homework to your satisfaction

19 19 9 12 33 7 0 2 0

Participating in class

21 21 14 5 33 5 0 0 2

Volunteering 19 16 9 28 28 0 0 0 0 Attending class regularly

21 5 2 14 56 2 0 0 0

Being attentive in class

30 14 12 7 28 7 0 0 2

Behaving in class

21 14 14 5 37 9 0 0 0

Academic performance

26 16 12 12 30 5 0 0 0

Coming to school motivated to learn

30 9 14 12 33 2 0 0 0

Getting along well with other students

28 7 16 9 33 5 0 0 2



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 36: Student Survey Results

Did Not Answer

(%)

Definitely (%)

Somewhat (%)

Not At All (%)

Do you like the after school program? 2 67 28 3

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

2 70 24 4

Did you feel safe during your after school program?

2 75 17 6

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

2 58 29 11

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

2 78 14 6

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

2 65 24 8

Did your after school program help you with your homework?

2 63 19 15

Did your after school program help you improve your grades?

2 63 22 12

Percentage of male students that completed the survey: 51%

Percentage of female students that completed the survey: 49%

Grade levels of students that completed the survey:

K – 4%

1st – 14%

2nd – 16%

3rd – 19%



4th – 14%

5th – 20%

6th – 14%



5.5 Student Success Snapshot

“Salma is an excellent example of a student who benefits from the 21st Century CCLC Program. She utilizes her time wisely and comes in and does her homework im mediately. She participates in our scheduled lessons and usually asks questions, helps other students, or finishes her activity in a timely manner. She has excelled in just about all the categories in which they were tested. She showed the most improvement in Science. Salma is a sweet, caring, conscientious student that will surpass any

expectation.”

- Written By: Tupperware Brands Boys & Girls Club Staff Member

5.6 Overall Findings for Each Objective

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

objective. This data was required to be evaluated and reported separately per age group. In

the table below, after each objective statement, the age group is identified as “ELEM” for

elementary students and “MIDDLE” for middle school students. The words that are bold within

the objective statements refer to the objective assessment was used to analyze the specific

objective.

Table 37. Objectives and Findings

Objective Findings

5.6.1 Objective 1: 75% or

regularly participating students

will maintain or improve their

reading skills as demonstrated by


and grades. (ELEM)

Objective met.











and grades. (ELEM)

Objective met.










Objective met.










Objective met.




5.6.5 Objective 5: 75% of



math skills as demonstrated by


and grades. (ELEM)

Objective met.









and grades. (ELEM)

Objective met.










Objective met.












Objective met.







science skills as demonstrated by

such measures as teacher

assessments, teacher created pre,

mid and post tests (for students K-

2), or Discovery Education


grade 3 – 5)

Objective met.










mid and post tests (for students

K-2), or Discovery Education


grade 3 and above)

Objective not met.



Objective Status – Limited Progress










in MIDDLE SCHOOL)

Objective met.















grade 3 and above)

Objective met.




5.6.13 Objective 13: 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.

(ELEM)

Objective met.







programming offered will increase

their knowledge of how to

support their child’s learning and

be involved in their child’s life.

(MIDDLE)

The result for this objective includes the analysis of data

given for all grades, K through 6. Due to the nature of

the data collection, grade level was not able to be

determined with confidence for each line entry survey

response. The full names of the students were not used

for all entries, therefore parent responses were not

categorized into grade levels 6-8 separately.



will attend a minimum of one 21st


the grant year. (ELEM)

Objective met.






will attend a minimum of one 21st


the grant year. (MIDDLE)

Objective met.









programming offered will

demonstrate motivation/interest

in family involvement throughout

the year. (ELEM)

Objective met.







programming offered will

demonstrate motivation/interest

in family involvement throughout

the year. (MIDDLE)








5.6.19 Objective 19: At least 70%

of parents/guardians participating

in 21st CCLC services will report


member services, as




(ELEM)

Objective met.




5.6.20 Objective 20: At least 70%

of parents/guardians participating

in 21st CCLC services will report


member services, as




(MIDDLE)









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

Objective not met.



Objective Status – Approaching Benchmark



President’s Challenge Physical

Fitness Test. (ELEM)


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. (MIDDLE)

Objective met.






will increase their knowledge of

good nutrition and healthy habits,

as measured by pre, mid and post


Habits program. (ELEM)

Objective not met.






will increase their knowledge of

good nutrition and healthy habits,

as measured by pre, mid and post


Habits program. (MIDDLE)

Objective not met.





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.

(ELEM)

Objective not met.

Total students with sufficient data – 116high




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,

Objective met.






and post tests in SMART Moves

and prevention program modules.

(MIDDLE)

6.0 PROGRESS TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY

This section provides information about any partnerships and/or sub-contracts that benefited

the Tupperware Brands Boys & Girls Club 21st CCLC program during the 2014-2015 school year.

Table 38: 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

LEAD Institute

FPO Yes N/A $5000

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.

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 Tupperware 21st CCLC program received funding later than expected for the 2014-2015

project year, so the program did not begin until January 12, 2015. There were challenges

associated with the late start since most other programs were at the mid-year point at that

time, but the Tupperware program worked hard to overcome those challenges and was able to

finish out the year in good standing. There were lessons learned during the process of getting

the program operating and fully staffed so late into the school year, but the Tupperware site is

looking forward to starting the program on time for the upcoming school year.

Although, progress was made toward meeting most of the grant objectives, there were a few

student-related grant objectives that were not met. For the upcoming year, the following

recommendations have been made:

Implement a progress monitoring system with fidelity in an effort to increase student

achievement and meet each objective. A progress monitoring system that allows for

student progress to be checked and discussed more than three times per year

(beginning, middle, and end of year) can prove to be beneficial and keeps the program

aware of what needs to be done at multiple times throughout the year to help students

meet the grant objectives by the end of the project year.

Monitor testing for personal enrichment activities more closely, especially for the Triple

Play and SMART Moves objective assessments since those grant objectives were not

met.

Include more information on parent sign-in sheets for workshops/events and for parent

survey records that includes the grade levels for each student. It would also be helpful

to know which students are siblings so that data can be reported as accurately as

possible in the future.



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 the

Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida, the Tupperware Brands

Boys & Girls Club and their 21st Century Community Learning

Center (CCLC) Program please contact:

Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida

101 East Colonial Drive

Orlando, Florida 32801

(407) 841-6855

www.bgccf.org

http://www.bgccf.org/

summative evaluation report 2014-2015 - boys & … & girls clubs of central florida –...

Documents