Executive Director and Key Staff_final

HOPE II Grant Evaluation Site Visit Protocol – Executive Director/Key Staff/HOPE II Director

HOPE II Site Visit Protocol

Executive Director/Key Staff/HOPE II Director

Organization:

Site Visitor Name:

Date:

Location:

Interviewee Name(s) and Titles:

Description of Organization and Surrounding Area/Neighborhood:

Introduction

My name is ________ and I work for Abt Associates, a research organization located in Cambridge, MA. Our firm has been hired by the National Institute of Justice in order to evaluate the HOPE II grant program and these sites visits contribute to that effort. The purpose of my interview with you today is to understand how the HOPE II funds have been used to implement and support strategic goals of your organization. The interview will take approximately 1 hour. I will be asking questions pertaining to general information about [organization name], your goals for the use of HOPE II funding, technical assistance received from the Maryland Crime Victims Resource Center (MCVRC), and collaborations that your organization has engaged in to support the implementation of your grant activities.

The purpose of this interview is not to evaluate your organization’s activities or performance with respect to the HOPE II grant, nor do your responses have any bearing on your organization’s future competitiveness for receiving Federal funding.

Organizational Information

1. What is the overall mission of [organization name]?

1. How and when was it founded?

2. [IF APPLICABLE] How did the organization decide to become involved with victims of crime? When did the organization begin serving victims of crime?

3. Please describe your general responsibilities within [organization name]?

1. Please describe your responsibilities with respect to specific activities implemented under the HOPE II grant.

4. What is the structure of [organization name]?

[OBTAIN COPY OF ORG CHART]
[PROBE: Board of Directors, Executive staff, number of line staff, volunteers, reporting structure]

5. If the organization is faith-based, what is its religious affiliation?

1. [If faith based] What role does faith play in the services provided?

6. Given that your organization has not received a Federal Grant before, what were your expectations of a Federal Grant process?

[PROBE: goals, management, reporting/paperwork, technical assistance]

7. Has this grant process differed from other competitive grants that your organization has obtained?

1. If so, how?

[PROBE: goals, management, reporting/paperwork, technical assistance]

8. How does [organization name] assess needs for organizational development and programming?

1. Are standardized instruments used? If yes, which instruments?

9. How are key services provided (service delivery model)?

1. What arrangements are made for the provision of other services such as referrals?

2. [IF FAITH BASED] What role does faith play in the delivery of services to victims?

HOPE II Objectives and Implementation

10. How did [organization name] propose to use the HOPE II sub-grant in your application to begin/expand services to victims of crime?

1. How did this fit with your agency’s other priorities at the time?

11. Have your organization’s priorities evolved or changed since you received the HOPE II grant? If so, how?

12. Have the goals for use of HOPE II funds evolved or changed over time? If so, how?

13. Have the strategic activities to realize the goals evolved or changed over time? If so, how?

14. If [organization name] had not won the HOPE II grant, what would have happened?

[PROBE: Would program still exist? Would you be able to do the same types of activities? Would you be able to serve as many clients?]

1. Would your organization have been able to get comparable resources from another funding source?

2. Would your organization have prioritized the same strategic goals and activities that were developed through the HOPE II grant program?

15. What are your opinions of the design of the HOPE II grant:

1. Is the amount of funds provided adequate?

2. Is the timeframe of the grant sufficient?

3. Do you think the “Intermediary model” produces good results? Why or why not?

[SITE VISITOR SHOULD DEFINE INTERMEDIARY MODEL]

16. What aspects of the HOPE II grant program are the most beneficial to your organization?

1. What could be improved?

2. Is there anything that you would change?

Technical Assistance from MCVRC

17. What kind of TA did [organization name] expect to receive through the grant?

18. What was the process for deciding on the type of assistance that [organization name] would receive from your Site Mentor and MCVRC?

1. Were there any discussions with your Site Mentor or other MCVRC staff beforehand to plan the technical assistance process?

2. Were you satisfied with the process of assessing technical assistance needs and the process of initiating technical assistance with your Site Mentor? With MCVRC? Why/why not?

3. Are you satisfied with the outcomes of these processes – the type of technical assistance that was offered to your organization and the level of preliminary discussion with your Site mentor or other MCVRC staff regarding technical assistance planning? Why/why not?

19. Do you feel that your Site Mentor and MCVRC understood your organization’s goals for using the HOPE II funds?

20. How was technical assistance from your Site Mentor delivered to your organization? How was technical assistance provided by other MCVRC staff (if applicable)?

[PROBE: Email, telephone, and/or visits? Frequency?]

21. Are you satisfied with the content and the delivery of support from your Site Mentor and MCVRC?

1. Did your TA needs change over the course of the grant? If so, was your Site Mentor or other MCVRC staff able to change their TA for your organization in response to your needs?

2. Was there anything that you needed that your Site Mentor or MCVRC did not supply?

3. Were you satisfied with the method of communication (i.e., phone, email, in-person) and the frequency of communication that you had with your Site Mentor? With other MCVRC staff?

4. Was the Site Mentor or other MCVRC staff able to answer your questions?

5. Did you feel comfortable going to your Site Mentor or other MCVRC staff to discuss obstacles or difficulties in developing or implementing your HOPE II activities?

6. Is there anything you wish your Site Mentor or MCVRC had done differently? Could have done better?

22. How has the technical assistance allowed your organization to improve its capacity?

23. How have you benefited from working with your Site Mentor and MCVRC and from receiving assistance from them?

1. What have you benefited from the most in the process?

2. What did you benefit from the least?

3. What could be improved?

24. What challenges/issues have arisen in working with your Site Mentor or MCVRC and how have they been resolved?

25. How have your clients benefited from the Site Mentor/MCVRC’s assistance?

26. How successful has [organization name] been to date in realizing its plans?

1. Why or why not?

[PROBE: Were all goals realized? Did unforeseen needs or challenges arise during implementation? If so, how were these managed?]

2. What factors have facilitated or impeded success?

27. How does [organization name] plan to sustain what it has gained through the HOPE II grant?

[PROBE: In general, with respect to staff, funding, client needs, collaboration w/ other orgs, and relationship with community]

Collaboration

28. Did your organization collaborate with a partner organization in working towards your goals for the HOPE II funding?

1. If not, why not? [GO TO SUSTAINABILITY]

1. Was it not necessary to collaborate with another organization based upon your goals for HOPE II?

2. OR – Would your organization have preferred to collaborate but there were no available or willing partners?

2. If so, which organization(s)?

1. Why was a partnership established with this/these particular organization(s)?

2. How long has this partnership been in place?

3. Was it in place prior to preparing a proposal for the HOPE II grant program?

29. What is the nature of the partnership?

1. What are the positives in the relationship with [partner organizations names]?

2. What are the negatives?

3. How have challenges that have arisen been resolved?

4. Do you plan to continue to collaborate with this/these organization(s) after HOPE II?

30. Has [partner organizations names] benefited from the HOPE II grant in any direct or indirect ways?

Sustainability

31. Will the services/activities implemented through the use of HOPE II funds be sustained?

1. If so, how?

[PROBE: Have you thought about the level of funding that will be necessary to sustain

activities? Have you planned or thought about the sources of funding? What would funding specifically be used to support? Does the organization need additional technical assistance to continue developing what was implemented under HOPE II? If so, have you thought about or do you have plans for how this TA will be obtained]

2. If not, why not?

[PROBE: Have you thought about the level of funding that would be necessary to sustain activities? Do you know what the barriers are to obtaining sufficient funding? What type of additional technical assistance, if any, would be necessary to sustain activities?]

32. Overall, what are the key goals for your organization over the next 5 years?

Collection of Secondary Documents

• Organizational charts

• Information on funding sources

• Strategic Plan/Mission Statement

• Intake forms

• Referral forms

• Assessment forms

• Information on program partners

12

A bt Associates Inc.