Evaluation
of the Aging Worker Initiative (AWI)
Master
Protocol
Site Name
This evaluation is being conducted as part of an evaluation of the ten aging worker grants funded by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Disclosure Statement Your responses will help us better understand the effectiveness of these grants. Individual responses will not be attributed to specific individuals or organizations. Responses to this data collection will be used only for statistical purposes. The reports prepared from this survey will summarize findings across the sample and individual forms will not be available to anyone outside the study team, except as required by law. |
Public Burden Statement According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, persons are not required to respond to this collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number and expiration date. Responding to this evaluation is required to maintain benefits, as it was part of the Solicitation for Grant Application. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average one hour and twenty minutes per response. Send comments regarding this burden estimate to the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Policy Development and Research, Room N5641, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20210. Do NOT send the completed evaluation to this address. |
Date of Site Visit: Date
Field Team: Site visitor
Name |
Title and Function |
Organization |
Phone/Email |
|
|
|
|
Grantee name/address |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partner LWIA |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Education partners |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Economic development |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employers |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other partners |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the size of the service area targeted for the initiative?
What is the population of the service area?
What are the reasons for the selection?
Will the initiative be implemented uniformly throughout the service area?
How is the area defined (e.g., county, zip codes, jurisdiction of LWIB(s))?
What are the essential characteristics of the area (urban/suburban/rural/mixed)?
What is the local unemployment rate?
What are the major industries/employers?
What types of jobs are older workers most likely to have?
What types of jobs are available to older workers?
How have the local industries changed in the last five years? For example, are there more health care jobs, green jobs, etc.?
How might these trends influence the number of employment opportunities in the area?
How has the recession affected grant planning and implementation?
More participants wanting to enroll
Fewer employers hiring?
Has the recession had any impact on the involvement of partners, or of the availability of leveraged resources?
Have it had any effect on the types of occupations for which participants are trained, or the number of job openings?
What other challenges were created by the economic recession?
What attempts, if any, have been made to address these issues?
How were these challenges addressed?
Were there opportunities available through the Recovery Act that might not have been available otherwise? If so, please describe.
What employment and training services existed for older workers before this grant under:
WIA adult or dislocated worker funding stream?
SCSEP?
WIA or other incumbent worker training?
Other, including any outside public workforce investment system? If so, provide details.
Were there any services targeted to currently employed or retired workers?
Were these services available in sufficient quantity?
Were there any accommodations for older worker needs in training or other services (based on any needs identified in the grant plan)?
How do the service options differ for older versus younger workers?
What accommodations in services/service design have been developed for people with disabilities?
What factors, if any, have limited the service options available to older workers?
How much involvement does the initiative have with other services at the One-Stop Career Centers?
Utilize WIA core and intensive services? If so, for what types of services?
Are other workforce investment partners involved?
What is the nature of that involvement?
How were key program elements integrated with regional economic development?
Industries or occupations emphasized?
Outreach to employers?
Links with/support for specific economic development strategies and initiatives?
How does this initiative fit in with other workforce initiatives, such as, SCSEP and Medicaid Infrastructure Grants (MIG)?
Are the services offered across these initiatives substitutes or complements?
How often is there communication across these agencies?
How is the grant administered?
Does grant administration differ in any way from administration of other programs?
When was the administering agency created?
In Houston and Vermont: What is the relationship to the LWIB?
What is the mission of the organization?
What types of programs and services does the agency provide?
What is the overall operating budget of the organization?
In Connecticut: What are the relationships to the state’s other LWIAs?
If multiple LWIAs are involved, do they have an administrative role?
In other grantees: What is the relationship among the participating LWIAs?
Do you anticipate using the maximum amount of administrative funds?
What is the overall staffing structure for administering the AWI grant?
How many staff are involved?
What types of staff?
Describe the staffing for service delivery
Were the staff hired for the grant or did they come from One-Stop Career Center or partner staff?
What are their roles and responsibilities?
What are their qualifications?
What percentage of their time is allocated to AWI?
On average, how many cases are assigned to each worker?
If the staff work on other programs, what proportion of their caseload is composed of AWI participants?
Is this staffing plan consistent across all LWIAs participating in the grant? If not, describe the variation?
What is the participant-to-staff ratio?
What experience does the grantee have serving older workers through WIA or other programs?
What are the education and skill levels of the older workers you have served in the past? Are they typically lower or higher skills workers?
How long has it been serving the older worker population?
How would you describe the past level of success in working with this population?
What is the purpose of the initiative?
What unmet need among the older worker population was it intended to address?
What were the perceived opportunities of this grant?
What were some of the drawbacks based on the SGA?
What was the expected demand for services? How does actual demand compare to expectations?
How would you describe the program philosophy or approach?
What programmatic goals do you hope to achieve?
How are these goals measured?
What participant outcome goals do you hope to achieve?
How are these goals measured (common measures, other ways)?
To what extent are these goals quantifiable?
Has there been any change since the grant began?
What were the key steps taken in planning for this initiative? Who was involved in the initial grant application and design of the initiative?
What organizations/entities did they represent?
How engaged were employers and education and training providers (like community colleges) in the planning process?
How often did you meet?
What were the main issues of focus and/or concern during the planning process?
How would you characterize the overall planning process?
Did it go smoothly?
Were there any particular challenges?
Are there organizations that you wish had been at the table, in hindsight, and why?
What influence has the economic recession had on project planning?
Who does this initiative target?
Why was this particular group targeted for this program in your area?
What are the characteristics of participants served? What are their education and skill levels, and level of work experience?
What are their most common challenges to getting and keeping a job for target participants?
What percentage of clients at the time of enrollment are:
Labor Force Status |
Approx. % of participants |
Employed, full-time |
|
Employed part-time, seeking full-time |
|
Unemployed |
|
Out of labor force, retired |
|
Out of labor force, discouraged |
|
What are the primary reasons in which your participants are enrolling in the program?
Reason for enrollment |
Approx. % of participants |
Career change (including entrepreneurship) for any reason (for example, health, economic need, transition to retirement) |
|
Skill enhancement in current job or career |
|
Return to labor force from retirement for financial reasons |
|
Return to labor force for other reasons |
|
Other |
|
Other |
|
Other |
|
What sectors/industries are targeted by the initiative?
How were these sectors/industries chosen?
How do these sectors/industries meet the criteria for high-growth, high-demand industries and sectors (add substantial numbers of new jobs, significant impact on economy overall, impacts the growth of other industries, transformed by technology/requiring new worker skill sets, new and emerging business that is expected to grow)?
Why were specific occupations chosen? Are these occupations different from the occupations that the general population of job seekers train for (e.g are they more suitable to the needs of older workers)?
What are the eligibility requirements for participation in the program?
Are there any additional restrictions or goals beyond the grant requirement (age 55+)?
Have eligibility requirements posed any challenges to program success?
What effect have additional WIA formula funds from the Recovery Act had on the grant planning and subsequent operations?
If partners have received additional funds from the Recovery Act, what effect have they had on participation or contribution of leveraged resources?
What types of partners were targeted for this initiative (employers, industry associations, educational institutions, training providers, aging organizations, SCSEP grantees, economic development entities, apprenticeship programs, tribal organizations, philanthropic community, community or faith-based organizations)?
What partner characteristics did you specifically target?
How was it decided which partners would be invited to participate and which would not?
What role did you envision each would fill in relationship to overall initiative goals?
What strategies were used to involve partners in the grant application?
Prior to this grant application, did you have a relationship with your partners?
If so, what was the nature of that relationship?
How long had that relationship been in place?
Was it formal, or informal?
On what types of initiatives have you had previous involvement?
If there was no previous relationship, why did you decide to involve the partner in this particular effort?
How would you characterize the overall success involving partners to participate in the initiative?
How pleased are you with the final composition of partners in the initiative?
Were there some agencies you initially wanted to partner with but were unable to do so?
If so, what were the barriers in establishing that arrangement?
Was another agency involved to fill that gap, and if not, is the initiative lacking in some way without that partner?
Are there any other partners that in hindsight you wish were involved in the initiative that are not involved?
Which agencies are key partners?
What are their roles and responsibilities?
What is the average number of staff at these organizations?
How many and what types of programs and services do they provide?
What is the average budget and range of operating budgets of these organizations?
If multiple agencies are involved, how is coordination handled?
What staff are partners contributing to:
Administration
Services
How many staff?
What types of staff?
What are their roles and responsibilities?
What are their qualifications?
To what extent have employers partnered in the design of the AWI?
What criteria were used to seek and select industries and particular employers?
What are the characteristics of employer partners:
To what extent do they hire workers in H1-B industries and occupations?
What type of experience do they have in hiring and retaining older workers?
When were employers first included in the process?
What previous involvement have employer partners had with the grantee and older workers?
What seems to work well in this partnership?
What could be improved?
How are employer partnerships integrated into regional economic plans?
To what extent are local education and training providers involved in this initiative?
When were they first included in the process?
Who was included?
What types of education and training programs do participants access through these partnerships?
How many program participants have been referred to the local education and training providers involved in this initiative?
What were the experiences of participants referred to these providers?
What seems to have worked well in this partnership?
Have older workers had any challenges in accessing these programs?
What experience do partners have serving older workers?
How long have they served this population, and what types of services have they provided?
Which partners will interact directly with workers recruited as part of this initiative?
Where are the partners located?
How accessible are their locations to the population served by AWI?
What types of contractual relationships, if any, were put in place between grantee and partner agencies?
What did those arrangements encompass?
Were any MOUs (Memoranda of Understanding) needed to use client assessment tools or other resources?
Were any roadblocks encountered in getting the necessary contracts or MOUs in place? What affect did that have on the project?
What other agreements or procedures govern the relationship between grantee and partners?
How often does the grantee communicate with partners, and how does it vary by partner agency?
How do they communicate?
What topics do they discuss?
Does the grantee hold regular meetings with partners?
If so, what is the purpose of these meetings?
Are these meetings held individually or as a group?
How long do they last?
What types of information are discussed during these meetings?
How helpful are they?
Is there an advisory board or steering committee for the AWI grant? If so, what organizations are on it, what is its role with the grant, and how often does it meet? What works well with the board, and what could be more effective?
To what extent are other local community providers involved with workers recruited for this program?
In what ways are they involved?
What other agencies and/or programs are involved—SCSEP, One-Stop Centers (VT and TX), AAAs?
What is the availability and accessibility of these specialized services?
To what extent are participants referred to these agencies?
What proportion of participants accesses these services?
What were the experiences of participants referred to these providers?
What seems to have worked well in working with these agencies?
Distinguish between services from the coaches and generalized assistance to all grantees.
What do you hope to achieve with the TA provider?
What is the relationship between the grantee or partners and the TA provider?
How and how often do grantee/partners communicate with the TA provider? What topics are typically discussed?
What services have you accepted from technical assistance provider (e.g., help with reporting, technical assistance, trainings or workshops, structural resources, written materials)?
What is the process for identifying your TA needs?
To what extent have you agreed with this assessment?
How do you and the TA coach determine what types of TA will be provided?
What are your impressions of that process?
What is the relationship between the grantee and the TA coach?
What are the strengths and limitations of the TA coach?
How would you describe the intensity of the TA provider’s involvement?
Are they highly involved, moderately involved, or involved on a limited basis?
To what extent does their level of involvement compare to what you would like from them?
What would you like to see different?
Some services may still be in the planning or pilot stage. Distinguish between active and planned services.
How are participants recruited to the program?
What proportion of participants are recruited through grant-specific outreach?
What proportion of participants are referred by:
One-Stop Career Centers?
Local education providers?
Other partners in the grant?
Other means
What type of special emphasis is there on recruiting disadvantaged populations (veterans, people with disabilities, military spouses, ex-offenders, minorities, new Americans)?
Did you face any challenges in recruiting participants?
Were there any delays in the start of participant enrollment?
If yes, what caused them?
What strategies did you use to overcome those challenges?
How is recruitment linked to employer requirements?
What services have participants received before enrolling in AWI? Describe the depth and quality.
Get copies of assessment tools. If on-line assessment, then ask for screenshots and/or a list of information collected.
What are the primary workforce and other challenges facing participants (education, lack of work experience, etc.)?
What types of assessments are conducted:
Counselor’s discussion with participant?
Commercial products?
Products designed by state or LWIA
How was the decision made regarding which tool to use?
Describe the assessment process:
Who conducts the assessment?
How long does it take?
When is it conducted?
What information is gathered?
How is this information used in determining whether participants receive readiness training, education/formal training, job placement services, or other services?
Was any tool, process, or use developed or modified specifically for this program?
How does the assessment compare to its counterpart under WIA and SCSEP?
Are these services funded through the grant, or through leveraged resources?
How is case management provided?
?What are common topics in those meetings
How often and why does the case manager interact with the participant?
What is the most common form of communication between case managers and program participants—in person, telephone?
How often do case managers meet with participants (Discuss in terms of any expected frequency) :
To choose a service path?
During training, if that is the service path
Placement?
What seems to work best for engaging participants and keeping them involved in the program?
What could be improved?
How does case management compare to its counterpart under WIA and SCSEP?
Are these services funded through the grant, or through leveraged resources?
The key issue underlying this section is whether the grant is emphasizing longer-term career planning rather than finding an immediate job.
How does career planning with an emphasis on career pathways differ from pre-grant career planning? ()?
|
IEP |
Career Pathway |
What percentage of participants receive each type of career planning guidance (include both trainees and non-trainees)? |
|
|
At what stage is such a plan developed? |
|
|
What information is included in this document? |
|
|
What activities are typically included in the plan (e.g., job search/job readiness, education and training activities)? |
|
|
How often is this plan updated? |
|
|
Are career pathways or IEPs used for non-trainees?
How does the training provided address different career pathways?
Are participants encouraged to move vertically up the career ladder, or laterally across occupations/industries?
How does that vary by participant characteristics?
How does use of these service planning strategies differ from those used in WIA or SCSEP?
How do IEPs and career pathways planning differ for older workers as compared non-older workers that you serve?
Describe any specific techniques to provide career awareness?
How is career awareness integrated into the training and non-training services?
What types of resources (web sites, videos, etc.) are used to develop this awareness?
Are job-readiness, job shadowing, or informational session opportunities available?
To whom is career awareness provided?
What types of education or training opportunities are available to older workers through the grant?
Do these opportunities result in a credential, and if so what kind of credential?
How are participants notified of the available education and training programs?
Is the grantee associated with any programs at local community colleges that specifically target their curriculum or certificate/degree programs to older workers?
How have education and training services been tailored/customized to meet the needs of older workers served through the grant?
What are the key factors in a decision to train or not to train?
Describe the key elements of the training decision:
Training occupation
Training vendors
Financing
What limitations apply to training decisions:
Occupational choice
General demand occupations (for example, as required by WIA)
H1-B industries and occupations (mandatory for this grant)
State or local high growth/high wage requirements
Vendor choice
Specific programs designed for this grant
Eligible training provider list
Other
Duration of training
Cap
Financing the training:
Additional sources to pay for any higher cost training or to pay for post-training services such as qualifying exams, externships, etc.
Income maintenance during training period
What factors affect training choices:
Does it vary by participant characteristic and/or intended occupation?
How does the type of training vary by occupational goal?
Was training provided in H1-B occupations and industries?
What are the most common training occupations?
Who are the most common training providers (partners, eligible training provider list vendors, others?
Do the occupations targeted differ from occupations for which non non-older workers served by the organization are trained (there’s a better way of saying that, but this is the idea)?
What types of training techniques are used (contextualized learning, methods for upgrading specific occupational skills, comprehensive models with wraparound services such as assessment and follow-up)?
How are these targeted to older learners?
What types of technology-based learning (TBL) do you use in training (i.e. chat rooms, webcasts, internet, and computer-based learning, etc.)?
How do older workers react to any TBL techniques?
What types of entrepreneurial training is available to older workers through the grant?
Is this training available to all participants, or only those thinking of businesses in certain industries/sectors?
Is the grantee partnered or have another type of relationship with Small Business Administration programs? If so, which specific programs and how are they utilized?
How many participants in any form of training are planning on self-employment?
What types of supportive services, work supports, and/or accommodations such as a flexible work schedule been made available to participants?
Which are provided most often?
Does your organization provide these services directly or make referrals to other organizations?
What resources are used to provide these resources (e.g. WIA, TANF, etc.)?
Have employers been responsive to these requests?
What types of services/accommodations/supports, etc. do they provide?
What additional supports might be beneficial to participants?
After participants are referred to the education and training, or other partners, what is the ongoing involvement with the grantee?
What are the roles and responsibilities of the grantee after the participant is referred?
Who maintains the case—the grantee, the partner, or both?
Under what circumstances might a participant be referred from a partner back to the grantee?
How often does this occur?
Does the grantee provide job placement services? Do other organizations provide placement services – for example, do non-WIB grantees use placement services available through the One-Stop System?
How do these services vary by occupation and/or participant characteristics?
What in-house resources (not paid for with AWI funds) are available to program participants?
What services are available to participants after they are employed?
How long are these services available?
Are these available both to those working for employers and those who become self-employed?
What services are requested most often?
Do staff continue to follow up?
If so, for how long?
What are participants’ primary service needs after they begin working?
What other types of services, including WIA-funded services, were provided to older workers?
How many individuals received these services (by type)?
What additional services might be helpful?
To what extent do participants dropout of service delivery?
At what point in service delivery to clients typically drop out?
For what reasons?
What type of follow-up is made with these individuals to encourage continuing participation or obtain outcome information?
What other programs or services are available to older workers in the community?
Are the services available to the same population as this initiative, or only certain subsets?
What is the overall demand for services?
Are there waiting lists at the grantee or other initiatives?
Why and how do these people select the AWI program over others?
Are workers served under AWI co-enrolled in the One-Stop system (or SCSEP) under WIA? What types of services do they use that are available through the One-Stop System and/or SCSEP?
Are workers served under AWI co-enrolled in other workforce development or social programs? What types of services do they use that are available through these other programs?
Has the service delivery structure changed over time?
If so, how?
What were the reasons for these changes?
How, if at all, has the recession influenced service receipt?
Besides the formal partnerships, employers may be involved in designing participant services and making them responsive to particular industrial or employer needs
How were employers involved in designing participant services?
Selecting target industries and training occupations?
Curriculum?
Career pathways, career awareness?Other services
What types of employer did you reach out to as part of the initiative?
How many employers were reached via this effort?
Did you primarily target employers in certain industries or of a certain size?
Have employers adapted their positions to meet the needs of older workers, and if so how?
Were you trying to change employer attitudes, identify employers willing to hire older workers, or something else?
Were deliverables produced as a result of this effort, and if so, what?
How did employers respond to your outreach efforts?
What did employers identify as their most pressing concerns related to hiring aging workers?
Were any workers in this initiative placed at employers as a result of this outreach?
How will this outreach affect employer opinion of hiring aging workers going forward?
What would you do differently going forward to reach employers?
What skill needs have been filled through the initiative?
How have these hires affected the businesses and the regional economy?
The impact of capacity building is addressed in Section XII.
What specific activities (products, models, curricula, teaching methods, training-the-trainer, licensure, or certification requirements) for serving older workers will be operationalized by the workforce system (and by the grantee, if the grantee is not a WIB) after the grant ends?
What specific activities for serving older workers will be operationalized by other partners after the grant ends?
What types of capacity-building activities were undertaken as a result of this initiative?
Where were these activities directed (toward community colleges, proprietary training providers, labor-management organizations, etc.)?
How will the grant be used to enhance One-Stop Career Center capacity?
How many individuals did these activities reach?
Which produced deliverables, and in what form?
What challenges were encountered in producing deliverables?
What independent entities were used to review and evaluate any developed products or deliverables?
What effect have these activities had?
What additional capacity-building activities or supports may be helpful?
Does the reporting accurately capture characteristics, services, and outcomes?
Is the AWI performance accountability system used as a stand-alone mode or in conjunction with any WIA-related tracking system? Describe the other system.
What other data, including outcomes, were tracked, if any?
Do grantee administrators use data from the MIS to manage the grant and assess staff performance? If so, in what ways?
Have you faced any challenges in using the MIS? If so, what were they?
Did you receive technical assistance in overcoming those challenges?
How are participant outcomes monitored and tracked?
What tasks are involved in this process?
What information about outcomes is recorded in the participant’s case file?
Are case notes electronic or in paper format?
How do the structure, format, and information collected compare across case files?
About how much time does it take each week to monitor and document participants’ participation and service use?
What types of reporting are required of program participants (e.g., submitting time sheets, reporting hours and activities)?
What are participants’ perceptions of the reporting process?
What challenges have you faced in tracking participants?
Please note: Discuss with the grant manager or MIS staff how SPR can get extracts of non-confidential data (all identifying information stripped out, including SSN, name, contact information.
What records |
All participants, including current participants (those who have not exited) |
||||
What variables we would like, (although we will make do with whatever is available) |
|
||||
Confidential data |
None. All confidential or identifying data (SSN, name, address, and phone) must be removed. With confidential data deleted, we will not need to use any security procedures during transmission. If any states transmit confidential data, we will strip them out and delete them immediately. |
||||
Period Covered |
Beginning of AWI until the most recent available data |
||||
When we need it |
October 2010 for interim report; June 2012 for final report |
||||
Data format |
We will accept data in whatever format it can be transmitted. A text file with tab or comma-delimited values is probably easiest. Make sure to get a record layout. |
Review the outcomes in the most recent report, compared to the grantees plan and to other grantees. Discuss any discrepancies.
What is average duration of program participation:
All participants?
Trainees?
Non-trainees?
What factors affect program duration (employer demand, participant needs, program designs, etc.)?
What types of jobs and earnings are participants receiving?
Were these jobs related to the training received or the career guidance provided?
Did these jobs have established career ladders?
What are the principal factors affecting outcomes for training and non-training participants?
How do outcomes in AWI compare to those in WIA and SCSEP for comparable participants?
If there are differences in outcomes, to what do you attribute the differences?
Of the additional measures discussed in the SGA, what are you using to manage the grant?
Are there any other measures in use (for example, for incumbent worker training)?
How are grant funds being used by grantees and sub-grantees to provide services (i.e. percentage on service components)?
Have you revised the budget, and if so, why?
See the table of potential effects of leveraging in the site visitor instructions.
What leveraged resources did the grantee or partners bring to the table?
Which agencies had leveraged resources, how much, and what activities did the leveraged resources support?
Are these resources in the form of cash, or some other type of support?
What are the effects of the leveraged resources on the Aging Worker Initiative and on the program that provided the leveraged resources?
Does the benefit of leveraging exceed the cost of negotiating and monitoring it?
What other resources are leveraged by the grantee within its own agency that the contract does not cover?
What other resources are leveraged by partners, and in what form?
What are the effects of the leveraged resources on the Aging Worker Initiative and on the program that provided the leveraged resources?
Does the benefit of leveraging exceed the cost of negotiating and monitoring it?
What are the primary strengths and limitations of the grantee with regard to:
Integration with regional economic talent development?
Organization and partnerships?
Service delivery?
Sustainabillity?
What have program participants found helpful about services provided by grantees?
What was least helpful?
To what extent has the grantee increased its ability to serve older workers in:
Service capacity
Additional slots for existing services?
More types of training occupations?
Program quality
Focus on techniques to serve older workers?
General improvements in quality?
Other?
What changes, if any, have occurred in how local workforce investment systems serve older individuals?
What service needs of older workers sometimes are still unaddressed?
What resources would be necessary to meet these service needs?
What additional services would be most helpful?
What practical lessons and promising practices for the workforce investment system were identified during this project?
Do these recommendations vary whether for the system in general or for regional economies?
Do these lessons apply only to older workers, or more broadly?
How successful were grantees in recruiting a diverse array of partners?
Which partner relationships were the most successful and why?
What aspects of the program work particularly well in helping participants find and keep jobs?
What were the other main successes of this program initiative?
How have you achieved these successes?
These questions are likely to have been covered in the preceding sections. If not, the questions provide an opportunity to get at these
What were the key problems in administering the project?
Did you encounter challenges coordinating the input of all partners into account when making key decisions?
Did any of the partnerships fail during the course of the project, and what were the possible reasons?
Did you encounter challenges in recruiting participants?
What challenges did you face in serving participants?
What challenges did you face in placing participants in jobs?
What challenges did you encounter in helping participants keep and advance in their jobs?
What challenges did you face in tracking participants and recording their outcomes?
What other challenges did you face during implementation?
What strategies were used to overcome these challenges?
In hindsight, what would you do differently?
Sustainability and replicability will be preliminary in the interim report. However, because the grantees have been operating for almost a full year by the time of the site visits, such questions are appropriate for the Round 1 visit. These topics will be very important in Round 2.
How sustainable are the services provided by the grantee after the program ends?
To what extent have grantees sought outside funding to continue providing services?
How successful have they been?
What is the likelihood that services that grantees provide to older workers will continue after grant funds run out
What services will probably continue and at what level?
What specific activities, programs, etc. targeted to older workers do you expect will be institutionalized by the public workforce system (or grantee, of grantee is not a WIB or One-Stop)?
Do you expect that the workforce system will use WIA resources to provide services to support older workers after the grant ends, and if so what types of resources and for what activities?
Which agencies will provide those services?
Do you plan to replicate the program or service model?
What types of older workers would most benefit if a provider in another service area wanted to replicate this AWI model?
What would a provider in another service area need to replicate this AWI service model in its community?
What are the essential program components of a successful AWI service model?
What are the key challenges, including key challenges to replicating this specific model?
What other advice would you give to a provider in replicating the model?
What changes would you recommend they make?
1 Many of these questions can and will be addressed in pre-site visit research. We will use these questions to guide our write up and may ask some of these questions to the grantee to verify our understanding.
A-
| File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document |
| Author | hooper.thomas |
| File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
| File Created | 2021-02-01 |