Below is a text-only version of the Toolkit's introduction. A web compatible version (i.e. low resolution graphics) of the Toolkit can be downloaded from the bottom of this page. Contact the CMP directly for a high resolution version of the Toolkit.
An Evaluation Toolkit for
The Community Mapping Program
Prepared for
The Orton
Family
Foundation
Prepared by
Program Evaluation and Educational Research Associates
September 8, 2004
The Community Mapping Program is part of the Place-based Education Evaluation Collaborative (PEEC), a unique partnership of organizations whose aim is to strengthen and deepen the practice and evaluation of place-based education initiatives.
PEEC programs (and organizations) include the CO-SEED Project (Antioch New England Institute); the Community Mapping Program (the Orton Family Foundation, Vermont Institute of Natural Science); the Sustainable Schools Project (Shelburne Farms, and the Vermont Education for Sustainability Project); and A Forest for Every Classroom Project (Shelburne Farms, The Northeast Natural Resource Center of the National Wildlife Federation, The Marsh Billings Rockefeller National Historical Park, The Conservation Study Institute, and Green Mountain National Forest).
In addition, the Upper Valley Community Foundation provides funding and support for several of these programs through its Wellborn Ecology Fund, as well as financial, administrative and staff support for collaborative evaluation and research efforts.
Acknowledgements
This toolkit is the result of the work of many people in addition to the staff of PEER Associates. The programs and individuals that constitute the Place-based Education Evaluation Collaborative (see above for a listing of member organizations) provided the core conceptual and practical context from which these specific evaluation tools emerged. The staff at the Vermont Institute of Natural Science (Ned Swanberg, Nicole Conte, Sherry Berrin, Tim Sinnott, among others) provided critical feedback and field testing of survey instruments, as did CM Institute trainers Amanda Gierow and others. The instruments designed by external consultant Dr. Sally Wither and piloted in the western U.S. with the help of Annie Richman greatly influenced the final form of many of the survey tools. Graduate research assistant Matt LaFond worked
closely with PEER Associates staff to design and field test many elements of the case study templates. Case study template tools also drew on the groundwork laid by a previous intern for Orton. The inspiration and support of Orton Family Foundation staff members Bill Roper and Connie Knapp was crucial and constant.
Community Mapping Program Evaluation Toolkit
Introduction
This Evaluation Toolkit for the Community Mapping Program is a product of an exciting vision for national expansion and replication of the CM model. While planning the priorities and activities of the 2003-2004 evaluation efforts for CMP, the Director of Programs for the Orton Family Foundation challenged the external evaluation team “…to make sure we come away with tools that can be flexibly used in CMP schools around the country” (personal communication, October, 2003).~Thus, this Toolkit is designed as a hands-on, “nuts and bolts” resource for the CMP regional coordinators who are charged with implementing key parts of the ongoing evaluation efforts. It is intended to be general enough to be adaptable to local conditions, standardized enough to make comparisons across CMP sites
feasible and efficient, and detailed enough to keep regional coordinators from having to reinvent the evaluation wheel.
CMP stakeholders use evaluation findings to help make decisions. Current and potential CMP funders use evaluation findings to decide whether or how much financial support to provide and often to determine whether defined goals have been met as a result of their support. Orton Foundation staff and CMP regional coordinators use the evaluation process and findings to reflect upon and make decisions about day to day program implementation and design. Community partners can use evaluation findings to decide whether or not it makes sense for them to get involved in a CM project. CMP staff and funders are as committed to continuously improving the CM model as CM team members are to meeting real needs in their communities and helping young people learn and care about those communities. Evaluation helps program participants by helping
CMP staff refine, test, and ultimately deliver a better CM product to more people. For these reasons and more, CMP is committed to program evaluation.
One thing these evaluation tools are NOT used for is to assess the performance or worth of individual students, educators, or other participants in a CM project. Readers and users of this Toolkit are encouraged to frequently remind participants that the purpose here is to learn about CMP as a whole program, not to judge individuals. It is critical that participants understand and feel comfortable with evaluation tools and their uses because without the gift of their participation in evaluation efforts, many important decisions simply won’t be as informed as they should be.
In the templates that follow, the term “researcher” is used to refer to anyone who might undertake a case study or other evaluation activity. Depending on the program site, evaluation needs, and available budget, the “researcher” may be an external evaluator, a CMP staff member or regional coordinator, or a student intern. If the wording in this Toolkit is not specifically addressed to a particular role, it is assumed that the reader is a CMP regional coordinator.
| 