delaware’s experience with program review

Post on 12-Feb-2016

44 Views

Category:

Documents

0 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

Delaware’s Experience with Program Review. We were doubly lucky…. We had TWO program reviews!!!. Our Process. The Checklist Task Assignment Preparation of Advance Materials Creation of Presentation Framework The Visit. The Checklist. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Delaware’s Experience with Program Review

We were doubly lucky…

We had TWO program reviews!!!

Our Process

• The Checklist• Task Assignment• Preparation of Advance Materials• Creation of Presentation Framework• The Visit

The Checklist

List of requirements from technical assistance guidance

Task Assignments

Charge to staff

Preparation of Advance Materials

• Notebook– Narrative– Evidentiary

documentation• Box of goodies

– Samples of products

Creation of Presentation Framework

• PowerPoint presentations– Brief history– Report on State Level Activities– Report on State Leadership Activities– Discussion of data

• A cohesive story rather than a point-by-point regurgitation of data

Delaware Assistive Technology Initiative

RSA Program ReviewOctober 2009

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Our Customers

• Only eligibility criterion is Delaware residency

• 326 individuals served with device loans in 2007-2008

• 505 individuals served with device loans in 2008-2009

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Borrower Profile 07/08 08/09

Individuals with disabilities/Family members

46% 53%

Representatives of education 22% 24%

Representatives of employment 2% 1%

Representatives of healthcare 28% 20%

Other 2% 2%

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Customer Satisfaction

• 07/08 – 100% satisfied 90% highly satisfied

• 08/09 – 99% satisfied 88% highly satisfied

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Our Staff

Each ATRC has an AT Specialist and an administrative support professional

AT Specialists routinely access professional development to maintain state-of-the-art knowledge and skills

Committed to customer service and customer satisfaction

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

New Castle County ATRC

Joann McCafferty

Marvin Williams

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Kent County ATRC

Eddie Jory

Beth Shinn

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Sussex County ATRC

Dan Fendler

Sandy Walls

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Vast inventory of devices

• Only service of this type and magnitude in the state

• Considerable investment over the years• Searchable on the website• Maintain “wish list” of equipment

Recent $60Kaward fromDE DOE

2 Vantage Lites

SpringBoard Lite

DynaVox V

Tobii C8

Lightwriter SL40

GoTalk 20+

2 GoTalk Buttons

TechSpeak 32

6 TouchSmart tablets

8 Netbook N120s

3 TouchSmart IQ800ts

3 PowerLite Projectors

5 iPod Touch devices

6 Kindle devices

Sony Reader Digital Book Pulse Smartpen

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

• 544 devices were loaned in 2007-08

• 846 devices were loaned in 2008-09

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Loans by Device Category

07/08 08/09

Vision 23% 28%

Hearing 18% 13%

Speech 33% 29%

Learning 8% 10%

Mobility 0 1%

Daily Living 5% 4%

Environmental Adaptation 5% 5%

Vehicle Mod/Transport 0 1%

Computers & Related 8% 6%

Recreation etc. 0 1%

Other 0 2%

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Loans arise from:• Service provider need for

equipment• Trainer need for demonstration

equipment • Demonstrations• Contacts at exhibits, health fairs,

awareness presentations• AT Messenger articles• Need for temporary/replacement

device

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

The Loan Process• Contact form• Loan documentation• Return reminder (if needed)• Customer feedback form

Device LoansWHO

WHAT

WHERE

WHEN

HOW

Loan challenges:• Keeping inventory current• Multiple renewals• Failure to return equipment

DataDiscussion

We are madabout data!

Data Collection Infrastructure• Our data collection procedures are formalized

– Significant investment in conceptualization of data structures and collection procedures

– Data collected in paper form– Forms customized to reporting requirements– InfoSys: database customized to our specifications– All staff trained on data collection procedures– The Notebook serves as a reference document

Data Collection Infrastructure• ATRCs are responsible for demo and loan data,

event data, individual BOLD data– Individual information entered into database– Data tabulated

• Sandy responsible for AT Exchange data• Eileen & Joann responsible for financial loan

program data• Sonja maintains BOLD financial data

Activities Data• We encounter few data collection challenges.

– Our investment in building relationships with our customers facilitates data collection.

– We have direct contact with the majority of our customers.

– Our ATRC structure gives us “reach” into all sectors of the state.

– Our large inventory enables us to address equipment needs across life domains.

Activities Data• Two areas in which the data could be more

complete– We don’t always know the “buyer” in an AT Exchange

transaction. That’s the price of a system that empowers individuals to act on their own behalf.

– We need to secure evaluation data for all of our training sessions.• Those for which we are not the host/sponsor• Need format that more effectively informs planning

Activities Data• Utilization of all activities continues to increase.• Clarification of some amorphous data guidance

will strengthen validity and comparability across states.

• Activity numbers at times reflect emphases in other program areas.

• Sometimes there is a “back story.”

Achievement of Measurable Goals

• Long- and short-term goals established with input from staff and Advisory Council

• Grounded in baseline data• Objective was to be ambitious and realistic• We achieved FY2008 short-term goals for

all dimensions of access and acquisition activities

Achievement of Measurable Goals

Access Education EmploymentCommunity

Living IT/Telecomma. Long-term Goal 80.00 60.00 85.00 85.00

b. Long-term Goal Status Not met Met Not met Met

c. FY 2007 Performance 80.95 100.00 77.11 100.00

d. FY 2008 Short-term goal 75.00 50.00 75.00 75.00

e. FY 2008 Performance 75.94 63.64 81.04 83.33

f. FY 2008 Status Met Met Met Met

g. FY 2009 Short-term goal 78.00 55.00 80.00 80.00

h. FY 2009 Performance 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

i. FY 2009 Status

j. FY 2010 Short-term goal 80.00 60.00 85.00 85.00

k. FY 2010 Performance 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

l. FY 2010 Status

The Visit

• Staff gathered in one location• Webinar

– PowerPoint– Live connection

• Planned for 3 two-hour sessions

Afterward…

• Follow-up requests for information

Useful Features

• Links to website• Video tour of an ATRC• Comparison of annual data• Inclusion of data in programmatic discussion• PowerPoint carried the basics; the live

component supplemented and elaborated

Lessons Learned

• HUGE amount of work– It took a village

• Valuable opportunity to reflect• Design of state’s response sets the tone

– Thorough– Anticipated questions & addressed them

proactively

Advice?

• Allow adequate time for preparation• Supplement your data with the stories• Tell it like it is• Don’t forget humor!

The End

We thank you for all the time and effort that you devoted to this process.

top related