The document provides a review and critique of a program evaluation report on the Results-Based Model (RBM) from 2002-2003. It contains the necessary sections like summary, purpose, background and methodology. However, the conclusions and recommendations are missing. The methodology could be improved by providing examples from the appendix to support findings. The readability varies, with some sections like the IRI skills easy to understand and others like the survey analysis difficult to follow. Clearer communication of goals, questions and conclusions is needed along with recommendations.

1. Critique and Review of:
Program Evaluation Report
Results-Based Model (RBM)
2002-2003
Report found at: http://www.idahotc.
com/files/rbm.pdf

2. Contained all the necessary
component sections of a final
evaluation report?
 Summary: a summary of results is provided
at the beginning of the document
 Purpose: assesses team members from
RBM pilot schools, analyze the effect of
RBM on IRI scores on those with
significant reading skill concerns in K-3
 Background information: explains that this
the 4th year of implementation or the
Results-Based Model, a problem solving
approach to support students who are
having concerns with reading.

3. Contained all the necessary
component sections of a final
evaluation report?
 Description of the evaluation
study and design: provides a
general outline in Figure and
Table 1, and an explanation of
survey creation techniques.
Individual sections also
contained descriptive
information concerning the way
data was gathered and used.

4. Contained all the necessary
component sections of a final
evaluation report?
 Discussion of the program and
results: the program and results
were communicated throughout the
document
 Conclusions and recommendations:
unless the conclusion and
recommendations were located in
the Appendix A-G sections, the
evaluation failed to communicate
significant conclusions or provide
recommendations to the reader.

5. · Evaluation methodology -
sound or questionable?
 Survey: The staff survey is extremely
thorough and provides valuable data for a
wide variety of areas within the evaluation.
It’s possible that these surveys are too
lengthy resulting in participant stagnation.
 The use lists in the results sections
concerning areas of most improvement
could be communicated in a better way.
Perhaps an instance or significant example
of data from the appendix section could
help represent the data areas listed.

6. · Evaluation methodology -
sound or questionable?
 The information provided
concerning the IRI Reading
Skills Associated with RBM
Intervention plan contains well
explained, sound data
beneficial, and comprehendible
to the reader.

7. · Readability - easy to read,
follow and understand?
 The IRI Reading Skills Associated
with RBM Intervention Plans section
of the document contains a very
straightforward narrative about the
purpose of the analysis. The survey
analysis section lacks this spelled
out text.
 It would be beneficial to have the
purpose as clearly stated at the
beginning of the document as well as
in these sections.

8. · Readability - easy to read,
follow and understand?
 When comparing the evaluation
information provided under the
survey section in comparison with
that is written about the IRI skills, the
survey information seems very
disjointed and difficult to follow.
Perhaps this is again because the
Appendix A-G information is not
included.
 The IRI Skills section is much easier
to follow and read.

9. Surprises?
 p.11 Table 2

10. Surprises?
 p.11, Table 2 is very busy and hard
to follow. It would make more sense
to have this information under the
descriptions for each appendix
section.
 Appendix A-G are missing, but this is
likely an internet/upload problem, not
a mistake by the evaluator

11. · Learned something new about
doing evaluation reports?
 Cut and dry
 To the point
 Be thorough
 Be careful when uploading
 Clear communication is a must,
especially goals, evaluation
questions, and conclusions
 Need recommendations

12. · Suggestions to make the
evaluation better?
 The evaluation desperately
needs recommendations to
validate the evaluation
 Communicate goals of
evaluation in the introduction
more thoroughly
 Descriptive summary of results