1. Earn-A-Bike Evaluation
Carlo A. Nino
FINAL
Executive Summary:
The project’s theory of change is that if an environment is created to present youth an incentivized goal systemthen
will they have the opportunity to learn a sense of value.
The Earn-a-Bike Co-Op seeks to increase self-empowerment by creating space for low-income youth to perform
hands-on do-it-yourself activities that promotes new skillsets for maintenance and repair of bikes. Through this
program their select activities are meant to build and/orenhance community engagement between neighborhoods of
differing income levels in a non-hierarchical model of organization. The organization seeks to promote equitable,
affordable and practical services with priority to those in need.
The evaluation methods used here are intended for the CEO and are a snapshot ofthe performance of the project
within a limited timeframe of observation. The organization requires a set-up and registration for participants to
work in the program. The project has a clear understanding of the size and demographic population of its target
participants. The project has the ability to quantify statistics of its core participants to date so as to measure who has
joined and how long they have been with the program. Surveys are available to track how the participants are doing.
The up-shot of it is the project changing lives through a bouquet ofactivities. The demographics are a combination
of low-income youth and parents of mixed marriages and vocational outcomes. It still cannot be determined if there
are indeed otherfactors that contribute to the success ofthe project due to the limited time constraint of observation.
Purpose Statement
The evaluation is designed to assess the implementation and impacts of the the Earn-A-Bike project for low-income
youth in San Antonio,Tx. The program is dynamic and is still finding its way after three years of implementation.
This evaluation is designed to assist in the future development of the project and to ass ess its impact on participants.
Ultimately the assessment will be provided to the owner of Earn-A-Bike for his review and for his submission to the
Board of Directors.
Background:
Profile of the Earn-A-Bike Program:
Project has been in existence for 3 years by same owner/CEO.
Donor dependent consisting of multiple donors.
Functions with a 7 member Board of Directors.
Consists of 600+ unique registrants to date.
Between 5-10 active volunteers at principle site.
Expanding to 4 mobile units working in each district of the city.

2. Age groups of volunteers range from 18-65.
Age group of participants 7-18.
The gathered data shows how projects are goals how for joining and how their new skills are being leveraged in a
real world context. There are also initial fees to help offset operating costs.
Evaluation Overview:
Background
San Antonio is a rapidly growing city. Often called a big “little city” it boasts nearly 2 million residents. The
majority of citizens are Hispanic and Spanish speaking only and attend public schools. The city has been in
existence since the early 19th century and has had several heavy industries come and go. That means that several
parents,and grandparents benefited from experience in heavy labor. To be sure the city has a large military
community with 3 Air Force bases and an Army base. This is relevant because most of the children who participatie
in the Earn-a-Bike program have no relationship to these military bases. The primary industries in the city are
tourist based with the remove of the heavy textile industries that moved to the Northern Mexican maquiladoras
during the NAFTA treaty of the 90s. With that said certain areas of the city have thrived while others have not. The
areas that require the most development are indeed throughout the west,south and east sides of the city. With
competing resources and limited assets the San Antonio City manager struggles to balances these priorities while
still being able to fostera strong and responsible workforce. Several NGOs and NPOs have risen to the occasion in
the wake of this economic displacement. Among these is Earn-a-Bike.
Methodology
This evaluation used a summative performance evaluation for the program’s end-of-year conclusion using a
snapshot design due to time constraints. Surveys were constructed with the assistance of project staff and are made
available on-line for dissemination.
Methods were conducted by sitting with the principle architect of the project itself.
The project allowed interviewers:
- to discuss elements of the project through personalinterviews with staff
- interviews with beneficiaries who were of age (18+)
- focus groups with parents
- surveys.
This findings of this evaluation are targeting the CEO of the coop as target audience.
Evaluation Questions:
 Has participation in the Earn-a-Bike project changed lives? If so,how?
 What are the main factors contributing to beneficiary participation in Earn-a-Bike?
Internal Validity of the Project:
 Selection bias – Where surveys were conducted selection bias was confined to those beneficiaries who
were of age to participate in the research and analysis. Issues also arise for selection bias where on-line
surveys are used for participants who do not have access to personalhome computers let alone personal
internet access. That means that on-line surveys would only be completed by those individuals who had

3. access to these resources in the first place which would skew the results and/or provide an inaccurate
picture based on the surveys replies.
 Counterfactual – Earn-a-Bike emerges from other community projects (e.g. Good Samaritan, Jireh House,
after schoolprograms). Other projects were taken into account. Desired outcomes emerged as a result of
Earn-a-Bike as opposed to alternative explanations given by parents/guardians.
 Impact heterogeneity- Ethnicity is largely homogenous howeversocio-economic status is not. Impacts are
generalizable among participants from the diversity in parental vocations/socio-economic status.
Limitations of the Evaluation
 Time Constraints – The evaluation had to take place with a very narrow window of time. Additionally the
project was implemented on Saturdays within a 5-6 hr window of observation.
 Number of visits to the project – From the period of commencement for the evaluation coupled with the 1x
per week period of observation reduced the number of opportunities for data points.
 Absence of Monitoring data over time – This is a summary evaluation sans a defined and discrete set of
metrics proceeding from the mission statement. Statistics and data are limited to what was observed during
the 4-5 week period of observation.
 Beneficiary age for interview – Age of the beneficiaries was a restriction as they represented a target
demographic for vulnerable groups under the age of 18.
 Many of the beneficiaries lack internet, email addresses (for mass communication and coordination). They
don’t have sufficient experience in navigating the internet much less parents who enjoy internet/cable.
That means coordinating instructions are word of mouth or have to be written doorto door or on pamphlets.
 Because of the internet situation it also invites those who do have access to internet and laptops to the
actual events themselves. It serves the dual purpose of having people from multiple demographic groups
(haves and have nots)meet together.
Evaluation and Findings:
The program data seems to indicate that their theory of safe-safe and location are good places to implement a project
that supports the objective of fostering self-confidence and self-reliance in the participants. There isn’t any data that
shows conclusively through any statistical metric that the theory bears this out and the counterfactuals of other
programs are largely apocryphalbased on limited interviews.
The program has been running for 3 years solidly and appears to enjoy support from large donors but there hasn’t
been any formalized report that is delivered to the board of directors as of yet that factually demonstrates how the
programs implementations are a direct cause to the effect the Board of Directors is key on delivering.
Indicators that the project is successfulas a community based project is the number of return participants who have
graduated from the project but still return. It is not clear what the actual basis for their returning is and this
phenomenon can be attributed to comradery, safe location, charisma from project leadership, hidden incentives. For
the project to be successfulit must develop a clear line that distinguishes what it is doing in order to develop or
enhance the outcomes it seeks.

4. The Earn-A-Bike Co-op (EAB) is a volunteer-driven initiative with a mission to create equitable access to cycling
by providing affordable bicycle maintenance, services, and education. To achieve the mission, they operate a
community bicycle repair shop. The shop provides a central forum for sharing equipment, materials, and
expertise and facilitates affordable, practical, hands-on support for cyclist of all ages and skill levels.
The idea is that by operating a community bicycle repair shop they provide equipment, expertise and support for
different ages and skill levels in a non-hierarchical workspace.
The conditions for this activity reflect a safe-space for groups of differing income levels to work togethersharing a
similar interest. The interest is bicycles. The main objectives are both abstract and concrete. Their aim is to
increase greater self-esteem and self-confidence among those who want to participate in healthy living which also
has the direct consequences ofhealthier living and transfer of knowledge and skills as well as the indirect
consequences offostering community spirit and “equitable access” to the city.
There are other aspects ofthe program related to health and obesity. Interestingly enough there are otherhealth
professionals,medical doctors and health specialists in vascularhealth who are performing similar research who are
outside the scope of this research but are just as interested in what the consequences are for youth participating in a
healthy outdooractivity for prolonged periods of time. The socio-economic research they are performing does
reveal similar findings within this research insofar as much as those who lack access to mobility, have pooreating
choices or simply lack the vision and/orthe mechanisms that would provide them the vision for working for
something beyond what is immediately in front of them, in this case government projects and subsidized
government living.
There cannot be said with any distinct certainty but upon initial observation the youngerladies who participate are
invited and indeed encouraged by their fathers. As the children progress in age there seems to be a greater maternal
influence.
The project has changed lives. The evaluation made use of one on one interviews with beneficiaries as well as
informal interviews with parents of participants. The respondents during the interviews indicated differences in
their children’s attitudes,deportment and initiative.
Main factors include but are not limited to:
- Location of the project (seated within reach of intended beneficiary but accessible to other target
demographics)
- Engaged leadership from owner/CEO
- Rules up front approach

5. Control for Bias
 Control for confounding-Was taken into account when assessing the effectiveness of the Earn-a-Bike
intervention (variable X), from local population data in which Earn-a-Bike was a beneficiaries choice
among community projects. Data show that gender differences (variable Z) influence a beneficiaries level
of participation as well as that genders chances being affected by the projects desired outcomes of self-
confidence, empowerment and so on (variable Y). In this scenario, gender Z confounds the relation
between X and Y since Z is a cause of both X and Y.

6. Program Effectiveness:
The project owner and principle implementer calculates success using the following indicators.
The project owner did indicate that that his principle measure for success were returning pupils who had finished the
program. This made sense of the face of it since they had already earned their bike.
The data was drawn from randomized surveys. I already addressed bias. There are also no names associated to the
surveys to avoid attribution.
 # of unique registrants - Data is proprietary.
 # of returning registrants - Data is proprietary.
Data collected was from surveys conducted at an Earn-a-Bike event sanctioned by the owner.
Correlation
Age Gender
Did the project
share clear
goals for
earning a bike?
Y/N
Would you
consider
mentoring
new
volunteers?
Y/N
Would you
return to
the project
even after
earning
your bike?
Y/N
Do you feel
the skills
you
learned are
applicable
in school?
Have you
applied these
skills in your
household or
neighborhood?
Y/N
Age 1
Gender 0.398532 1
Did the project share clear
goals for earning a bike? Y/N 0.226941
-
0.433012702 1
Would you consider mentoring
new volunteers? Y/N 0.244427
-
0.177667264 0.6770032 1
Would you return to the
project evenafter earning your
bike? Y/N 0.226941
-
0.433012702 1 0.6770032 1
Do you feel the skills you
learned are applicable in
school? 0.226941
-
0.433012702 1 0.6770032 1 1
Have you applied these skills in
your household or
neighborhood? Y/N 0.25378
-
0.184466197 0.228217732 -0.10113 0.22821773 0.22821773 1
*Correlations reflected in yellow

7. Statistics
Age
N Valid 13
Missing 0
Mode 10
Range 7
Minimum 8
Maximum 15
Parent
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Father 2 15.4 15.4 15.4
FRIEND 1 7.7 7.7 23.1
Girl Zone 1 7.7 7.7 30.8
Letter 1 7.7 7.7 38.5
Mother 6 46.2 46.2 84.6
Mother & Web 1 7.7 7.7 92.3
Website 1 7.7 7.7 100.0
Total 13 100.0 100.0
This table is meant to reflect the relationship between the ages,genders and influence of the respective parent and
their direct involvement in having their kids participate in this program.
Recommended Actions:
 Data collection – Institutionalize use of survey mechanisms. Formal mechanisms such as on-line or paper
surveys. Informal mechanisms such as interviews one-on-one with volunteers and parents. Conduct data
collection at the beginning of introduction of new member and when the volunteercompletes all necessary
steps needed to earn a bike. However this information Is collected in a uniform manner and codified so
that the data can be like for like. This can take the form of surveys were would have to be relevant to the
beneficiary but also usefultoward understanding what the projects ultimate goals are.
 Data analysis – Adopt a preferred model to process data. Uniformity of action, standardization and
consistent data processes will help provide generalizable data for the heterogeneous socio-economic and
gender groups. The analysis needs to remain focused on whatever the primary question is being asked. To
be sure Earn-A-Bike has several goals. Obesity, self-confidence, self-respect, a vision beyond what today
has to offer and so on. When the analysis is conducted it’s important to understand what variables needed
to be correlated or else the analysis leads off into an erroneous direction. For example, measuring and
analyzing unlike items such as a reduction in obesity having a relationship to self-confidence might be

8. valid but it may have had nothing to do with what the original mission statement was which was to reduce
diabetes.
 Defined metrics tied to mission statement – These are key indicators the project wants to measure and track
over time per beneficiary. The key indicators are tied directly to the core mission statement of the project
and are clear and unambiguous.
 Defined Activities – A living document that includes general activities for the volunteers. Also articulates
activities that are excluded.
 Outreach methodology – The project has a clear strategy for communicating its message to the targeted
demographic. Not all participants have access to the internet or emails and this should be taken into
account.
 Donor Engagement – The project reflects similar goals for sympathetic donors. Close engagement with
donors sets expectations. Have a standard operating procedure or a clear strategy for consistent
communication with donors. Metrics can reflect their goals but ultimately reports to the Board of
Directors.
 Donor/Stakeholder Register – Has all information, key points of contact,a standardized matrix for
expectations and priorities.
Donors
Earn-a-Bike enjoys several donors and to its credit it not only keeps them but gathers more. The donors indicate
their interest in the project because of the health benefits but also because of the gender equality issues that are at
stake. Being a heavily latino population females are not often granted the same set of options as males. With that
said several of the donors have an interest in seeing more women participating in the Earn-a-Bike program. Their
idea is that it promotes strongerand confident business leaders in the local community and that projects such as this
promote those attitudes. The donors also indicated that what they liked about the atmosphere of Earn-a-Bike is that
it allowed people to fail in a safe way. That people were able to practice without being ridiculed or cajoled and in
fact were able to continuously fail while gaining more skills and thicker skins it would translate to better
performance in schools,a reduction in truancy and by extension a reduction in crime. All these theories exist
beyond the scope of this evaluation but are part of the interview process related to the evaluation of the donors.

9. Appendix A: Descriptions of Program Logframe:
This logical framework is an articulation of how the project functions. What the main purpose,strategic goals are,
inputs,outputs,outcomes and final desired results. There are to flow in a logical manner and if they do not then the
framework needs to be adjusted or else the project needs to be re-enginered to achieve the desired results.
Appensix B: Activitiies:
 Safety,participationandbehaviordiscussion
 Assignbicycle,adultvolunteer,andworking space
 Fifteenminutesforadultvolunteerandparticipanttogetto know each otherand designaplan
of action
 Openthe box and start assemblyprocess
 Finish Bike assembly
 Inspection - Learnthe ABC andD’s
 Ridingsafety101
 Helmetcoloring
 On/off,start/stop,leftturn,emergencystops,swervespractice
 Value of Nutrition
Appendix C: Persons Interviewed:
CEO – CristianSandoval
ProjectManager – Eric Muehlfeld
ProjectVolunteer–Joanne
Parents
Participant

10. Appendix D: Survey
Age: Gender:
Whendid
youenroll?
How many
days,weeks
or monthsdid
it take foryou
to graduate?
After
participating
inthe
program do
youfeel a
change in
your life?
Y/N
What type of
atmosphere
do youfeel
Earn-a-Bike
providesyou
to workin?
Wouldyou
feel you
would
have
achieved
the same
level of
confidence
without
the Earn-
a-Bike
project?
Y/N
Was the
location of
Earn-a-Bike
convenient
for
participation
in the
project?
Y/N
Did the
project
share clear
goals for
earning a
bike? Y/N
8 F 12/10/2015 null Y safe and fun N Y Y
10 F 12/10/2015 null Y fun and safe Y Y Y
15 M 12/12/2015 null Y Versatile Y Y Y
9 F 12/10/2015 null y fine N y y
15
M 12/10/2015 null y
comfortable
environment Y Y Y
10 M 12/10/2015 null N fun Y Y Y
14 F 12/12/2015 1 day Y Intriguing N Y Y
8 F 12/12/2015 1 day Y cool Y N Y
9 M 12/12/2015 null Y None N Y N
11 F 12/12/2015 null N None Unknown Y Y
12 F 12/12/2015 1 day Y Good Y N Y
10
F 12/12/2015 1 day Y
Friendly,
comfortable N Y Y
10 F 12/12/2015 null Y
good
environment N Y Y
Have you
applied these
skills in your
household or
neighborhood?
Y/N
How did
youdo
this?
Who
encouraged
youdo join
this
project?
On a scale of
1-5 how
wouldyou
rate your
sense of
independence
at the
beginningof
How would
you rate
your sense
of self-
confidence
at the end
of the
project?
What other
activities
would have
offered you
the same
sense of
achievement?
How did
you hear
about
Earn-a-
Bike?

11. the project
N N/A FATHER 4 1
Buildingmore
bikes Father
N N/A FATHER 4 1
Buildingmore
bikes Father
N N/A MOTHER 1 1 None Mother
N Learning FATHER 3 1 Father Website
Y
Did as
instructed FRIEND 2 1 None Mother
N Learning MOTHER 3 1 None Mother
N N/A MOTHER 4 1 None Mother
N
Put mind
to it. NIECE 5 1 Running Mother
N N/A NOBODY 2 5 None Letter
Y
Had help.
Witnessed. FAMILY 1 1 Unknown
Mother &
Web
Y N/A UNKNOWN 2 2
Learning how
to cook Mother
Y
Healthier
cooking Girl Zone 3 1
Local
Community
Serivices
(unspecified) Girl Zone
Y Friend FRIEND 1 1 Unknown FRIEND