Program Effectiveness. Current, and anticipated future visitation, miles/acres of opportunity, facilities, amount requested, and grantee contributions shall be taken into consideration.
Program Effectiveness. During the first year and a half of the TIER I LTP Program (April 2008- October 2009) we have served approximately 2,000 individuals with bus tickets or bus passes at an average cost of $1.62 per bus ticket and $52 per bus pass (due to price increases effective 2/1/09). As indicated above, each of the individuals served by the program is either utilizing the transportation assistance to enhance their ability to provide for their own transportation needs in the future or utilizing the transportation assistance to strengthen or stabilize their family situation. Assistance is provided only after the case worker has completed a needs assessment to determine client need. To demonstrate ongoing effectiveness of the program, the partnership will provide quarterly reports to the C/CAG that reflect the number of transportation units issued, communities served, and what the transportation unit was used for. In an effort to ensure the transportation resources are being utilized to achieve project goals, the Low-Income Transportation Partnership will meet on a quarterly basis to review program effectiveness; discuss project challenges and create solutions; and to continue in the development of new and additional transportation funding resources.
Program Effectiveness. As part of the application process, Navigator program awardees were asked to describe the community(ies) they expected to serve during their term as a Navigator, the reason for expecting to serve primarily that community(ies), and the number of people they expected to serve. To ensure Navigator programs are effectively engaging the target community(ies), provide a description of the successes and struggles you have experienced in serving the target community(ies).
Program Effectiveness. 1.4.1 Program Model Two reflections are offered on the VHB program model. Succinctly, throughout the developing world, millions of women are unable to receive services from their over- worked and under-funded Ministries of Health. When these women fall sick, there is nowhere to go that does not require sometimes hours (or half-days) of travel. Moreover, preventative public health activities are all but unheard of. The VHB model offers a way to fund well-trained primary health promoters outside of, and complementary to, the Ministries of Health to promote women’s ‘demand-driven’ search for better health services. If financial sustainability can be achieved, the model offers an effective way for women who would otherwise not receive health education to learn how to improve their lives. At the same time, it offers marginalized rural and peri-urban women an opportunity to improve their household incomes (and the health of their children), as well as to grow in self-esteem. The evaluator finds the model compelling. In places like Malawi, Guatemala and Peru where infant and maternal mortality is still quite high, the model should be made to work: it is a way tens of thousands of such women can be served. In addition, though there is debate on this topic, the evaluator views favorably the strategy of Project HOPE to create a country platform in three countries like these independent of grant funding. Growth in professionalism in career national staff and long-term organizational development are hard to achieve when a country operation is surviving from one short-term grant to another. The evaluator supports the implicit ‘program philosophy’ that a successful VHB project could create a program base on which Project HOPE can build.
Program Effectiveness. ECS and ECC will meet on a quarterly basis with the GSRP administrators to solicit information about, provide oversight on, and evaluate the effectiveness of the Program.
