You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.

www.HFRP.org

The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.

Terms of Use ▼

Program Description

Overview The Austin Eastside Story After-School Program (AES) hopes to provide a safe and academically enriching environment for children (pre-K to 7th grade) attending school in East and Northeast Austin, Texas. Goals of the program are to increase students' interest in furthering their education, improve their academic performance and technology skills, increase parents' empowerment and commitment, and foster the social and cultural development of parents and students.
Start Date 1996
Scope local
Type after school
Location urban
Setting public schools (two) and community centers (two)
Participants pre-K through 7th grade students
Number of Sites/Grantees four sites operated by the Austin Eastside Story Foundation
Number Served 350 (1999–2000)
Components The program serves children in pre-K to 7th grades from 2:45 to 6pm. Activities include academic enrichment and tutoring. Parents are required to be involved in the program. As a condition of enrolling their children, all families must sign a form indicating their agreement to attend monthly parent meetings on parenting and community advocacy skills. They are also expected to volunteer four hours per month in a role that supports the program. The after school program is free for all who attend.
Funding Level $385,000 (FY 1999–2000)
Funding Sources The majority of funding comes from the City of Austin and the Austin Eastside Story Foundation. Funding is also provided by the Austin Health and Human Services Department, the Austin Police Department, and the Austin Solid Waste Department. 


Evaluation

Overview Dr. Peter Witt of Texas A&M University was contracted to evaluate AES according to field best practices.
Evaluator Dr. Peter A. Witt, Texas A&M University
Evaluations Profiled Evaluation of the Eastside Story After-School Program
Evaluations Planned None
Report Availability Witt, P. A., & Bradberry, E. K. (2000). Evaluation of the Eastside Story After-School Program. Austin, TX: Office of the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts.

Available at: rptsweb.tamu.edu/Faculty/Witt/pubs.htm


Contacts

Evaluation Dr. Peter Witt
Bradberry Recreation and Youth Development Chair
Department of Recreation, Park & Tourism Sciences
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX 77843-2261
Tel: 409-845-7324
Fax: 409-845-0446
Email: pwitt@rpts.tamu.edu
Program Barbara McVae
Eastside Story
2209 Rosewood Ave.
Austin, TX 78702
Tel: 512-322-2343
Email: barbara.mcvae@ci.austin.tx.us
Profile Updated November 2, 2001

Evaluation: Evaluation of the Eastside Story After-School Program


Evaluation Description

Evaluation Purpose To learn about the program's implementation, participant characteristics, and the academic, social, and behavioral outcomes of participants. Additionally, the evaluator seeks to assess the program's performance on 15 dimensions which were selected to represent best practices in after school that, according to the evaluator, are widely agreed-on by field professionals.
Evaluation Design Non-Experimental: Data were collected from program participants and stakeholders. The evaluator's rating of the program according to field best practices was a unique feature of this evaluation.
Data Collection Methods Document Review: Some demographic data (e.g., gender, ethnicity, grade, birthday, family characteristics, etc.) were obtained from program files. Grades were obtained from report cards collected by program teachers.

Interviews/Focus Groups: Interviews were conducted with select program teachers, parents, and children. Interviews were conducted with approximately half of the program teachers and a sample of parents. Program teachers were selected by the evaluator and the parents were selected by AES program personnel based on their availability. In addition, small group interviews were conducted with some children (grades 3 and up). The interviews with parents and children focused on program characteristics, program quality, program satisfaction, and program outcomes.

Surveys/Questionnaires: Surveys were designed and administered to students in the program (3rd grade and up), parents, program teachers, and schoolteachers. Children in 3rd grade and up were administered a questionnaire on topics such as why they attended the program, if they liked it, if they felt safe there, and what, if any, were their educational plans. Parents were surveyed on program quality and perceived outcomes. Program teachers were required to assess each student's goals, progress toward them, and interest in academic activities. Schoolteachers completed surveys about their students as well as their general views of the program.

Tests/Assessments: The Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) scores were obtained from Austin Independent School District (AISD) for most program participants (3rd grade and up) who attended AISD schools. In addition, TAAS scores were obtained for most program participants (3rd grade and up) who attended two charter schools.
Data Collection Timeframe All data were collected during the 1999–2000 school year.


Findings:
Formative/Process Findings

  Many of the formative findings derive from the rating scale used by the evaluator to rate the program on 15 field best practices. Using a rating scale from 0 to 4, where:
  • 0 - Program does not exhibit characteristic.
  • 1 - Program exhibits characteristic a little.
  • 2 - Program exhibits characteristic somewhat.
  • 3 - Program exhibits characteristic a lot.
  • 4 - Program exhibits the characteristic a great deal.
The evaluator rated the program on each of 15 best practices culled from the work of after school professionals.
Activity Implementation The program was rated “3+” in the best practice of having program activities designed to achieve the stated goals.
Cost/Revenues The program was rated:
  • “4” in the best practice of providing the program to the participants at a reasonable cost ($2.68/hour/child).
  • “3” in the best practice of having a stable source of funding.
Parent/Community Involvement The program was rated “3” in the involvement of parents in the design, operation, and improvement of the program.

Parental work requirements (4 hours/month) and mandatory monthly parent meetings seems, according to the evaluator, to create a sense of responsibility for and ownership of the program.
Program Context/Infrastructure The program was rated:
  • “4” in the best practice of responding to a clear individual or community need
  • “4” in the best practice of having a clear set of goals
  • “3+” in the best practice of creating a safe and secure environment for children during the after school hours
  • “3” in the best practice of having adequate and well maintained facilities
  • “3” in the best practice of having needed equipment
  • “3+” in the best practice of meeting its major goals
  • “2” in the best practice of having means in place to assess program quality, satisfaction, and achievement of outcomes
Recruitment/Participation The program was rated “3” in the best practice of being offered at necessary and convenient times.

Of 278 children: all participants were African American; 60.6% were female; 15.8% were in pre-K or K, 29% were in grades 1–2, 35.3% were in grades 3–4, 16.5% were in grades 5–6, and 3.2% were in grades 7–8; 66.8% from single-parent families, 83.8% of whom work full-time; and 6.8% had family incomes <= $9,999/year, 32.5% had incomes $10,000–$19,999, 29.3% had incomes $20,000–$29,999, and 31.4% had incomes > $30,000.
Satisfaction Eighty-two percent of children indicated that they liked the adults who worked in the program and 80% and 82.3% respectively said that they came to the program because they thought it would be fun and they wanted to receive help with homework.

Some children complained that they did not have enough time to play or be involved in less structured activities during after-school hours.

Only 48.1% of participants indicated that they liked to come to AES every day and as many as one third characterized the program as “boring.”

In general, parents were satisfied with the quality and content of the program (90.6% rating quality as good or very good), mentioning that they would recommend the program to other families (99.2%).
Staffing/Training The program was rated:
  • “2+” in the best practice of maintaining staff to participant ratios appropriate to meeting program goals
  • “3+” in the best practice of employing staff with backgrounds, experience, and credentials necessary to carry out program goals
  • “3-” in the best practice of offering adequate pre-service and in-service staff training


Summative/Outcome Findings

Academic Three-quarters of teachers felt that the program had helped children in their classes.

At least half the schoolteachers attributed improvement in homework (55.1%), overall academic performance (55.5%), and TAAS scores (59.5%) to students' participation in the after school program.

Both program teachers and schoolteachers felt that the program was improving children's academic performance (e.g., school grades and TAAS scores).
Youth Development Many parents felt that the program had increased the degree to which their children liked school (77.6%), had confidence in themselves (90%), and felt happy (85.6%).

© 2016 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College
Published by Harvard Family Research Project