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 Fort Worth After School (FWAS) program is a community-driven initiative that provides after school programs for youth in Fort Worth, Texas. Program goals revolve around three areas: educational competence, physical and social development, and crime reduction. Services provided include homework assistance, tutorial, snacks, cultural and recreational activities, and mentoring.
Start Date September 2000
Scope local
Type after school
Location urban
Setting public school
Participants preschool through middle school students
Number of Sites/Grantees 52 schools (47 elementary schools and 5 middle schools, 2000–2004); 55 schools (48 elementary schools and 7 middle schools, 2004–2005)
Number Served In the first 5 years, 16,252 youth attended at least 1 year of FWAS. In year 5, funding was allocated to support 50–150 youth per day at each campus.
Components A Coordinating Board (CB) made up of city, school district, and community representatives oversees the program, while an administrative staff monitors day-to-day operations. Most programs operate 4 days per week (Monday–Thursday) from the time school is dismissed until 6 p.m. At many of the sites, the same youth participate all 4 days each week. At several sites, some youth participate 2 days per week, with a different group of youth participating the other 2 days. In a few cases, programs are offered on Fridays. At each site, youth receive a snack and an opportunity to complete homework. Youth receive a combination of enrichment activities and free play or recreation time. Service providers include programming in at least three of five areas: academic enrichment, sports and recreation, cultural and fine arts, community service, and character development. FWAS established a youth-to-staff ratio minimum for all sites: 15:1 for elementary schools and 20:1 for the middle school.

The CB's selection of school sites was based on a combination of factors including the percentage of youth eligible for the Federal Free Lunch Program and crime statistics for the area around the school. Each year the CB approves several agencies/organizations as potential service providers. Principals at participating schools either select one of these providers to offer the program on their campus or develop a “site-based” (self-managed) program. FWAS is staffed by a director and two program coordinators. A Parent Advisory Committee (PAC), formed in year 2, is made up of parents of program participants. In addition, in year 3, monthly networking meetings hosted by service providers, schools, and community organizations were established to give site coordinators, providers, and principals the opportunity to talk, share, and collaborate.
Funding Level The city of Fort Worth and Fort Worth Independent School District (FWISD) jointly provided a total of $2.2 million per year for the first 5 program years. Some sites used additional funding sources to serve more youth; some are supported in conjunction with FWISD 21st Century Community Centers (21st CCLC) programs.
Funding Sources City of Fort Worth Crime Control and Prevention District, FWISD, U.S. Department of Education 21st Century Community Learning Center funds


Evaluation

Overview The evaluation sought data about program inputs (the elements that make up FWAS, such as its leaders, facilities, and activities); outputs (the number of youth attending FWAS, the types of activities offered, and the number of program hours provided); and outcomes (what happens to youth, parents, and the community as a result of FWAS).
Evaluators Peter A. Witt, Terri King, Jin-Hyung Lee, Kristi Montadon, Lydia Justice, Joanne Oh, Billy Brown, Texas A&M University
Evaluations Profiled Fort Worth After School Program: “A Diamond in the Rough” First Year Evaluation

Fort Worth After School Second Year Evaluation

Fort Worth After School Third Year Evaluation

Fifth Year Evaluation: Fort Worth After School
Evaluations Planned Evaluations are ongoing.
Report Availability Witt, P. A., & King, T. (2001). Fort Worth After School program: “A diamond in the rough” first year evaluation. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University. Available at rptsweb.tamu.edu/Faculty/Witt/1Report%20Text.PDF

Witt, P. A., King, T., & Lee, J. H. (2002). Fort Worth After School second year evaluation. College Station: Texas A&M University. Available at rptsweb.tamu.edu/Faculty/Witt/
FortWorth2003/FWASEVALS.htm

Witt, P. A., King, T., & Montandoni, K. (2003). Fort Worth After School third year evaluation. College Station: Texas A&M University. Available at: rptsweb.tamu.edu/Faculty/Witt/
FortWorth2003/FWASEVALS.htm

Witt, P. A., King T., Justice, L., Oh, J., & Brown B. (2005). Fifth year evaluation: Fort Worth After School. College Station: Texas A&M University. Available at: rptsweb.tamu.edu/
Faculty/Witt/FortWorth2003/FWASEVALS.htm


Contacts

Evaluation Peter A. Witt
Elda K. Bradberry Recreation and Youth Development Chair
Department of Recreation, Park, and Tourism
Texas A&M University
2261 TAMU
College Station, TX 77843-2262
Tel: 979-845-7325
Email: pwitt@rpts.tamu.edu
Program Miguel Garcia
Director
Fort Worth After School
100 N. University NE 232
Fort Worth, TX 76107
Tel: 817-871-2369
Fax: 817-871-2893
Profile Updated May 24, 2006

Evaluation 2: Fort Worth After School Second Year Evaluation


Evaluation Description

Evaluation Purpose To determine if FWAS was being successfully implemented and meeting its goals of youth educational competence, physical and social development, and crime reduction.
Evaluation Design Non-Experimental: Evaluators assessed stakeholders' program perceptions and satisfaction; FWAS attendance; and participants' social behavior, school liking, homework completion, and other academic abilities. A sampling plan to cover the range of service providers led to a designation of 16 target sites. Some data were collected for all 52 sites (attendance; site coordinator, staff, and principal surveys; and service provider, FWAS administrative staff, and principal interviews), while other data were collected only for target sites (parent and youth surveys and interviews, program coordinator interviews, and site visits). Small group interviews were done with parents and youth at 3 target sites. Surveys were completed by 240 parents, 412 youth, 52 principals, 50 site coordinators, 199 program staff, full-service providers, and all CB members.
Data Collection Methods Document Review: FWAS staff provided data on program goals, activities, cost, and attendance.

Interviews/Focus Groups: Interviews and focus groups discussed program quality, outcomes, satisfaction, goals, and activities.

Observation: Each target site was visited at least 4 times to assess quality and outcomes.

Secondary Source/Data Review: Registration, demographic, and daily attendance data were collected from service providers.

Surveys/Questionnaires: Surveys asked about program goals and activities, quality, satisfaction, and outcomes.
Data Collection Timeframe Data were collected during the 2001–2002 school year.


Findings:
Formative/Process Findings

Costs/Revenues In year 2, funding per site ranged from $31,182 to $50,000. The average annual cost per child care slot was $840–$845. FWAS increased capacity use and lowered cost per child per hour at actual and full capacity from year 1 by 8% and 11% respectively. In year 2, full capacity cost per child per hour was $2.16, and actual capacity cost was $2.31 per child per hour.
Parent/Community Involvement Nearly all surveyed parents agreed that they received sufficient and appropriate information from program staff.

Various organizations implemented year 2 programs, including: Hispanic Youth Promoting Excellence, which brought high school students in to teach arts, improve motor skills, and inspire reading; Crime Prevention Resource Center, which held programs on violence, drugs, and character building; TCU Music Department, which brought in college music majors to teach Spanish songs; and TCU Latin Arts Festival, which provided workshops conducted by Latin American ballet and modern dance companies.
Program Context/Infrastructure In year 2, many programs switched from an outside service provider to maintaining and running the program internally to allow more control over program goals and processes.

In year 2, 84% of all target school youth were on the Federal Free/Reduced Lunch Program.

Surveyed parents were nearly unanimous in indicating that their child felt safe in FWAS; 86% of youth indicated the same. In addition, 29% of parents said that if not for FWAS, their child would have been without adult supervision at least some of the time.

Quality of snacks, while improved, continued to be an issue from the previous year.
Program–School Linkages Of site coordinators, 21% disagreed that principals informed them of important decisions.

Over 40% of programs hired school staff as site coordinators. At these sites, principals were more likely to rate FWAS staff as qualified and classroom management and discipline as performed very well, while site coordinators were more likely to say that school staff were supportive of FWAS and that teachers were more willing to collaborate and provide information on homework. Further, programs that hired school staff were more likely to have a school-wide mechanism or strategy for communication between school-day teachers and FWAS staff about homework assignments (88% of teachers employed by FWAS agreed vs. 63% of teachers not working at FWAS).

Sixty percent of schools directly employed the site coordinator. In these cases, all site coordinators agreed that there was a strong partnership between FWAS and the school vs. 71% of site coordinators not employed by schools. Similarly, site coordinators reported differences in the extent to which schools informed FWAS staff of important decisions depending on whether the site coordinator was employed by the school.

Programs that shared school cafeteria or gym space with other programs sometimes experienced noisy and crowded conditions. FWAS staff worked with principals and providers to ensure heightened access to classrooms, libraries, and computer facilities. Programs that hired school staff helped FWAS gain access to school facilities.
Recruitment/Participation In year 2, 2,600 program slots were available (50 per school). Daily capacity use was 94%, with 4,728 youth registered in FWAS (182% of slots, indicating an 82% enrollment turnover). The average child enrolled for 87 days, or 67% of possible days.

Of FWAS participants, 35% were African American, 53% were Hispanic, and 9% were White; 51% were female and 49% were male. Nearly 11% were in Pre-K or kindergarten, 22% were in grades 1–2, 56% were in grades 3–5, and 12% were in grades 6–8.
Satisfaction Almost all surveyed parents (98%) said that they would sign their child up for FWAS again or recommend it to others. Fewer youth said that they would recommend it (39%) or sign up again (38%). However, the majority of youth surveyed (91%) liked FWAS. A common reason given in interviews for why youth did not want to participate again was that they did not want to be at school during the school day plus after school.
Staffing/Training Most site coordinators and staff agreed that training was adequate, but in focus groups, agency administrators and site coordinators indicated a need for more training in creative discipline/classroom management, First Aid/CPR, and programming ideas.

All site coordinators agreed at least somewhat that staff set high expectations for youth. Most principals felt that providers did well in hiring staff, but some had concerns about turnover.

Almost all surveyed parents thought that FWAS had good leaders and that leaders treated their child with respect. Similarly, the majority of youth thought that FWAS had good leaders (92%) and that FWAS adults always or almost always cared about them (70%).


Summative/Outcome Findings

Academic Over half of surveyed youth said that they always or almost always had time to finish homework in FWAS (52%) and got help with homework (55%); 67% of parents agreed “a lot” that their child did better on homework due to FWAS.

About half of principals strongly agreed that FWAS increased youth awareness of the importance of learning (51%), school attendance (51%), and academic performance (43%).

Of those surveyed, 43% of youth and 53% of parents said that youth liked school more and 63% of parents agreed “a lot” that their child did better in school due to FWAS.
Youth Development The majority of youth (80%) and parents (71%) surveyed agreed that FWAS helped youth learn to work with other youth.

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