CIP News - Communities in Partnership
CIP News
CIP News - Communities in Partnership
Communities in Partnership
Print
Email
Forum Evaluation
Summary
Forum attendance was represented by Disability Services, Neighbourhood Houses, Community Learning Centres, People with Disabilities, Advocacy Workers, Administration Staff, Volunteers, Tutors, Management for all services, Committee members and City of Casey Representatives. This demonstrates a broad and wide ranging cross section of the community. Unforeseen staffing shortages, due to the H1M1 influenza, hindered one disability service from participating in the forum.
Registered attendance at the forum was 59 persons. After cross referencing the registered attendees and those who completed the photographic authority, an additional confirmed 16 persons are identified. From visual observations of the function room, head count on the day stands at 89 people participating.
Of particular interest is the result of the evaluation data in the area of relevance of the forum. Many comments by participants who indicated that the forum was not particularly relevant to them and their position (level three and four, chart four ) is at a total of 23%, however, those same participants scored in the 53% and 45% brackets for finding the forum informative and overall satisfaction (charts seven and eight). These figures clearly indicate that while some participants may not have felt that the forum was directly of benefit to their particular position, they have been educated and are satisfied with the days’ outcomes.
Some comments from participants who fit the above criteria;
****the participant indicated that they didn't think the forum was relevant to their position, however, ranked the time, organisation, information and overall rating at the highest level. their personal comment was - ENJOYED THE FORUM, NICE CATCHING UP WITH OTHER CENTRES. GREAT LUNCH THANKS. CAN'T SEE A WAY TO IMPROVE THE FORUM!
****as above on indications. personal comment - GREAT PRESENTATIONS, GOOD WORKSHOPS
The data gathered as a whole is very favorable in all areas, with combined scores in the level five and six ranges, up to 97%.
Comments from the participants to support this finding;
I FOUND THE FORUM EXTREMELY HELPFUL AS I LEARNT MORE ABOUT OTHER ORGANISATIONS AND MORE ON THE WAY THEY ALL OPERATE AND THEIR NEEDS
WELL DONE! I BELIEVE THAT SUSTAINABLE OUTCOMES WILL DEVELOP FROM THE COMMUNITIES IN PARTNERSHIP PROJECT
HAVE MORE FORUMS LIKE THIS - GREAT DAY
The area in which a noticeable change can be distinguished is on chart five, Time Allocation. The forum times were arranged to suit the working day, beginning at 10.00am and running until 3.00pm. The sub-committee also took into account previous feedback from a prior training session concerning evening events, were mindful of transportation for people with disabilities in attendance and also aware of school pickup times. We acknowledge that all people and time frames cannot be catered for.
****this person indicated level 3 for time allocation question - BEGIN 10AM, SHORT COFFEE BREAK. ACTIVITIES, FINISH WITH LATE LUNCH
Attached documents give all analysis, data break down, charts and all comments as completed by participants.
The analysis finds a successful and satisfying ‘The Next Step’ forum was held.
De-Brief Session Immediately Following Forum
Points raised during de-briefing;
- Miscommunication with Civic Centre staff regarding kitchen support
- Identify target audience
- Challenge is the backfill of staff
- Personal invitations could be given
- Lack of support from management and staff
- Someone could have done a background on the project
- Karen (NH speaker) was great – interactive speaker
- The controlled mix of audience was effective
- Beginning the day with morning tea created a friendly atmosphere
- Catering was excellent
- Guest speakers all effective and engaging
- We have opened up channels for further discussion
- Keep Michael O’Meara (guest speaker), Lynne Baxter (facilitator) and Shona White (Westernport Speaking Out) in the information loop
- We believe that we have established further opportunities and understanding between sectors and people.
Recommendations
An alternative registration process may be developed as a result of the registered participants, cross referencing and head count conducted, and the conflict identified.
Firmly give guidelines to invited parties on who the target audience is for attendance. This will avoid any confusion on who the session will be suitable for.
Have an extension of workshop time available if the working group feels the need to continue, and with the consent of everyone present. This will alleviate the feeling of being ‘rushed’ toward the close of the day.
