|
|
Performance Measurement and TQM Analysis1. Rationale for
Performance Measurement The Digital Bridge Trust Fund
Act, HR 4477 seeks to close the gaps on information technology by
providing federal funding for community technology centers that will: 1)
expand access to computers, technology training and technological tools
in underserved rural, urban and Native American areas; and 2) provide
the training necessary to improve their educational performance and
employment competitiveness utilizing computer technology.
In order to improve the digital
divide a program design, organization structure and budget have been
developed. The program design includes the responsibilities for Board of
Trustees, Digizone Administrator and the Regional Task Forces and
determines criteria for grant allocations. The
digizone offices highlight the proposed organization structure. The
budget report presents excellent distribution based on the criteria.
The fund is provided in next 10
years; however, the performance of the fund should be evaluated in each
year and improves programs year by year.
Considering the human and financial resources, information
technology innovation and economic growth, evaluation is essential. Goals to be measured The program should be measured against criteria relevant to the
appropriate definition of success.
While increasing technological competitiveness and access to
underserved rural, urban and Native American communities are the
overarching goals of the legislation, the Board of Trustees will also
target tangible program-related goals. Total quality management will
assess the review board, regional coordinators, state liaisons and the
program manager’s ability to deliver a national notification campaign
that is clear, comprehensive and far-reaching. The review board and the
regional coordinator will be responsible for conducting an efficient,
fair and reasoned review and selection and distribution of annual
grants. Finally, it will be
the responsibility of the State liaisons and the program managers to
provide critical support and assistance to grant recipients and to
ensure targeted populations are reached and program goals are adhered
to. Summary of Goals: Ø
The selection and distribution of funds is conducted in an
efficient and fair manner. Ø
The national notification campaign is clear and comprehensive and
reaches a wide variety of potential applicants. Ø
Ensure support and assistance provided to grant-recipients is
timely and appropriate. Ø
Each community technology center targets underserved
communities-providing technological tools for educational and
professional competitiveness. Performance Indicator* Goal 1: The selection and distribution of
funds is conducted in an efficient and fair manner.
Input Measures -
Total expenditures on needs assessment -
Total expenditure (personnel, communications, supplies, travel)
of board of trustees and review board -
Total board of trustees staff hours devoted to review and
distribution to six digizone -
Total board of trustees members working on review and
distribution to six digizone -
Total expenditure (personnel, communications, supplies, travel)
of 6 digizone offices -
Total 6 digizone staff hours devoted to review, selection and
distribution to community technology centers -
Total 6 digizone staff members working on review, selection and
distribution to community technology centers
Output Measures -
Number of funds allocated to each digizone -
Number of application received* -
Number of application screened out of review process* -
Number of applications approved/selected -
Duration of time for review board decision -
Duration of time between selection and awarding -
Number and dollar value of grants
Outcome Measures -
Number of recipients -
Geographic distribution of recipients -
Number of complaints** -
Number of exiting community technology centers as a recipient -
Number of new community technology centers as a recipient -
Number of corroboration with other programs Impact Measure
- Quality of
Community Technology Centers Goal 2: The national notification campaign is clear and
comprehensive and reaches a wide variety of potential applicants. Input Measures -
Total expenditures (personnel, communications, printing,
supplies, travel, equipment) -
Total digizone staff hours devoted to notification -
Total digizone staff members working on notification Output
Measures -
Number of brochures distributed -
Number of Town meetings -
Responses to requests for information* -
Number of application printed vs. number sent -
Geographic distribution of town meetings -
Geographic distribution of request for information -
Geographic distribution of request for application -
Geographic distribution of applications received Outcome
Measures -
Number of calls/questions* -
Number of participants in town meetings -
Number of request for information* -
Number of request for application* -
Number of applications received* Impact Measures
- Quality of
application receive
Goal 3: Ensure office support and
assistance provided to grant-recipients is timely and appropriate. Input Measures -
Total expenditures (personnel, communications, printing,
supplies, travel, equipment) -
Total digizone staff hours devoted to support and assistance -
Total digizone staff members working on support and assistance Output
Measures -
Number of information services to community technology
centers* -
Number of community technology center visits made by digizone
staff -
Number of meetings with community technology centers
Outcome Measures -
Duration of time awaiting response to question -
Improvement of community technology centers ·
Number of Internet accesses ·
Number of computers ·
Number of programs ·
Number of participants -
Number of community technology centers achieving their
goal* -
The number of Community Technology centers starting on time* -
Number of complaints** Impact Measures - Community
Technology Centers reaching target populations and operating efficiently
and effectively Goal 4: Each community technology center
targets underserved communities-providing technological tools for
educational and professional competitiveness. Input Measures -
Amount of grants -
Total expenditure (personnel, communications, printing, supplies,
travel, equipment) -
Total community technology center staff hours devoted to manage a
community technology center -
Total community technology center staff members working on
support and assistance Output
Measures -
Number of participants of a community technology center* -
Number of alumni of community technology center* -
Survey of achievement test -
Survey of exit questionnaires
Outcome Measures -
Impacts of providing community access to technology on individual
"users" ·
Improve computer, technology and job
skills ·
Increase self confidence with
technological tools ·
Increase access to employment -
The impacts of providing access to technology on the communities
in which these centers are located ·
Average Household income of the
communities ·
Ratio of employment ·
Ratio of higher education ·
Number of Participation in Civic and
Community Activities through community technology
centers
-
The conditions and programmatic components that produce
beneficial outcomes, as well as less desirable effects ·
Number of participants’ opinion of
increasing Job Skills and Access to Employment
Opportunities ·
Number of participants who reported new
or changed ideas and goals for learning and
educational attainment ·
Number of participants who feel of
pride, achievement, and competence
-
Assessing the impact of providing access to technology in
informal community settings, especially for members of groups that have
unequal access to educational opportunities and resources ·
Number of participants who get an access
to Internet (home, school, library
etc) ·
Number of participants who get an
opportunity to use the computer ·
The location of communities (regard of
above participants) ·
Household Income (regard of above
participants) ·
Attitude of education (regard of above
participants) Efficiency Measures In addition to monitoring and evaluation the inputs, outputs and
outcomes detailed above, the board of trustees and digizone office will
also institute efficiency measures into the Total Quality Management
System. Over the project five years of the program, the flowing ratios
will be calculated and analyzed. -
Application that do not meet criteria / overall number of
applications -
Number of community centers not starting on time / total number
of community technology center -
Ratio of total community technology centers expenditures to total
grants awarded -
Ratio of total community technology centers expenditures to
number of alumni Research Methods A.
Application Files B.
Notes/Minutes from Town meetings C.
Phone/Internet Records D.
6 Digizone annual report E.
Semi-annual reports from community technology center F.
Achievement Tests G.
Exit Survey H.
Site Visit and Interviews I.
Budget and Staffing Data J.
A third party evaluation report Reporting Method The
progress and successes of the board of trustee will be reported through
a variety of internal and external mechanisms. Internal reporting
include grantees’ biannual progress reports to digizone committees,
regional digizone committees’ annual reports to the board of trustee,
and a third party’s semi-annual progress reports to the board of
trustee. Moreover, digizone administrator initiates periodic meeting
with regional digizone presidents, and communicate each digizone’s
progress to the Board of Trustee. External reporting will be included
the mandated yearly report to President and the United States Congress. A.
President and the United States Congress B.
The Board of Trustee C.
Digizone Administrator D.
Regional Digizone committees E.
Grantees F. A Third Party (outside auditor)
Use of Data A.
Process Evaluation – the analysis of quantitative and
qualitative data will offer voluminous information on the work processes
and overall operations of the program. It is measured by grantees’
biannual progress reports, regional digizone committees’ annual
reports, a third party’s semi-annual progress reports to the board of
trustee, and digizone administrator’s periodic meeting with regional
digizone presidents and the Board of Trustee. Processes that are
inefficient or ineffective must be clarified and redesigned. If the
process is unnecessary or duplicative, it should be eliminated. B.
Outcome Evaluation – Outcome evaluation is examined the
immediate or direct effects of the program on participants. It is
measured by an achievement test and an exit survey for all participants.
The third party’s yearly evaluation will officer detailed feedback on
the program’s overall outcomes. Results of the evaluation should shape
or contribute to future community technology center reform initiative or
legislation. The impact of the community
technology center program should be primarily considered on
underserved
rural, urban, and Native American communities. Quarterly
demographic assessments are also conducted in order to ascertain what
percentage of the “target population” is being reached.
Implementing TQM The community technology center program will rely on the Board of
Trustee for the implementation of total quality management. Personnel
assigned to the community technology center program will actively
participate in the performance assessment process. Total quality
management, if done correctly, will become standard operating procedure
in the program.
|
