AEA365 | A Tip-a-Day by and for Evaluators

CAT | Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations

Greetings, I am June Gothberg, the Chair of the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG. We have been honored to be included in aea365 and hope that you have gained in your knowledge and expanded your evaluator toolbox this week.

I would like to wrap up our week with the broad topic of inclusive evaluation. I was introduced to the term in the late 90s by our past AEA President, Donna Mertens. In her 1999 AJE article, she stated “Inclusive evaluation has the potential to contribute to an enhanced ability to assert truth, objectivity, credibility, validity, and rigor… based on a review of world history, certain groups have been systematically excluded from having meaningful participation in the design, implementation, and use of evaluations that impact them”. It’s my belief that in order for evaluators to provide unbiased, accurate, and useful results, they must attend to those in the margins.

Lessons Learned and Hot Tips:

  1. Increasing participation from marginalized populations increases evaluation validity and reliability. Think about it, without the voices of all, how do we make recommendations for all?
  2. Marginalized populations may include more than you know. In addition to people with mental or physical disabilities there are: addicts, historically oppressed, homeless, LGBTQ, low-income, low-literate, the aging, those from the non-dominate culture, trauma survivors, veterans, and women and girls.
  3. Persons from marginalized or vulnerable groups may be hard to identify. Many vulnerabilities are invisible. For example, people with learning disabilities, veterans with PSTD, people that have experienced abuse, or people with mental health issues.
  4. Learn the language. Professions outside evaluation are also tackling this issue but may use differing terms: education uses inclusion, mainstreaming, least restrictive environment, employers tend to use the terms integrated and equal access; community planners and agencies use terms like independent, universal, accessible, and livable.
  5. Accommodations tend to benefit more than the marginalized person. I recently attended a MIhiddentalent.org conference where employers discussed the advantages of diverse work populations. On a large panel of the nation’s top employers, every one of them said the benefits to all employees far exceeded the cost of accommodating employees.

Rad Resources:

  1. AEA’s Cultural Competency Statement http://bit.ly/AEACC
  2. Center for Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment (CREA) http://bit.ly/CREAIL
  3. Mertens, D.M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York: Guilford Press. http://bit.ly/DMTrans
  4. Thurston & Jenson (2014). Merging Trauma-Informed and Universal Design Principles http://bit.ly/TIUDE

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

·

This is a post from Sarah von Schrader and Katie Steigerwalt at the Yang Tan institute on Employment and Disability at Cornell University. Sarah is a researcher and evaluator at the Institute, and Katie works with the Northeast ADA Center, which provides information, training, and technical assistance on the Americans with Disabilities Act. One of our missions as an institute is to ensure that whether we are gathering or sharing information, that we create accessible materials for our wide range of audiences.

Lesson Learned:

This week we have highlighted the prevalence of disability in the U.S. and importance of “evaluation for all” and of course this includes sharing our evaluation data. We love data visualization as a powerful way to share information! However, not everyone may be able to access this information in all its visual glory. For example, individuals who are blind, visually impaired, or who have certain cognitive disabilities may not be able to access the critical points that are conveyed through colorful graphics, fancy tables, and detailed pictures. This audience most likely relies on the use of a screen reader, and while technology has made some marked advancements, a screen reader still will not be able to interpret any graphic without a little help.

Therefore, an important step in creating a fully accessible document is developing alternate text, or “alt text” for an image of graphic that is important to the meaning of the document. Alt text is descriptive text manually added to an image that is not visually displayed, but can be read by screen readers. You may notice sometimes when you are scrolling through a PDF and your mouse hovers over an image, descriptive text might spontaneously pop up – that’s alt text!

Hot Tips:

  1. Avoid repetition and wordiness – the descriptions should be concise as possible to get the important information across.
  2. Remember that alt text is primarily for people who are blind or have significant visual impairments – When you describe a chart or graph, give all information that a sighted user would be able to access, without adding extraneous information. The colors of lines in a graph is irrelevant, for example – but the categories and values are important. (How would you verbally describe the image to a colleague over the phone?)
  3. Alt text should be written in a logical order – from high to low, largest to smallest change, most to least important. Depending on the figure, this may not necessarily be the order of the categories listed in the key.
  4. Keep in mind – If you are struggling to generate a useful and concise description for alt text, it may be a sign that the figure is too complex and should be simplified. If you can’t describe it, imagine how your audience might have difficulty understanding the figure, even if they are sighted!

Rad Resources:

  1. Tips on writing good alt text descriptions: http://bit.ly/1lUHtT4
  2. Instruction for adding alt text in Word 2013/2016: http://bit.ly/29DwzPj
  3. Alt text is just a small part of creating an accessible document. Here is a checklist to create fully accessible electronic documents in MS Word 2010 – http://bit.ly/29RchSI

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

No tags

We are LaWanda Cook and David Filiberto, research faculty at the Yang-Tan Institute (YTI) on Employment and Disability. One of the YTI’s Healthy Living initiatives, “Fits In: An Inclusive Fitness and Wellness Technical Assistance and Evaluation Program” is being undertaken to ascertain the effectiveness of enhanced training of fitness professionals to improve the inclusion of persons with disabilities in community settings alongside of peers without disabilities. Our goal is to identify strategies that will enable fitness professionals and individuals with disabilities to sustain these efforts.

Lessons Learned:

Project managers, community partners, people with disabilities, and their family members need a mutual understanding of the definition of “inclusive” versus “adaptive” programming, prior to finalizing the program design.

Individuals with disabilities can benefit from education about and exposure to fitness/wellness options, with opportunities to try these activities in different settings. We recognize that for some individuals, movement toward inclusion may happen in stages from first being introduced to a fitness program with peers with disabilities to ultimately participating in a “typical” community-based program. Some individuals may prefer and choose to participate in more, or less, inclusive settings. The key is to provide choices.

Fitness professionals would benefit from an understanding of common types of disabilities/functional limitations, hands-on experience working with people with disabilities, and guidance on how to talk with individuals with disabilities to mutually decide if they should work together.

Hot Tips:

  1. Effective programming requires program staff to consider the needs of all stakeholders. They must be skilled not only in serving individuals with disabilities, but in educating subject matter experts and the general public about disability and inclusion. Mutually beneficial community partnerships, and thoughtfully designed opportunities such as Pop Up events, and adaptive classes or workshops can be impactful first steps to more inclusive community-based opportunities.
  2. When assisting in the creation of sustainable inclusive programs for individuals with disabilities, it is important to remember that program personnel and participants may not be well versed, or even familiar with, the methods and purpose of quality evaluation. Even after creating an evaluation that is simple and straightforward, provide the necessary technical assistance and fidelity monitoring to assist in the thorough and accurate collection of data.

Rad Resources:

  1. For tips on designing and evaluating physically, programmatically, and attitudinally inclusive recreation programs, see the National Center on Health, Physical Activity and Disability (NCHPAD) website at http://www.nchpad.org/
  1. As we help create avenues for individuals with disabilities to participate in inclusive, community-based fitness/wellness activities we encourage you to learn more and follow our project here: http://bit.ly/29DvcyH

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

No tags

Hi, I’m Amelia Maynard, Ph.D., District Analyst for the Anoka-Hennepin School District in Minnesota and an independent evaluator with Maynard Evaluations. I have worked to conduct inclusive evaluations with programs that target both individuals with disabilities and the general public.

Individuals with disabilities are often excluded from evaluations because we are uncertain of how to be inclusive or aren’t aware of these individuals’ presence in the program. As this population, including individuals with cognitive disabilities such as Autism and dementia, continues to grow, the evaluation community needs to ensure these individuals’ views aren’t ignored. Including individuals of all abilities in evaluations helps increase equity and validity by ensuring more stakeholder voices are included. To increase participation of individuals with disabilities in evaluations, the process needs to be accessible from the beginning. By creating accessible recruitment and consent processes, we can ensure that individuals who want to be heard have the opportunity to participate.

Hot Tips:

  1. Know your stakeholders – Consider if individuals with disabilities are a stakeholder group in your evaluation. Work with program staff to determine if and how you can include these individuals in the evaluation process. Staff may have ideas of how to reach out to these stakeholders, such as placing notices in accessible areas or communicating with care-takers.
  2. Use more examples and visuals – To increase the participation of individuals with disabilities, be adaptive and creative in how you introduce your evaluation and obtain consent. For many individuals, it is helpful if evaluators use more visual modes of communication. For example, evaluators can show videos that describe and demonstrate the evaluation process, use pictures in pamphlets or on the consent forms, and use large fonts and easy-to-read, non-technical language. These sorts of accommodations can benefit individuals with a wide range of disabilities, from those with low vision to those with learning or cognitive disabilities.

Lesson Learned:

Many of the accommodations evaluators can make to be inclusive of individuals with disabilities benefit everyone. Data collection processes and consent forms can be confusing for those who are unfamiliar with such work or for those who are not native English speakers. Many of us appreciate clear language and visuals when dealing with complex topics!

Rad Resource:

To help create accommodations that benefit everyone, use the principles of Universal Design. Check out the Universal Design for Evaluation Checklist, developed by Jennifer Sullivan-Sulewski and June Gothberg.

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

My name is Linda Thurston and I serve as the associate dean for research in the college of education and Kansas State University. I have been a member of AEA for 16 years and have been co-chair of the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG.

Lesson Learned:

Have you thought about the potential characteristics of your stakeholders? Are they just a regular bunch of community members? Agency personnel? Teachers and administrators? State legislators? Your regular bunch of stakeholders are likely to have these characteristics: 12 – 15% have experienced rape or other severe trauma; 20% have a disability (depending on ages); 15% have an invisible disability such as a learning disability or mental illness; and 12 percent of the males will probably be colorblind.

https://twitter.com/InvisAbilities

https://twitter.com/InvisAbilities

Hot Tip:

As evaluators, we know to involve stakeholders at every of our evaluations. How can we be sure we include these stakeholders in our reports and presentations? We need to be sure ALL our stakeholders can access evaluation materials at every stage. We need to consider out websites, the fonts we use, the colors of our graphics, the readability of our reports. Microsoft Office has a readability tool. Here are a few other Rad Resources that I have found helpful in responsive and inclusive evaluation.

Rad Resources:

  1. Guidelines for creating accessible printed posters (Gilson & Kitchin, 2007) http://bit.ly/11As8Ja
  2. Presentation accessibility guidelines (Association of University Centers on Disability) http://bit.ly/11h3OeR
  3. PowerPoint accessibility guidelines & template (American Public Health Association) http://bit.ly/13UOiuS
  4. Universal Design for Microsoft PowerPoint http://bit.ly/17N7uaP

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

No tags

Greetings from the Disability and Other Vulnerable Population (DOVP) TIG! We are the DVOP leadership team, Caitlyn Bukaty, June Gothberg, and Sarah von Schrader. This week we’re excited to share a series of posts focused on inclusive evaluation.

Today we want you to consider: Who’s taking part in evaluation? In many cases the group of stakeholders can be quite broad – professionals, consumers, customers, clients, students, families – across the many facets of evaluation the list expands quickly. Given the wide range of people who can participate in evaluation it’s important to design evaluation with everyone in mind.

As leaders of the DOVP TIG our mission is to support the field of evaluation in building practices that make evaluation accessible to everyone, including individuals with disabilities. According to the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) almost 1 in 5 people in the United States have a disability1,2. The World Health Organization estimates a similar figure globally3 accounting for about 1 billion people in the world.

Gothberg

http://reciteme.com/statistics

This means that if you are conducting evaluation it’s highly likely that some of your stakeholders have a disability, whether or not you are working with a specific population of individuals with disabilities.

Some individuals with disability may face specific barriers to participation and use in an evaluation. For example, individual with a vision impairment may use a screen reader. By preparing surveys and reports to be accessible with screen readers, this population can participate in evaluation independently. Individuals with language difficulties or cognitive impairments may benefit from shorter, more direct surveys or alternative response options. The figure people offers insight into the prevalence of specific disabilities, which may help you decide what accessibility features to incorporate.

Gothberg 2

http://census.gov/

This week we will offer you a range of insightful posts centered on designing evaluations to reach as many stakeholders as possible. We know that we can’t cover everything in a week, so we encourage you to reach out, follow up, ask questions, and get involved with the DOVP TIG so that we can work together to create evaluation for all!

Rad Resources:

US Disability Statistics

National and State level Health and Demographic information about adults with disabilities

References:
1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2015). CDC: 53 million adults in the US live with a disability. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2015/p0730-us-disability.html
2 Courtney-Long, E. A., Carroll, D. D., Zhang, Q. C., Stevens, A. C., Griffin-Blake, S., Armour, B. S., & Campbell, V. A. (2015). Prevalence of disability and disability types among adults – United States, 2013. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 64(29), 777–783.
3 World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disability (p. 325). Malta. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/en/

 

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

 

No tags

Hi! I’m Myia Welsh, an independent consultant working with nonprofit and community organizations. Much of my work is done with organizations that provide services to survivors of human trafficking. What’s that, you ask? Trafficking is any enterprise where someone makes a profit from the exploitation of another by force, fraud or coercion. Just like the sale of drugs or weapons, the sale of humans occurs both in the U.S. and around the world. Find out more about human trafficking here.

Lesson Learned: Conducting evaluation with these organizations has required me to learn my way around engaging trauma survivors in evaluation – especially in focus groups. Focus groups with trauma survivors can be challenging if you don’t know what to expect. They require slightly different planning and facilitation skill. I recommend the following preparations:

  • Understand what you’re dealing with. Do some reading on trauma, so that you know how to recognize dynamics in the room.
  • Review your protocol for trigger questions. Stick with what’s essential to the evaluation.
  • Consult knowledgeable stakeholders to help you be aware of causing potential harm, and brainstorm about how to avoid it.
  • Be prepared for an emotional response, and have a plan to handle it with respect and support. An abrupt or uncomfortable response from the facilitator could silence participants. So, check your reactions. Have tissues ready in case of tears and tactile toys/objects around to help manage anxiety.
  • Make safety a factor in your planning: Where will this group feel safe? Physical space and location should be taken into consideration. Will bringing additional note takers or co-facilitators into the situation enhance or threaten perceived safety?
  • Check your facilitation practices. In most focus groups, a zoned-out participant would be prompted to participate. With a group of trauma survivors, this might be a signal that the reflection brought on by the discussion is getting overwhelming. Have a plan ready so that you can recognize it and continue on without disruption. Consider a non-verbal cue that you can set up in the beginning, a colored index card for instance. A participant can set their card on the table as a signal that this is getting tough. Make sure everyone knows that they can step away if they need to.
  • What’s your wrap-up plan? Have a strategy ready for ending in a positive way, soothing the emotions that may have emerged. Guide discussion to future hopes or recent accomplishments.

Lesson Learned: Even if it might be emotional or messy, service recipients are key stakeholders who’s voice cannot be left out of an evaluation.

Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

My name is Lija Greenseid. I am a Senior Evaluator, with Professional Data Analysts, Inc. in Minneapolis, MN. We conduct evaluations of stop-smoking programs. Smokers generally have lower education levels than the general population. Therefore, we want to make sure the materials we develop are understandable to smokers.

Rad Resource: Use a “readability calculator” to check the reading-level of your written materials. I have used this with program registration forms, survey instruments, consent statements, and other materials. Not surprisingly, the first drafts of my materials are often written at a level only grad students (and evaluators) can understand. With a critical eye and a few tweaks I can often rewrite my materials so that they are at an eighth-grade reading level, much more accessible to the people with whom I want to communicate.

A good Readability Calculator can be found here: http://www.editcentral.com/gwt1/EditCentral.html

It provides you with both a reading ease score, and a number of different measures of the US school grade level of the text.

This blog posting is rated at a high-school reading level. Do you agree?

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating Best of aea365 week. The contributions all this week are reposts of great aea365 blogs from our earlier years. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

 

Hello, we are Emily Lauer and Courtney Dutra from the University of Massachusetts Medical School’s Center for Developmental Disability Evaluation and Research (CDDER). We have designed and conducted a number of evaluations of programs and projects for elders and people with disabilities. In this post, we focus on the topic of person-centered evaluations. We have found this type of evaluation to be one of the most effective strategies for evaluating aging and/or disability services, as it tends to provide results that are more valid and useful through empowering consumers in the evaluation process.

Why person-centered evaluation? Traditional evaluations tend to use a one-size-fits-all approach that risks supplanting judgment about consumers’ individual perspectives and may not evaluate components that consumers feel are relevant. In a person-centered evaluation, consumers of the program’s or project’s services are involved throughout the evaluation process. A person-centered evaluation ensures the program or project is evaluated in a way that:

  • is meaningful to consumers;
  • is flexible enough to incorporate varied perspectives; and
  • results in findings that are understandable to and shared with consumers.

Lessons Learned:

Key steps to designing a person-centered evaluation?

  1. Design the evaluation with consumers. Involve consumers in the development process for the evaluation and its tools.
  2. Design evaluations that empower consumers
    • Utilize evaluation tools that support consumers in thinking critically and constructively about their experiences and the program under evaluation. Consider using a conversational format to solicit experiential information.
    • Minimize the use of close-ended questions that force responses into categories. Instead, consider methods such as semi-structured interviews that include open-ended questions which enable consumers to provide feedback about what is relevant to them.
    • Consider the evaluation from the consumer’s perspective. Design evaluation tools that support varied communication levels, are culturally relevant, and consider the cognitive level (e.g. intellectual disabilities, dementia) of consumers.
  1. Involve consumers as evaluators. Consider training consumers to help conduct the evaluation (e.g. interviewers).
  2. Use a supportive environment. In a supportive environment, consumers are more likely to feel they can express themselves without repercussion, their input is valued, and their voices are respected, resulting in more meaningful feedback.

Hot Tip: Conduct the evaluation interview in a location that is comfortable and familiar for the consumer. When involving family or support staff to help the consumer communicate or feel comfortable, ensure they do not speak “for” the consumer, and that the consumer chooses their involvement.

  1. Involve consumers in synthesizing results. Involve consumers in formulating the results of the evaluation.

Rad Resource: Use Plain Language to write questions and summarize findings that are understandable to consumers.

Many strategies exist to elicit feedback from consumers who do not communicate verbally. Use these methods to include the perspective of these consumers.

Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

 

Hi.  We’re  Sherry Campanelli, Program Compliance Manager and Laura Newhall, Clinical Training Coordinator, from the University of Massachusetts Medical School’s Disability Evaluation Services (DES). Although DES conducts evaluations regarding whether an applicant for public benefits can be found disabled, evaluation as a research endeavor is not our primary focus. Nevertheless, as an organization, we are committed to ongoing quality improvement efforts to enhance our services for people with disabilities. We use a team-based iterative approach to define and address problem functions and processes.

For example, we used the process described herein to develop Quality Assurance systems for our clinical, clerical and technical support processes. We have also used this method to tackle caseload backlogs, and effective processing of incomplete applications.

We’ve discovered over time, regardless of the issue or problem involved, that there are common techniques that help a quality improvement (QI) team be successful. We would like to share some of these lessons learned with you.

Lesson Learned: 

  • Determine and clearly state the issues to be solved and team goals.
  • Involve key staff (line staff doing the work and managers supervising the work) in the development of any QI initiative. They are in “the know” about areas that may be problematic.
  • Incorporate non-judgmental facilitation to keep up the momentum. Key components include:

o   Involving all participants in decision making/discussion;

o   Keeping meeting minutes and agendas;

o   Keeping track and sharing “to do” lists, “next steps” and progress towards goals;

o   Meeting on a regular and ongoing basis (don’t cancel meetings unless absolutely necessary);

o   Seeking management decisions and input as needed; and

o   Making sure you hear from the quiet folks in the room – they may need a little encouragement to speak up, but often offer great insights.

  • Utilize team members/subcommittees to perform specific tasks between meetings.
  • Utilize available qualitative and quantitative data.
  • Collect specific data, as necessary, to help define the problem and suggest solutions.
  • Do fact finding to support decision-making.
  • Maintain a “living” working document(s) as decisions are made to be incorporated into a final product.

Utilize pilot testing to determine feasibility and make changes (i.e., “fix bugs”) prior to full implementation.

  • Provide periodic communication to the rest of the department or organization during the project and at its conclusion.
  • Train all impacted staff on process improvements.
  • Conduct periodic assessments after implementation to assess success of the project.
  • Refine processes as new issues and changes occur.

Hot Tips:

  • Sometimes QI processes take longer than expected. “Keep going even when the going is slow and uncertain.”  G.G. Renee Hill
  • “To discover new ways of doing something – look at a process as though you were seeing it either for the first or last time.” Mitchel Martin

Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

 

Older posts >>

Archives

To top