Washington
Community Technology Opportunity Program
2008/09
Pilot Project
Final
Report
July 15,
2009
Report on
Project Management, Deliverables and Outcomes
Washington State University
Division of Governmental
Studies and Services
Nicholas P. Lovrich, Ph.D., Director
WSU Project Team:
Michael Gaffney, JD
Christina Sanders, MPA
Monica Babine
Esther Tate
Partner
Organizations:
University of Washington Information School
Michael Crandall
Samantha Becker..
Communities Connect Network
Betty Buckley
Puget Sound Center for Teaching, Learning and
Technology
Karen Manuel
NPower Seattle
Peg Giffels
Pilot project conducted under funding from the 2008 Washington
Legislature (ESSB 6438)
Executive
Summary
The Community Technology Opportunity Program (CTOP)
was created by an act of the 60th Washington State Legislature (ESSB 6438) to
support and advance community technology programs that provide “digital
inclusion” activities for Washington’s underserved and low-income residents. WSU Extension was named as administrator of
this program, which consisted of two primary deliverable components and a management
component. The program was funded by a
one-time budget allocation of $500,000 to WSU.
The first deliverable
component was the solicitation, award and funding of ten grants to
organizations or entities which proposed providing access, service or training
to underserved populations in the State of Washington. Although a more detailed description of those
ten successful grantees and the process by which the grants were awarded is
contained elsewhere in the body of this report, a brief description is also
included below in this Executive Summary.
A total of approximately $364,000 was awarded to the ten grantees, in
amounts ranging from a low of $18,938 to a high of $50,288. WSU Extension administered those grant funds,
reimbursing grantees for allowed expenses, minus a required twenty-five percent
(25%) match, based on monthly invoices. The
performance period for the ten grantees was from August 1, 2008 through June 15, 2009. Towards the end of the performance period,
some limited supplemental funding was also awarded to several of the grantees,
based on projections of expenditures and a predictive final accounting. Specific amounts funded for each grantee are
detailed below.
The second deliverable
component was the development and delivery of capacity-building training for
the benefit of the ten CTOP grantees and other, similar programs within the
State. This training was delivered by
NPower Seattle, under an agreement with the Puget Sound Center for Teaching,
Learning and Technology. A mix of
in-person and distance-delivery courses were offered, on three primary topic
areas: Fund-Raising, Open-Houses, and
Evaluation. A total of twelve such
workshops were successfully delivered. A
full report of this component was authored by NPower Seattle and is included within
this Report in its entirety.
Approximately $70,000 for this capacity-building effort was administered
by WSU to fund contracts with PSCTLT and Communities Connect Network.
The third and final
component of the program was the management component. Grant management and fiscal functions were
undertaken by WSU Extension, which was the fiduciary agency for the legislative
funding. WSU Extension created a grant
invoicing, accounting and payment protocol for the grant program, administered
the invoicing and reimbursement process with the ten grantees, and similarly
administered the contracts with CCN and NPower for delivery of the
capacity-building training. The WSU
Extension budget for project administration was limited by the enabling
legislation to $50,000. Finally, the
University of Washington’s Information School provided evaluation services for
the CTOP program under another contract with WSU. The contract with the University of
Washington was in the amount of approximately $16,000. The UW iSchool developed the evaluation design,
crafted an on-line reporting process for the ten grantees, compiled the
information reported, and generated both two interim and a final evaluation
report. The full text of the Final CTOP
Evaluation Report prepared by the University of Washington is included in this
Report.
The ten successful applicants
who were awarded grants under the CTOP program are:
·
YouthCare Awarded
amount: $46,616 (Seattle/King
County)
YouthTech Computer Training
Program for Homeless Youth The project has two main goals: to 1) enhance
education, and 2) increase living-wage employment skills among homeless youth.
·
Yakima Interfaith Coalition Awarded
amount: $30,031
(Yakima)
Empowering Low-income Hispanic
Women through Education & Digital Inclusion The
purpose of this project is to empower low income Hispanic women through
educational services to attain their personal and professional goals thereby
maximizing their opportunities to escape poverty and improve their families’
quality of life.
·
Tincan Awarded
amount: $18,938 (Spokane)
eMerge Neighborhood News:
Supporting Educational Enhancement and Civic Engagement for At-Risk Teens The purpose of this project is to teach at-risk teens video
production skills, enhancing their capabilities to use information and media
technology while at the same time developing the soft skills such as
collaboration and problem-solving, that they will need in the workplace.
·
Save Our County’s Kids Awarded
amount: $36,555 (Shelton)
Shelton Community Technology
Project The purpose of this project is to promote
economic viability and access to services through education, skill-building and
community collaboration for low-income, underserved youth and adults in a rural
community.
·
Tacoma Goodwill Industries Awarded
amount: $31,706 (Tacoma)
Employment skills for Central and
South Puget Sound job seekers with disabilities or disadvantages through access
to Community Technology Services This project 1)
provides information on and access to Tacoma Goodwill Industries’ Community
Technology Center Services for underserved job seekers throughout the Central
and South Puget Sound region; and 2) bridges the digital divide to increase
employability outcomes for disadvantaged, vulnerable job seekers through
hands-on skills instruction and confidence development
·
New Futures Awarded
amount: $50,288 (Burien)
New Futures Community Technology
Center Initiative
Children of immigrant and refugee families in the Burien area will gain
basic computer and technology skills that will enhance educational success,
access information and connect to community resources;
·
Literacy Source, A Community
Learning Center Awarded amount: $29,346 (Seattle) Literacy
Online Provides the computer hardware and
software, instructional resources, curricula, and professionally-led
instruction so that high needs adult learners can obtain better jobs and better
access essential resources in their community.
·
Neighborhood House Awarded amount: $45,045 (South Seattle)
Youth Technology Program Under-served
youth living in public housing will increase academic success, develop
employment skills, develop leadership skills and be included in the broader
community context through digital arts; and
·
Northwest Learning and Achievement
Group Awarded amount: $26,370 (Wapato)
CAD*LAC Yakima Valley Community
Empowerment Project DSHS clients living the Wapato area will develop
employment skills focused on the technical skills in using Office software and
soft skills needed to be hired by area employers.
·
Street Youth Ministries Awarded
amount: $35,106 (Seattle)
Provide-Teach-Practice-Reflect:
Facilitating information system design within a drop-in center for homeless
youth When youth are
enabled and supported in creating information systems for themselves, their
peers, and other stakeholders in the community they are, in turn, positioned to
develop their own capacity for self-reflection and change.
The physical
locations of the ten grantee projects are depicted on the map below:
The
grantees were, on the whole, quite successful in delivering the promised
services, training and access to their particular populations. A full description of those grantee
activities – both individual and cumulative – is contained in the UW
Report. A summary of some of the metrics
captured in the evaluation process indicates that a large number of clients
were served, and that the access provided served educational, employment and
social networking needs extremely well. Highlights
are provided below. More detailed
information may be found in the body of the Report.
Number of Clients benefiting by area of focus
for client activities:
|
CTOP
Client use by impact domain |
||||
|
Number
of clients who used CTC for… |
Period
1 |
Period
2 |
Period
3 |
Total |
|
Employment |
488 |
773 |
847 |
2108 |
|
Education |
784 |
848 |
2313 |
3945 |
|
Social inclusion |
552 |
410 |
1813 |
2775 |
|
Information access |
903 |
608 |
922 |
2433 |
|
Total
# clients using CTC services |
1829 |
2829 |
3867 |
8525 |
|
Employment
impacts |
||||
|
Number of clients
who… |
Period
1 |
Period
2 |
Period
3 |
Total |
|
used employment services |
488 |
773 |
847 |
2108 |
|
researched or found information related to a job or career |
372 |
705 |
644 |
1721 |
|
received job training |
171 |
223 |
311 |
705 |
|
learned new hard skills (e.g. word processing) |
157 |
564 |
414 |
1135 |
|
learned new soft skills (e.g. office etiquette, problem solving)
|
184 |
351 |
543 |
1078 |
|
created a resume or portfolio |
215 |
183 |
321 |
719 |
|
searched for a job opening or career opportunity |
214 |
498 |
632 |
1344 |
|
filled out a job application online |
182 |
237 |
351 |
770 |
|
got job interviews |
57 |
175 |
213 |
445 |
|
secured an internship or apprenticeship |
9 |
34 |
41 |
84 |
|
were hired for new jobs |
35 |
25 |
45 |
105 |
|
Social
inclusion impacts |
||||
|
Number of clients
who… |
Period
1 |
Period
2 |
Period
3 |
Total |
|
used computers for purposes of social inclusion |
552 |
410 |
1813 |
2775 |
|
created an email account |
69 |
185 |
506 |
760 |
|
independently searched or browsed the Internet |
410 |
244 |
2143 |
2797 |
|
communicated with family or friends |
279 |
287 |
651 |
1217 |
|
visited or created an account on a social networking site |
105 |
165 |
306 |
576 |
|
created or maintained a personal blog or website |
3 |
43 |
123 |
169 |
|
connected with other people or organizations |
81 |
103 |
263 |
447 |
|
developed leadership skills or became a mentor |
4 |
49 |
91 |
144 |
Educational
impacts |
||||
|
Number of clients
who… |
Period 1 |
Period 2 |
Period 3 |
Total |
|
used educational services |
784 |
848 |
2313 |
3945 |
|
improved basic literacy skills? |
84 |
386 |
388 |
858 |
|
improved English language skills |
93 |
269 |
526 |
888 |
|
completed a homework assignment |
538 |
132 |
483 |
1153 |
|
took a class/workshop/tutorial |
219 |
571 |
1568 |
2358 |
|
learned about or prepared for the GED |
21 |
149 |
249 |
419 |
|
earned their GEDs |
1 |
17 |
22 |
40 |
|
learned about other educational opportunities |
127 |
113 |
191 |
431 |
|
applied for another educational opportunity |
7 |
28 |
214 |
249 |
|
were accepted into an educational program |
0 |
24 |
206 |
230 |
|
completed an educational program |
10 |
1 |
62 |
73 |
PROJECT
BACKGROUND AND INCEPTION
Brief
history
This
project had its inception in 2005with a 1.8 million dollar grant from the Bill
& Melinda Gates Foundation to the WSU Extension Program for Digital
Inclusion. This grant funded
significant fact-finding and collaborative activities. A significant outgrowth
of this grant-funded activity was the development of a partnership between the University
of Washington’s Information School, WSU Extension, NPower Seattle, the City of
Seattle, Stone Soup, One Economy and the Gates Foundation to create the Communities
Connect Network (CCN), which is now sponsored by The Puget Sound Center
for Teaching, Learning and Technology (PSCTLT). CCN was the lead entity in the policy arena
regarding digital inclusion, and managed grassroots public policy activities
that led to enactment in 2008 of ESSB 6438.
Project
Description
Primary
CTOP components -
Under the terms of ESSB
6438, the initial CTOP project had three key components:
- Grant Program ($364,000): To
providers of hands-on technology access and training to underserved
populations. (10 selected – see below)
- Grants
reimburse 75% of approved eligible expenses for specific community
technology projects between August 1, 2008 and June 15, 2009.
- Capacity-Building Program ($70,000): For
Community Technology (CT) providers in Washington State. (Delivered by
NPower Seattle in partnership with CCN and PSCTLT)
- 12
trainings designed to strengthen CT capacity.
- Topics
include: Evaluation, Fund-raising,
Open Houses.
- Project and Fiscal Management
($50,000) and Evaluation ($16,000): WSU Extension provided Project (DGSS)
and Fiscal (Extension Finance) management of the project ($50,000). UW iSchool provided Program Evaluation
($16,000)
Project
Management
DGSS has been fulfilling the Land-Grand outreach
mission of WSU since 1964. DGSS is
co-sponsored by WSU Extension and the College of Liberal Arts, and serves as a
connecting link between the campus and the citizens, communities and government
entities of the Northwest. Co-located
with the Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice Program on the
Pullman campus, DGSS provides research, consultation and training services on
contract or through grant funding to federal, state, tribal and local
governments and non-profits located throughout the region. DGSS operates the Natural Resources
Leadership Academy (NRLA), the Washington State Institute for Criminal Justice,
and the five-state Western Regional Institute for Community-Oriented Public
Safety (WRICOPS). These programs provide training and technical assistance
related to natural resource stewardship and the implementation of innovative
approaches to public safety. DGSS is
also home to the WSU Digital Inclusion project, which includes significant
Telework activities in addition to the CTOP project.
End-of-Project Report
The
following report prepared by the University of Washington Information School
provides an analysis of the activities of the 10 CTOP grantees during the award
period (August 1, 2008 through June 15, 2009) as reported in the three
quarterly reports which survey grant recipients were required to complete as a
condition of their grant. Information about activities and outcomes was also
gathered at a meeting of the grantees on May 29, 2009. The evaluation framework
used to analyze data collected through the surveys allowed domain-specific
inputs and activities to be tied to outputs and impacts. This was accomplished by correlation of the
CTOP grantee evaluation reports to the
Community Technology Impact Measurement Process Model which was developed specifically
for this purpose.. The survey – which was administered on-line – asked grantees
to:
1. Identify the policy
issues confronting the community in which they work.
2. Identify stakeholders
and their reasons for needing or using the CTC.
3. Report the inputs
which were available
or were added during the projec.
4. Report activities
that address policy issues or stakeholder needs across four CTOP
domains (employment
skills, education enhancement, social inclusion, and
access to information).
5. Report outputs (i.e.,
the number of persons participating in activities).
6. Measure and report impacts
by tracking the numbers of persons whose needs
have been successfully
addressed.
In
the full UW report available through the link below, the first and second
sections of the report set context and discuss the background of the CTOP grant
program. The third section outlines the project purposes and goals for each of
the 10 grantees. Section 4 deals with the grant reporting and evaluation
system. Sections 5 and 6 discuss the stakeholders and major policy issues faced
by the communities the grantees serve. Section 7 describes levels of client use
and available resources prior to the CTOP grant. Section 8 discusses the major grant
activity reported for each organization. Finally, section 9 will discuss
outputs and outcomes associated with each impact area.
LINK
TO UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON EVALUATION REPORT
In addition to the University of
Washington’s report on grantee activities, the primary provider of training –
Npower Seattle – has also compiled an end-of-project report of their training
activities, a complete version of which may be accessed using this link:
LINK
TO NPOWER SEATTLE TRAINING REPORT
Conclusion
This project accomplished a number
of significant things. First, it
demonstrated the power of collaborative action involving the two premier
research universities in the state as well as non-profit entities. Second, it provided a model and a
proof-of-concept for the delivery of critical technology training, services and
access to underserved populations in Washington. Third, it enabled the actual provision of a
wide variety of services to populations who would not otherwise have had such
access, resulting in demonstrable improvements in education, social networking
and employment among those populations.
It is the belief of the principals
involved in this project that continuation of this effort is appropriate,
necessary, and will be of great benefit to the State of Washington. If this program is continued, several lessons
arising from the current program could make future operations even more
impactful. Chief among these are that
the time frame for each grantee project should be longer – perhaps two years
rather than the nine months of this project.
There should also be funding for the longer term and for larger
projects, perhaps as much as $50,000 per year per grantee. Administration of the program requires
relatively intense effort, which should be funded at a level higher than that
of this original program. The management
partnership established in this initial project should be continued.