/
Implementing Language Access Plans: What Works?  What Counts? Implementing Language Access Plans: What Works?  What Counts?

Implementing Language Access Plans: What Works? What Counts? - PowerPoint Presentation

pamella-moone
pamella-moone . @pamella-moone
Follow
344 views
Uploaded On 2019-03-16

Implementing Language Access Plans: What Works? What Counts? - PPT Presentation

Evaluation Results Azadeh Khalili October 5 2011 1 Table of Contents Evaluation Overview Quick Snapshot of Participant Ratings Results from the Morning Session Results from the Afternoon Breakout Sessions ID: 756751

results session morning breakout session results breakout morning participant responses concurrent evaluation afternoon size note words sessions reflects mentioned

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Implementing Language Access Plans: What..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Implementing Language Access Plans: What Works? What Counts?

Evaluation ResultsAzadeh KhaliliOctober 5, 2011

1Slide2

Table of Contents

Evaluation Overview Quick Snapshot of Participant RatingsResults from the Morning SessionResults from the Afternoon Breakout Sessions

Considerations and Implications for Next Steps

2Slide3

Evaluation Overview

AECF evaluation forms measured extent to which convening achieved 5 desired results:Understand how language access contributes to achieving agency’s missionIdentify strategies and action steps to move language access forward

Connect with colleagues from other agencies to learn and share ideas

Use knowledge, skills, and networks gained today to strengthen my language access work

Know who to contact for TA going forward

Also asked:

Effectiveness of morning speakers and roundtable discussions

What participants found usefulWhat would have been more usefulOther commentsSeparate evaluations of morning session (116 respondents) and afternoon breakouts (77 respondents)

3Slide4

Snapshot of Participant Ratings:

The Convening Was Productive Use of Time

4Slide5

Results from the Morning Session

5Slide6

Results of Morning Session

6Slide7

What was most useful about the morning?

7

Note: Relative size of words reflects how often they were mentioned in participant responses.Slide8

What would have made the morning more useful?

8

Note: Relative size of words reflects how often they were mentioned in participant responses.Slide9

Additional comments from the morning session…

9

Note: Relative size of words reflects how often they were mentioned in participant responses.Slide10

Results from Afternoon Breakout Sessions

10Slide11

Aggregate Results of Afternoon Breakout Sessions

Session A

(

n

=76)

Session B

(

n=64) 11Slide12

Results of Each Breakout Session

* Results are the aggregate responses for the 3 desired results: learned new skills; helped refine action plan; and connected with colleagues.

12Slide13

Results of Concurrent Breakout #1:

Meeting Your Agency’s Translation Needs

Session A

(

n

=20)

Session B

(n=3) 13Slide14

Results of Concurrent Breakout #2:

Interpretation Testing and Training

Session A

(

n

=16)

Session B

(n=18) 14Slide15

Results of Concurrent Breakout #3:

Interpretation Using Outside Vendors

Session A

(

n

=10)

Session B

(n=9) 15Slide16

Results of Concurrent Breakout #4:

Best Practices in Contracting

Session A

(

n

=10)

Session B

(n=10) 16Slide17

Results of Concurrent Breakout #5:

Monitoring and Evaluation

Session A

(

n

=19)

Session B

(n=24) 17Slide18

Comments from afternoon breakout sessions

18

Note: Relative size of words reflects how often they were mentioned in participant responses.Slide19

Considerations and Implications for Next Steps

Design team set very ambitious goals for a single day with a large, heterogeneous groupHigh demand among participants for continued engagement:Examples of DOJ-approved LAPs

Peer learning from federal agencies linked to specific elements/challenges of their own

LAPs

More intentional networking (

eg

, all law-enforcement, mix-max from multiple agencies) with more choice of content

Responsive to concerns re: logistics (eg, room, handouts, etc)Opportunities to leverage greater role for federal LA task force members19