Evaluation report
Submission details
Candidate’s Name Phone No.
Assessor’s Name Phone No.
Assessment Site
Assessment Date/s Time/s
The assessment task is due on the date specified by your assessor. Any variations to this arrangement must be approved in writing by your assessor.
Submit this document with any required evidence attached. See specifications below for details.
Performance objective
Candidates are required to evaluate information provided in a case study and develop a management report, outlining progress and recommending possible modifications or improvements to the program.
Assessment description
For this assessment task you are required to develop an evaluation report using the case study information provided, and suggest improvements to the program for future and continued use. You will need to report on major milestones, achievements and employee feedback received, as well an evaluation of the program and recommendations for improvements to the program.
Procedure
1. Meet with your assessor to role-play a consultation and gain agreement with your manager on an evaluation methodology.
2. Review the case study provided and prepare an evaluation report by completing the following steps:
a. Objectives: Describe the objectives of the program being implemented in the case study. Describe the importance of monitoring for continuous improvement.
b. Progress: Collate and summarise information relevant to the progress of the program and objectives.
c. Feedback: Analyse feedback provided by stakeholders, by comparing feedback with program progress.
d. Modifications: Recommend modifications to the program, based on progress towards objectives, and opportunities for improvement of the program. Include a discussion of incorporating recommendations into continuous improvement strategies, enterprise agreements and future corporate plans.
Your overall report should be no more than two-to-three A4 pages long, and should use each of the steps above as section headers within the report.
3. Submit your report to your assessor in accordance with specifications below.
Specifications
You must:
• meet with your assessor to role-play discussion on evaluation method • submit a written evaluation report for the case study provided.
Your assessor will be looking for:
• evidence that you have reflected on and analysed the information contained in the case study.
Distance-based learners:
• Complete assessment as per instructions.
Case Study
MacVille’s Employee Assistance Program has been in place for 12 months under the care of Nina Evans. At the outset, MacVille’s 50 employees, including management, completed a health, nutrition and wellbeing survey. Of these, 15 employees voluntarily underwent medical tests including BMI, blood pressure and cholesterol.
Seamus MacVille (Operations Manager) stated, ‘the absentee levels among employees are still unacceptable and an obstacle to the achievement of our fiveyear projections on productivity. Whilst I am happy with the 6% reduction in the last 12 months, we are still beneath the projected goal of 10% per annum. Nina has done an excellent job in promoting the program and raising awareness of health issues.’
Sally Roberts, Payroll Officer from the business department, issued an annual report stating workplace injury incidences were unchanged from the previous year, citing back injury and repetitive strain injuries as the most common injuries.
Mary Belluci, MacVille’s Business Manager, issued a financial report showing expenditure of $42,000, which was $5,700 higher than the budget set at the beginning of the year. This figure is higher than the costs projected, but was approved based on set-up costs for the initial year. The key reason for the overexpenditure was the refurbishment of a room to be used for onsite personal training and fitness classes, which was approved mid-year after repeated comments and requests for upgrades by employees (especially in installing airconditioning). The other reason cited was an increase in the number of employees engaging the services of a health coach. Initially at the development stage, after the health assessments were completed, 15% of the employees enrolled for health coaching appointments. However, by mid-year interest had grown and more employees requested appointments with health coaches, lifting the figure to 24% of staff. It was noted that this budget did not reflect any labour costs incurred for Nina Evans to manage the implementation of this program.
Employee surveys have revealed several pieces of valuable feedback. Most health activity and exercise programs were well attended, however, the main reason listed for non-participation in the early morning walking group was not being able to access showers and breakfast before work commenced (after the exercise walk). Non-participation in the corporate fundraising walking event was due to a lack of awareness and time to prepare for the event, scheduled mid-year on a Saturday afternoon. The majority of employees were grateful for the opportunity to improve their health but felt restricted due to travel times to and from work, and have requested an adjustment to their working hours.
The stress management workshops, held twice throughout the year, were a huge success in terms of participation, with 20% of employees attending the first class, and another 30% of employees attending the second series of workshops (i.e. a total of 50% of all employees attended workshops). However, the QUIT campaign was not well attended. The main comments received on feedback forms were that employees didn’t want to give up their lunch break for the class, especially when lunch was their only cigarette-break for the day, and a few of them didn’t like the style of the presenter (too ‘preachy’).
The campaign is still considered important because one of the key objectives for the establishment of the EAP was the reduction of health risk factors.
Obesity was another targeted health risk factor within the EAP objectives. The most remarkable result in this regard has been 42% of MacVille employees have lost weight and achieved their personal targets set throughout the year. The initial tests revealed 8% of employees were extremely obese, and a further 12% were considered obese according to their BMI results. All of these employees recorded significant weight loss due to the guidance of health coaches and the ‘MacVille’s Biggest Loser’ incentive program.