The evaluation plan selected for this report describes the activity of the Smart Work Zone Deployment Initiative. The SWZDI was initiated in 1999 as a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Pooled Fund Study claimed to manage and maintain research among the participating states linked with the issues of safety and mobility in highway work zones.
The objective of the plan has been described briefly, with the intention not to overload the whole context of the evaluation plan, but it made the narration of the objectives a bit vague and not as clear as it could be. The objectives also state the amount of the made researches on the current topic, but it is the fact is that, this information is absolutely useless.
AS for the factors of the successful activity, it is necessary to emphasize, that the offered plan mentions some of them. These are the terms of the implementation of the plans, the funding (the funding is usually the collected fees of the states-participants to the organization, and the rollovers from the previous years), and the periodical leadership, which is defined by flipping the nickel. The technology and technical assistance is described in the chapter devoted to the program processes, but alongside with the objectives stays vague.
The articulation of the purposes and the accent on the adoption and continuation of the program are also stated in the program process chapter, and signify the achieved results, the intention to continue of the program outworking and the implementation of the adopted plans. It is also stated in the report, that all the responsibility is on the Project Manager, or the member of the Board of Directors, appointed responsible.
The issues of the evaluation are directly linked with the purposes of the evaluation, as the purposes of the evaluation are the estimation criteria of the success of the activity of the organization. For the 2006 program, a roll of fourteen requests for offers were elaborated and allocated to perspective investigators at research institutions in participating states. Five estimation offers were submitted by retailers. Offers were achieved for six projects and the projects were graded and allocated to the Board of Directors for agreement.
The data collection process occurred in the form of the implementation control, and gives the objective evaluation of the processes and methods of the implementation of the taken decisions.
As for the analysis and interpretation of the collected data, it is necessary to emphasize, that there is absolutely no need for such procedures, as the collected data, and the processes of collection themselves are rather simple, and do not need to be interpreted. But some analysis had been used in order to make valuable estimation, and forecast for the future activity.
The recommendations to the further activity must be offered by the Project Manager or the member of the Board of Directors, appointed for these duties. The recommendations must be provided attached to each final report, and cover both, the current situation, and the advice for the future.
References
Smart Work Zone Deployment Initiative 2006 “Evaluation Plan” SWZDI
McNamara, C. 2007 “Designing Your Program Evaluation Plans” Free Management Library’s Online Nonprofit Organization Development Program Module #11.