PROJECT EVALUATION

Print PageChoose Text SizeSmallAMedium A Large A

In an ongoing effort to evaluate the outcomes of investments, HCTF uses several vehicles:

    1. Technical committee review: annual technical evaluation of continuing projects.
    2. On site visit: HCTF staff and Board of Directors on-the-ground evaluations of individual projects.
    3. Detailed project evaluations: evaluations of specific projects including on-the-ground and financial audits.
    4. Project evaluation workshops: project leaders present their results for peer review.
An open, solutions-based approach directs the overall process of HCTF evaluations. Evaluation findings are shared with the proponent and help inform future decision-making relating to the project by HCTF’s Technical Review Committee and the Board of Directors.



1. Technical Committee Review

Continuing projects are subject to review by committee during the annual project application approval process. The primary review form is an example of the criteria used to review a project.

Primary Review Form


2. On Site Visit:

HCTF staff and/or Board members regularly visit project sites and meet the project leaders. Below are links to photos of on- site- visits.

Keogh River Steelhead. HCTF # 1-319


3. Detailed Project Evaluations:

The highest level of evaluation often involves an external auditor contracted to report on all aspects of the project.

BC Wetland Partnership Program: HCTF Project #0-247


4. Project Evaluation Workshops:

Specific workshop objectives are to:

    • Review and evaluate the results of HCTF investments in projects, and
    • Provide a forum for project leaders, organizations, and scientists to share information and ideas on how to further fish, wildlife and habitat management and activities.

Workshops Reports:

Project Evaluation Workshop: Methodology Overview
Fisheries Project Evaluation Workshop – March 23-25, 2010
Information, Education & Stewardship Project Evaluation Workshop – Feb. 11, 2011

Overall, participants enjoyed the workshops and rated them positively. Some common themes emerged from the comments for workshops held to date.

What participants said about the workshops:


Opportunity to share information
    • Provided an overview of the science behind many of the projects;
    • Updated technical knowledge, skills and contacts.

Good experience

    • Provided an opportunity for peer review and accountability of project leaders;
    • Provided candid “Lessons Learned” that showed the importance of reviewing and adapting programs as the need arises;
    • Provided some ideas and connections for potential initiatives;
    • Provided the opportunity to network and learn how others are applying the funds.

Communications / Outreach

    • Impressed by the diversity of projects led by different organizations across the province. The HCTF should more broadly communicate this information to all proponents.

Workshop Format & Timing

    • Would appreciate more social time to network;
    • Requested that more information to be sent out before the workshop about the project feedback form and the projects;
    • More details on the purpose of the workshop and HCTF expectations would be valuable.

 
 
 

EVALUATION