Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
National Capital Region
Division of City Schools
MARIANO MARCOS MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL
2090 Dr.M. Carreon St., Sta. Ana
Manila

PROGRAM EVALUATION

Program Title: “Marcosians Laban sa Droga” Campaign

Venue: School Covered Court Date: November 14, 2019

4- Strongly Agree 3-Agree 2-Disagree 1-Strongly Disagree

After the conduct of the training program, I believe that... 4 3 2 1 TOTAL REMARKS
A. Program management
1. The program was delivered as planned 316 105 5 2 3.71 The program went as
planned.
2. The program was managed efficiently 338 83 7 0 3.77 The program was managed
efficiently.
3. The program was well-structured 263 139 26 0 3.55 The flow of the program
went well.
B. Attainment of Objectives
4. The program objectives were clearly presented 356 28 40 4 3.71 It went as planned.
5. The program objectives were attained 374 32 15 7 3.77 Most of the objectives were
delivered to the students.
C. Activities
6. Program activities were appropriate to attendees’ 318 92 28 0 3.70 The students are suited to
abilities this type of campaign.
7. Program activities were based on curriculum 298 126 4 0 3.68 The topic was presented to
standards all grade level.
8. The activities were effective in generating learning 327 96 2 3 3.74 The program gave useful
informations and advices.
9.Age-appropriate learning methodologies were 398 29 1 0 3.92 The methods used were
used effectively effective.
10. Management of activities was effectively 215 184 26 3 3.42 The schedule was not
structured followed properly
11. Participation of all concerned were encouraged 363 61 4 0 3.84 The students are engaging.
12. Participants demonstrated a clear manifestation 157 215 53 3 3.22 The audience stayed behave
of expected performances. most of the time.
D. Provision of Support Materials
13. The support materials provided were appropriate NA NA NA N
to the participants’ needs A
14. Support materials provided were adequate and NA NA NA N
were given on time A
E. Program Management Team
15. Program management Team members were 413 13 2 0 3.96 The facilitators are
courteous approachable.
16. Program Management Team was efficient 328 87 9 4 3.72 Facilitators were productive.
17. Program management Team was responsive to 124 297 4 3 3.26 Facilitators were alert and
the needs of the participants ready for questions.
F. Venue and Accommodation
18. The venue was well lighted 161 238 22 0 3.60 The sunlight gave sufficient
light.
19. The venue was well –ventilated NA NA NA N
A
20. The venue was comfortable with sufficient space 96 206 84 42 2.83 The students are
for program activities compacted.
21. The venue had sanitary and hygienic conditions NA NA N NA
with adequate comfort rooms A
22. Meals were nutritious and sufficient in quantity
NA NA NA N
and quality A
23. Meals were generally well-prepared and tasty NA NA NA N
A
24. The accommodation was comfortable with NA NA NA N
sanitary and hygienic conditions A
TOTAL 3.54
GENERAL REMARKS: The program still has space for improvement but overall good job.
JOSEFINA J. BUSTOS
Monitoring Official
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
National Capital Region
Division of City Schools
MARIANO MARCOS MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL
2090 Dr.M. Carreon St., Sta. Ana
Manila

PROGRAM EVALUATION

Program Title: “NO DRUGS, FOR A BRIGHTER FUTURE” Poster Slogan Making Contest
Venue: School Auditorium Date: August 28, 2019

4- Strongly Agree 3-Agree 2-Disagree 1-Strongly Disagree

After the conduct of the training program, I believe that... 4 3 2 1 TOTAL REMARKS
A. Program management
1. The program was delivered as planned 16 18 0 0 3.88 The delivery was a success.
2. The program was managed efficiently 16 1 1 0 3.77 The management of the
contest is appropriate.
3. The program was well-structured 17 1 0 0 3.94 The program went great.
B. Attainment of Objectives
4. The program objectives were clearly presented 18 0 0 0 4 The objectives were
attained completely.
5. The program objectives were attained 18 0 0 0 4 The objectives were all
achieved.
C. Activities
6. Program activities were appropriate to attendees’ 18 0 0 0 4 All the contestants
abilities understood.
7. Program activities were based on curriculum 15 3 0 0 3.83 The program fit curriculum
standards standards.
8. The activities were effective in generating learning 16 2 0 0 3.88 All the contestants learned
a lot.
9. Age-appropriate learning methodologies were used 16 2 0 0 3.88 The methods was efficiently
effectively used.
10. Management of activities was effectively 16 1 1 0 3.77 The contest went smoothly.
structured
11. Participation of all concerned were encouraged 9 7 2 0 3.0 A lot of students
participated.
12. Participants demonstrated a clear manifestation of 17 1 0 0 3.94 The participants was greater
expected performances. than expected.
G. Provision of Support Materials
13. The support materials provided were appropriate 17 1 0 0 3.94 The materials were vey
to the participants’ needs appropriate to the contest.
14. Support materials provided were adequate and 18 0 0 0 4 The materials were given on
were given on time time.
H. Program Management Team
15. Program management Team members were 17 1 0 0 3.94 The team was very
courteous accommodating to all.
16. Program Management Team was efficient 15 3 0 0 3.83 The facilitators were all
efficient.
17. Program management Team was responsive to the 18 0 0 0 4 The facilitators were all very
needs of the participants polite and assisting.
I. Venue and Accommodation
18. The venue was well lighted 16 2 0 0 3.88 The lighting was alright.
19. The venue was well –ventilated 11 5 1 1 3.44 Contestants were sweating.
20. The venue was comfortable with sufficient space 18 0 0 0 4 The auditorium is big
for program activities enough for all the students.
21. The venue had sanitary and hygienic conditions NA N NANA
with adequate comfort rooms A
22. Meals were nutritious and sufficient in quantity and
NA NA N NA
quality A
23. Meals were generally well-prepared and tasty NA NA N NA
A
24. The accommodation was comfortable with sanitary NA NA N NA
and hygienic conditions A
TOTAL 3.843
GENERAL REMARKS: The program still has space for improvement but overall good job.
JOSEFINA J. BUSTOS
Monitoring Official