DECEMBER 2022

COYOTE
CORNER
PROGRAM
EVALUATION
program evaluation on buena park

high school's wellness center

BPHS mission statement

"We believe that all students have the responsibility, right, and ability to learn.

As an institute of learning, our mission is to facilitate and support each

student’s achievement and success in pursuit of further education and in the

workplace, to foster in each student the critical thinking and self-esteem

necessary to promote productive and healthy lifestyle choices, to instill in each

student a commitment to and respect for the democratic society in which they

live, to encourage within each student an awareness, appreciation, and

tolerance of ethnic and cultural differences.”

 COYOTE CORNER 2/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of the program evaluation is to gain a deeper understanding of the

recently implemented wellness center (i.e., Coyote Corner) program at Buena Park

High School (BPHS). The evaluation analyzed 3 questions that revolved around how

the program is shaped by data, the effectiveness of its services, and how it aligns

with BPHS' mission as a school. Qualitative data was collected through consultation

with the counseling team, and quantitative data was collected through pre- and post-
surveys implemented when students access services. Data was analyzed to determine

what data-driven decisions were made, the average difference between students' pre-

and post-emotional state, and if the program contributed to the mission of school

partners. Based on the findings, recommendations would be to ensure that data is

collected for each activity, explore each activity deeper to determine which are truly

efficacious and which may need improvement, and analyze how the program impacts

student achievement, discipline, and attendance data.

INTRODUCTION
Purpose
The purpose of program evaluation is to improve and give guidance to school partners in

making midcourse decisions such as continuing, expanding, scaling down, or

discontinuing a program (Giancola, 2014). The purpose of this evaluation is to gain a

deeper understanding of the new wellness center program (i.e., Coyote Corner - CC) at

Buena Park High School (BPHS) and analyze its success through the lens of 3 particular

evaluation questions and criteria set by the American School Counselor Association

(ASCA). As part of the school counseling program, it is important to understand how CC is

data-driven, effective for student development, and aligned with the school mission.

Audience
The intended audience for this evaluation is the school counseling department,

administration, teachers, and parents.

Limitations
Due to time constraints and limited evaluators, data analysis did not go as in depth as

intended. The findings are limited to the first 15 weeks of the 22-23 school year.

overview of report content

This report will provide a program description of CC and the evaluation questions used to

assess it. It will detail the evaluation procedures of data collection and analysis before

providing the results, conclusions, and recommendations for future partners.

COYOTE CORNER 3/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

FOCUS OF THE EVALUATION

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM
The CC program is part of the school counseling program at BPHS that

is designed to address students' social, emotional, and mental well-

being. Assistant Principal Dr. Kimberly Jenkins obtained the initial

grant from Children's Hospital of Orange County (CHOC), and school

counselor Christina Mansour oversees the team of 9 interns and 5

mental health providers that service students. It aims to assist students

with a variety of challenges that can be obstacles to learning and

thriving at school. The logic model (Appendix A) shows how the inputs,

activities, and outputs contribute to various outcomes, and this model

shaped the 3 evaluation questions used to assess the validity of data-

driven components and its effectiveness in helping students

emotionally towards BPHS' mission.

EVALUATION QUESTIONS
1. To what extent is data being used to inform and shape the program?
2. To what extent are the various activities implemented by the

wellness center effective for students?

3. To what extent does the program reflect the school's mission?
The evaluation questions were determined by analyzing the BPHS

program description and logic model based on the criteria of the ASCA

National Model for school counseling programs.

INFORMATION NEEDED TO COMPLETE EVALUATION

To adequately address these questions, the following information was

needed. The first question required data from the needs assessment

administered to students, student participant data, and intern meeting

notes. The second question drew on the information provided by

pre-/post-surveys completed each time students accessed CC, Finally,

the school's mission statement was needed alongside the logic model

to compare key components.

 COYOTE CORNER
4/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

BRIEF OVERVIEW OF EVALUATION PLAN AND PROCEDURES

The program evaluation started with a program description that described the different

components in addition to the program's goals. Based on this description, a logic model

(Appendix A) was made that outlined how inputs, activities, and outputs all contribute to
producing the intended outcomes aligned with program goals. The two previous steps along

with consultation with a supervising counselor helped to identify which evaluation

questions would be the most vital to answer at this time. In order to determine the

appropriate evaluation design for each question, a table for data collection was utilized

(Appendix B) which also helped in deciding the appropriate processes for data analysis.

Qualitative data was gathered from intern meeting notes, the school mission statement, and

the logic model while quantitative data was gathered from a needs assessment and student

participant pre-/post-surveys. After analyzing the key points in the qualitative data, results

of the needs assessment, and averages of the surveys, the evaluation will determine if the

program met the standard of success according to the criteria laid out by ASCA.

PRESENTATION OF EVALUATION RESULTS

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Table 1: Data Sources, Themes Found, and Resulting Decisions (Question 1)

Data Theme Result

Groups were made for

Academics: organization/time management, English

Students expressed need for

Needs
Language Development student support, mindful goal

academic, social/emotional, and

Assessment setting
career/college support.
Social/emotional: boundaries/assertiveness, healthy

relationships

1. Provisions
1. Students are staying longer than
a. Offered individual counseling services
Student
15 minute frame. b. Referred to/notified counselor
participant
2. Student reported lower
c. Referred to open group with mental health specialist
data emotional wellbeing in post-
2. Provisions
survey. a. Offered individual counseling services
b. Added student to intern regular caseload

1. Sessions run longer due to

Intern
students with higher needs than
1. Reviewed referral process for mental health providers to

Observations
school counselors can provide. provide students with higher level of support services.
(Meeting
2. Student on caseload is
2. Set procedure of notifying administration and removing

Notes) increasingly absent and cannot

from caseload to service other students.
make contact.
 COYOTE CORNER
5/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

Table 2: Reported Scores and Averages for Coyote Corner's Emotional

Wellbeing Survey (Question 2)

Averag

Check-in Score 2.5

Check-out

3.7
Score

Note: Survey asks students how they are feeling on a 5-point scale where 1 is the
worst and 5 is the best (i.e., "Awesome").

Data was taken from 8/16/22-12/7/22

Total visits: 449
Total students: 193
One-time visits: 116 students
More than 1 visit: 77 students
Average time in CC: 34 minutes

Demographics according to Aeries

Male: 54
Female: 139
9th grade: 70
10th grade: 35
11th grade: 39
12th grader 49
 COYOTE CORNER
6/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

Table 3: School Mission Key Components vs. Coyote Corner Outcomes

(Question 3)

"[F]acilitate and
"[F]oster in each
"[E]ncourage

"[A]ll
"[I]nstill in each

support each
student the critical
within each

students have
student a

student's
thinking and self-
student an

the
commitment to

achievement and
esteem necessary
awareness,

responsibility,
and respect for

success in pursuit
to promote
appreciation, and

right, and
the democratic

of further
productive and
tolerance of ethnic

ability to
society in which

education and in
healthy lifestyle
and cultural

learn" they live"

the workplace" choices" differences"

"Procedures and

activities are

responsive to
X X X X
students' current

needs"

"Students return

to class

regulated again
X X X
and not in

distress"

"Increase in visits

to wellness

center with

improvements in

grade,
X X X
attendance

and/or

discipline"

"Student learns

new coping
X X X X X
mechanism"

"Students are

emotionally

ready and

equipped to

navigate the X X X X X
post-secondary
world and its
stressors"
COYOTE CORNER 7/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS
TABLE 1
There were multiple sources of qualitative and quantitative data found

that the program used in its implementation. These sources included a

needs assessment, student participant survey, and intern observations as

recorded through meeting notes. As themes emerged from each of these

sources, the team took corresponding actions that would address the issue

appropriately. Groups were formed or new procedures were implemented

to address student needs.

TABLE 2
Students fill out a survey each time they access CC, and they are required

to indicate their emotional wellbeing score on a scale of 1-5 where one is

"worst" and 5 is "awesome." After analyzing the data, the average check-in

score was 2.5 whereas the average check-out score was 3.7. this shows

that the average student's perception of their emotional wellbeing

increased by 1.2 points as a result of accessing CC.

TABLE 3
There were 5 main components identified in the school mission statement.

The components are as follows:

"We believe that (1)all students have the responsibility, right, and ability to

learn. As an institute of learning, our mission is to (2)facilitate and support

each student’s achievement and success in pursuit of further education and in

the workplace, to (3)foster in each student the critical thinking and self-

esteem necessary to promote productive and healthy lifestyle choices, to

(4)instill in each student a commitment to and respect for the democratic

society in which they live, to (5)encourage within each student an awareness,

appreciation, and tolerance of ethnic and cultural differences.”

Comparing the components to the outcomes outlined on the logic model

(Appendix A), the program addressed all components to some extent. All

outcomes work towards components 1-3 while the first short-term

outcome, second intermediate outcome, and long-term outcome address

component 4, and the second intermediate outcome and long-term

outcome address component 5.

COYOTE CORNER 8/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CRITERIA AND STANDARDS USED TO JUDGE EVALUATION
The criteria for all 3 evaluation questions was based off of ASCA's Ethical

Standards (2022). For the first question, Standard A.3.d was used as it discusses

the use of data to assess and address needs in a comprehensive school

counseling program. The standard that ensures the program meets the criteria

for this evaluation question would be that data is used to identify the needs of

students and make consequent decisions.

For the second question, the Ethical Standards' preamble was referenced as it

outlines that school counselors should be creating an optimal learning

environment to promote development in 3 main domains which includes

social/emotional. This question originally sought to examine each activity (i.e.,

activities identified on logic model) and its effectiveness, but due to time

constraints and lack of data, the evaluation was unable to collect and

disseminate this type of data. Therefore, the standard that ensures the program

meets this criteria was changed to that the program positively impacts

students' emotional wellbeing.

For the third question, Ethical Standard B.2.b was used as it states that

comprehensive school counseling programs are designed to be an essential

part of the school's academic mission. Although CC primarily targets the

social/emotional domain, it should still connect to the school's mission as it is

under the larger umbrella of the school counseling program. The standard that

ensures the program meets the criteria for this evaluation question is if CC

connects to the school mission. This will be demonstrated by the program

outcomes aligning with at least 3 of the components from the school mission.

JUDGEMENTS
According to the standard set for the first evaluation question, CC meets the

criteria of being a data-informed program. Multiple sources of data were used

to make and document changes that effectively addressed the themes that

emerged from data analysis. For the second evaluation question, a 1.2 point

increase in student perceived emotional wellbeing was found, and that

qualifies CC as meeting the criteria of effectively promoting the

social/emotional development of students. Lastly, all 5 components of the

school mission was addressed to some extent by the intended outcomes of the

program. This is above the standard of 3/5, so it qualifies as meeting the

criteria of a school mission-aligned program.

COYOTE CORNER 9/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings, CC can be classified as a program that utilizes

data, promotes the social/emotional development of students, and aligns

with the school's mission. However, an additional finding regarding data

was that not all activities were collecting data. For example, out of the

groups that supported students, only 1 was taking ASCA-recommended

pre-/post-formatted assessments to evaluate its efficacy. This would

impact both the first and second evaluation question because these

activities can no longer be evaluated for improvement or prove

efficacious without data. Therefore, one recommendation would be that

all activities record a form of data to inform future evaluation. The

second recommendation would be to collect and disseminate data on all

activities to determine which are truly effective in fostering student

development in at least one of the 3 domains of academic,

social/emotional, and/or career/college. The current evaluation used a

survey that measures student perceived emotional wellbeing before and

after using the space, but this could include any of the activities

identified on the logic model. This data would inform improvements or

reallocation of resources for the program. Finally, the next evaluators

should analyze how the program impacts student achievement,

discipline, and attendance data. These domains are addressed by the

intern team on an individual basis, but the data should be tracked

systematically to understand CC's impact as a whole on individuals who

receive supports through the program.

REFERENCES
American School Counselor Association. (2022). ASCA ethical standards for
school counselors. Author.
Buena Park High School. (2022). Buena park high school's mission.
https://www.fjuhsd.org/domain/1309
Giancola, S. P. US Department of Education. (2014). Evaluation matters:
Getting the information you need from your evaluation.
 COYOTE CORNER
10/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
 COYOTE CORNER
11/11 DECEMBER 2022
PROGRAM EVALUATION

APPENDIX B