2016 ACF Grantee Meeting Workshop Evaluation Survey

This survey is for workshop participants who have taken part in the 2016 ACF Grantee Meeting. In the survey, which will take about 10 minutes, we ask you to evaluate the workshop that you just attended. Please complete a new survey for each workshop.

Thank you in advance for your thorough responses!

	5 (very good)	4 (good)	3 (fair)	2 (poor)	1 (very poor)
Presenter's level of preparation.	Presenter's level of preparation. 5 (very good)	Presenter's level of preparation. 4 (good)	Presenter's level of preparation. 3 (fair)	Presenter's level of preparation. 2 (poor)	Presenter's level of preparation. 1 (very poor)
Presenter's knowledge of subject material.	Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 5 (very good)	Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 4 (good)	Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 3 (fair)	Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 2 (poor)	Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 1 (very poor)
Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions.	Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 5 (very good)	Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 4 (good)	Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 3 (fair)	Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 2 (poor)	Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 1 (very poor)
Presenter's use of time.	Presenter's use of time. 5 (very good)	Presenter's use of time. 4 (good)	Presenter's use of time. 3 (fair)	Presenter's use of time. 2 (poor)	Presenter's use of time. 1 (very poor)
Presenter's presentation style.	Presenter's presentation style. 5 (very good)	Presenter's presentation style. 4 (good)	Presenter's presentation style. 3 (fair)	Presenter's presentation style. 2 (poor)	Presenter's presentation style. 1 (very poor)
Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly.	Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 5 (very good)	Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 4 (good)	Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 3 (fair)	Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 2 (poor)	Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 1 (very poor)
Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience.	Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 5 (very good)	Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 4 (good)	Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 3 (fair)	Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 2 (poor)	Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 1 (very poor)
Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples.	Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 5 (very good)	Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 4 (good)	Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 3 (fair)	Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 2 (poor)	Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 1 (very poor)
Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises.	Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 5 (very good)	Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 4 (good)	Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 3 (fair)	Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 2 (poor)	Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 1 (very poor)
Cultural relevance of the workshop.	Cultural relevance of the workshop. 5 (very good)	Cultural relevance of the workshop. 4 (good)	Cultural relevance of the workshop. 3 (fair)	Cultural relevance of the workshop. 2 (poor)	Cultural relevance of the workshop. 1 (very poor)
Overall rating of the workshop.	Overall rating of the workshop. 5 (very good)	Overall rating of the workshop. 4 (good)	Overall rating of the workshop. 3 (fair)	Overall rating of the workshop. 2 (poor)	Overall rating of the workshop. 1 (very poor)

5 (very good)

4 (good)

3 (fair)

2 (poor)

1 (very poor)

Presenter's level of preparation.

Presenter's level of preparation. 5 (very good)

Presenter's level of preparation. 4 (good)

Presenter's level of preparation. 3 (fair)

Presenter's level of preparation. 2 (poor)

Presenter's level of preparation. 1 (very poor)

Presenter's knowledge of subject material.

Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 5 (very good)

Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 4 (good)

Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 3 (fair)

Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 2 (poor)

Presenter's knowledge of subject material. 1 (very poor)

Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions.

Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 5 (very good)

Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 4 (good)

Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 3 (fair)

Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 2 (poor)

Presenter's awareness and responsiveness to questions. 1 (very poor)

Presenter's use of time.

Presenter's use of time. 5 (very good)

Presenter's use of time. 4 (good)

Presenter's use of time. 3 (fair)

Presenter's use of time. 2 (poor)

Presenter's use of time. 1 (very poor)

Presenter's presentation style.

Presenter's presentation style. 5 (very good)

Presenter's presentation style. 4 (good)

Presenter's presentation style. 3 (fair)

Presenter's presentation style. 2 (poor)

Presenter's presentation style. 1 (very poor)

Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly.

Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 5 (very good)

Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 4 (good)

Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 3 (fair)

Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 2 (poor)

Presenter's ability to present technical information clearly. 1 (very poor)

Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience.

Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 5 (very good)

Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 4 (good)

Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 3 (fair)

Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 2 (poor)

Presenter's positive attitude and ability to engage the audience. 1 (very poor)

Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples.

Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 5 (very good)

Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 4 (good)

Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 3 (fair)

Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 2 (poor)

Presenter's ability to provide real-life examples. 1 (very poor)

Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises.

Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 5 (very good)

Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 4 (good)

Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 3 (fair)

Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 2 (poor)

Visual Aids (eg PowerPoint presentation, flip charts, handouts, etc.) and/or exercises. 1 (very poor)

Cultural relevance of the workshop.

Cultural relevance of the workshop. 5 (very good)

Cultural relevance of the workshop. 4 (good)

Cultural relevance of the workshop. 3 (fair)

Cultural relevance of the workshop. 2 (poor)

Cultural relevance of the workshop. 1 (very poor)

Overall rating of the workshop.

Overall rating of the workshop. 5 (very good)

Overall rating of the workshop. 4 (good)

Overall rating of the workshop. 3 (fair)

Overall rating of the workshop. 2 (poor)

Overall rating of the workshop. 1 (very poor)

2016 ACF Grantee Meeting Workshop Evaluation

1. 2016 ACF Native Grantee Meeting Workshop Evaluation

Question Title

* 1. Workshop Title

Question Title

* 2. What is your role in your ACF-funded project?

Question Title

* 3. Please rate the below statements using the following scale:

Question Title

* 4. What topics covered in the workshop did you find most useful and why? Was enough time dedicated to those topics?

Question Title

* 5. Which topics covered in the workshop did you find the least useful and why?

Question Title

* 6. How can we improve this workshop/showcase to better meet your needs?

Question Title

* 7. Additional comments: