BasICs
The sustainability of bridge programs should be considered early in their development. Most bridge programs start with seed money to test strategies, an idea, or a concept. However, to continue to offer these programs, it is imperative to look beyond their initial development.
Sustaining bridge programs beyond the initial delivery or pilot requires a conscious effort to make ongoing improvements, maintain or broaden funding, modify or expand the career pathway, and embed bridge programs in the partner institutions’ policies, practices, and systems over the long term.
The initial efforts to sustain the bridge program will focus on achieving program and student outcomes, documenting the effectiveness of the bridge program approach, and securing funding for continuing program delivery. In subsequent phases, it entails learning from experience, improving program design, and determining whether and how to increase the size and scope of programming. This could mean expanding the bridge program to the next higher or lower level in the career pathway or to another occupation within the sector, or even other sectors. A longer-term goal would be to make bridge programs a standard item on the menu of services that program partners offer to low-skilled adults who want to advance in their education and careers.
This chapter focuses on considerations for continuing, improving, and expanding an existing bridge program, and on strategies for institutionalizing bridge programs in an organization and partnership.
hOw TO susTaIn a BrIDgE PrOgram
• Assess effectiveness, identify improvements, and determine whether it should be expanded
• sustain or expand the bridge program within the institution and partnership
• Promote organizational and policy changes that will provide long-term support
assess Effectiveness, Identify Improvements, and Determine whether It should Be Expanded The first step in assessing a bridge program is to examine its results in relation to the program plan and anticipated outcomes, including outreach to the target population, enrollment, learning gains, completion, transition to the next phase of training and education, employment, attainment of credentials or occupational certifications, and wage gains. Chapter Nine details how to do this. In making a case for sustainability, these results should be compared with those for similar courses and populations.
The next step is to analyze the effectiveness of the key elements and strategies of the bridge program and outline strengths and areas for improvement. The leadership team can use Worksheet 10: Assessing strengths and Weakness as a guide for examining program elements. Discussion of both the positive and negative outcomes of each critical program element is important in assessing what needs to be improved, maintained, expanded, or changed.
In considering whether to expand the bridge program to reach additional population groups, serve more employers, or broaden the career pathway, the leadership team should revisit the program design questions to see if anything should be changed. The questions presented in Figure 20: should the Program Expand? will help the leadership team consider whether and how to expand the bridge program or add a related industry or career cluster. If the partners answer yes to one or more of the expansion opportunities, they will need to assess what it will take to expand and whether they have the capacity to do it.
ChaptER tEN
Return to Table of Contents
WORkshEEt tEN
Worksheet 10: Assessing Strengths and Weaknesses
Leadership Team and Partners 1. Are the right partners at the table?
2. Did the leadership team and other program partners share a common understanding of program goals and the bridge approach?
3. Did each partner deliver a high quality of service?
4. Were students able to easily navigate among the partners’ services?
5. Did partners communicate regularly about students and issues in program delivery?
6. Were management systems in place and clear to all?
Target Industry and Pathway
1. Have labor market demands in the industry and career cluster remained strong?
2. Is the career pathway clear to students and instructors?
3. Do instructors have adequate expertise and knowledge of the industry and career cluster?
4. Have employers participated in meaningful ways?
Target Population
1. Did outreach and marketing reach the target population?
2. Did the marketing information clearly describe the unique program elements, requirements, and benefits of the bridge program for the target population?
3. Did the bridge program design meet the needs and interests of participants?
4. Was the schedule and location convenient to the target population?
5. Did enrollment meet goals?
Assessment
1. Did the intake assessment tools accurately and consistently gauge student literacy levels, capacity, and motivation to succeed in the bridge program?
2. Did student skills and interests fit with the bridge program?
3. Did the intake assessment tools provide an understanding of student learning needs, individual barriers, and interests?
weaknesses strengths
Program Component
Return to Table of Contents
WORkshEEt tEN
Worksheet 10 (Continued)
Contextualized Curriculum
1. Were industry knowledge and technical, occupational, and basic skills instruction integrated and coordinated?
2. Did learning goals align with the next level of education, for-credit college programs and employment?
3. Did instructors use applied lessons and simulations?
4. Did instructors and staff have sufficient understanding of the target population and course content? Were they able to use the bridge program approach?
5. Was professional development provided to instructors?
Career Development
1. Was career information accessible, accurate, and used by the students?
2. Did students have opportunities to tour industries and meet professionals in the career pathway?
3. Was advising accessible and effective?
4. Did students prepare career plans that will be useful as they move to the next level?
Transition Services
1. Were students fully aware of transition services when they registered?
2. Were the services available and accessible from the time of enrollment?
3. Were the services relevant to student needs?
4. Was the transition coordinator, coach, or advisor available to students when they needed assistance and at key points in the program?
5. Were there any student needs that were not met?
Funding
1. Did the resources meet the needs of the bridge program, students, and staff?
2. Did the bridge program meet the terms and conditions of the funding streams?
3. Will the funding streams be available in the future?
4. What were the key gaps in funding?
5. Are there new funding opportunities?
Data and Measurement
1. Did the partnership capture the information needed to assess progress and identify and solve problems?
2. Did the partnership have sufficient information and capacity to analyze and document outcomes?
3. What were the gaps in information? Will the team be able to fill those gaps?
weaknesses strengths
Program Component
Return to Table of Contents
ChaptER tEN