14
Evaluation
After all is said and done, the mission identified and stated, staff and volunteers and officials hired and trained, the programming and awards planned and promoted with care, the policies defined and written, the budget determined, and the “day of” details nailed down and dealt with, it is finally time to complete the last step in the process of creating an effective intramural program. Now you need to know if it all worked.
In evaluating the program, there are several questions to ask. Questions such as: What successes can be celebrated? Should the same event(s) occur again? What can be improved for next year (or the next season)? These questions, which constitute the bulk of the evaluation process, will be discussed in this chapter.
Chapter Objectives
>	Understand the importance of evaluation.
>	Learn the key components of effective evaluation.
>	Explore various methods of program evaluation.
>	Explore various methods of activity and event evaluation.
The Evaluation Process
Basically, the process of intramural evaluation includes five steps: (1) considering the mission and goals of an intramural program, (2) looking at the results, (3) measuring the difference between intention and reality, (4) explaining the differences, and (5) considering revision to either the mission or the implementation of the intramural program. This is the process of formal evaluation, which constitutes the bulk of this chapter, but informal evaluation is also useful in many situations. As defined in chapter 4, formal evaluation is the systematic collection of data for the purposes of measuring performance and making improvements—in this case, to the intramural program. Informal evaluation is the nonsystematic collection of data for the purposes of measuring performance and making improvements to the intramural program.
Informal evaluation occurs at many different levels and in many different ways. It happens when the aerobics instructor senses that the pace of the class is too fast and slows down to accommodate the participants. It occurs when the head official notices that officials are missing or having difficulty making some calls and holds a training meeting. And it happens when the intramural director glances at the schedule and has the feeling that there are not enough events to hold students’ interest and, thus, starts planning more. In each of these three cases, data was collected in a nonsystematic manner (sensing, noticing, glancing), performance was measured (too fast, missing calls, and not enough), and adjustments were made or considered (slowing down, holding a meeting, and planning more events). This ongoing informal evaluation is very important to the success of an intramural program. In fact, it is crucial. All program leaders need to constantly evaluate and make adjustments where appropriate, or at least consider making those adjustments.
Formal evaluation should also be conducted to ensure the success and well-being of an intramural program. By definition, formal evaluation is more structured and, thus, more thorough than informal evaluation. Indeed, even the evaluation instruments themselves are evaluated in formal evaluation. To ensure a complete, thorough, and accurate formal evaluation, the first step is collecting all relevant information.
Information Gathering
Programs can be evaluated externally or internally. External evaluation typically involves hiring professionals and experts from outside the institution. These experts can be consultants who specialize in intramural programming and programs, or they can be colleagues from other institutions with a comparable intramural program. Either way, someone from the outside looking in brings greater objectivity and a fresh perspective to an evaluation.
Internal evaluation is typically conducted by intramural directors and staff. This type of evaluation is just as useful, if not more useful, than external evaluation. Why? Because those working on the front lines have the most access to information.
The sources of information available to intramural directors and staff are many and varied, from the program participants themselves to computerized participation tracking overseen by an intramural administrator. Some institutions place intramural suggestion boxes around campus and near the intramural office so that students can randomly make suggestions or raise concerns about intramural programming. Institutions that have an intramural Web site often provide online suggestion boxes so that students can vent their frustrations and make positive suggestions. While this information is always helpful, however, frustrations usually constitute the bulk of it. Thus, this type of information will not necessarily represent the feelings of all participants but perhaps only those who are frustrated at something.
Important information can be gathered from various sources. Numeric participation statistics can be gained by counting the number of teams and individuals participating in an event. Some of this numeric analysis also goes on at an informal level by (1) watching attendance, defaults, and forfeits, and (2) trying to determine why attendance is at the level it is, and why defaults and forfeits are increasing or decreasing. These numbers can be compared to previous years’ statistics to determine any patterns.
Meetings and discussion groups are also helpful. These meetings can be very informal, such as going to the school cafeteria, sitting with a group of students you do not know, and asking them if they are willing to discuss their concerns and suggestions for the intramural program. These meeting can also be a little more focused by inviting select member from teams (perhaps team captains) to evaluate a program or a portion of a program such as officiating, promotion, sign-ip procedures, or general administration of a league/tournament.
Some methods will be more accessible to some intramural directors than to others, of course, given budget, time, and other constraints. The most effective method of information gathering that will be accessible to all intramural directors is polling, which for our purposes is simply asking specific questions to get feedback, suggestions, opinions, answers, and so on for purpose of evaluation. Polling can be conducted over the phone, via E-mail and listservs, on the program Web site, in face-to-face meetings, and with questionnaires, surveys, and evaluation forms. A sample of each is provided at the end of this chapter. These surveys can be adapted for use in meetings, phone interviews, E-mail surveys, and so on.
When gathering information, there are two components to consider: (1) who to approach for the information and how to approach them, and (2) what information to get. One of the most important sources is the student body, the primary participant group. Other important sources of information are staff and volunteers. These groups and the type of information they can contribute are discussed in the following sections.
Participants
To get information that is representative of participants’ feelings about and views on intramurals, a systematic approach is required. Students should be polled from time to time during the semester and at the end of each activity, event, tournament and league. As most people do, students appreciate being asked for their input. It makes them feel valued, and when decisions are based on that input, they feel acknowledged and respected. All students can be asked to complete an evaluation form or questionnaire, or a sample of participants can be approached to save the cost of printing and distributing hundreds (if not thousands) of questionnaires and to save time in having to count and evaluate them.
To get a random sample, try giving an evaluation form to every fifth participant listed in the intramural directory or every fourth player on intramural team and league lists. If you want a more selective sample, you could limit the polling to team captains or one representative from each team. When limiting the amount of data you collect, be sure to have at least one representative from each team or competitive unit complete an evaluation.
The types of information participants can offer vary from program to program and from participant to participant. The following areas should be addressed in participant polling, whatever the vehicle may be (questionnaires, Web site surveys, and so on):
	1.	Programming
>	Are participants satisfied with activities and events?
>	Are activities and events run well?
>	If given the chance, what programming would participants add or remove? What would they change?
>	If last-minute problems occur, do event and conveners know what to do?
	2.	Budget
>	Is the cost of activities reasonable?
>	Is there something that the intramural department should be spending more money on?
>	Is there something that the intramural department should be spending less money on?
	3.	Promotion
>	Do participants know about activities and events? Enough ahead of time?
>	Are promotional materials clear and understandable? Do they inspire participants to get involved?
>	Is the program Web site useful?
	4.	 Awards and prizes
>	Are the intramural awards and prizes positive incentives for wholesome participation in intramural events?
>	What parts of the intramural program should awards and prizes be added to?
>	What current awards and prizes should be improved? How?
>	What current awards and prizes should be diminished in importance? How?
	5.	Officials
>	Are officials effective?
>	Are they objective and fair?
>	Do they contribute to the fun of the activity or event, or do they strictly enforce the rules?
	6.	Mission
>	Do participants know what the intramural mission is?
>	Do the intramural department and activities represent and fulfill that mission?
>	What should be the prime goals of intramurals?
	7.	Tournaments and leagues
>	Is the structure effective?
>	Is it fair?
>	Does the schedule work?
	8.	Leadership
>	Are program staff helpful and informative?
>	Are they available?
>	Are they well informed about the activities and events?
	9.	Policies
>	Do participants know about the program policies?
>	Are they fair?
>	Which areas of intramurals should have policies to encourage broader and more postive participation?
Staff
Staff can also provide important feedback on the intramural program, especially if they complete an evaluation of their own areas of responsibility. Staff should submit reports at the end of each school year as well as after each event, league season, ongoing activity, and so on. These reports should include some input from participants (what staff members have heard or observed during activities and events) but also each staff member’s own observations and recommendations for the next event or year. These recommendations are important because they may help to identify procedures that will improve the event or program the next time around.
In addition, staff reports should include the following:
>	Description of the activity or event (facility; league, tournament, or other; whether it was a women’s, men’s, coed, or open event, and so on)
>	Length of the event or activity
>	Total number of participants
>	Successes (things that went well)
>	Failures (major problems)
>	Difficulties (minor problems)
>	Injuries
>	Suspensions that resulted (and appeals/protests made)
>	Changes made this year based on last year’s recommendations (did those changes work?)
>	Recommendations for next year
>	Additional comments
Finally, staff should also be asked about their job satisfaction. Remember, part of creating or running an effective intramural program is keeping staff happy. Poll staff members about the following areas:
>	Management and supervision
>	Compensation
>	Schedules and time management in the department
>	Workload
>	Working climate between members of the intramural staff
>	Ideas for improving staff performance and enjoyment
>	Staff training suggestions
>	Innovative ideas to improve the intramural program
>	Competency in dealing with emergencies
Officials
Officials, of course, are in the middle of the action. Thus, their input will be valuable—perhaps more valuable than that of participants. Particularly in the grade and high school settings, officials will likely be more mature and/or objective, and they may have expertise from officiating other intramural activities and events at your school or at other institutions. In addition, officials are the intramural staff who are probably most aware of the fair play and safety policies and procedures. Thus, they should be polled frequently for feedback and information on these components of the intramural program.
As outlined in previous chapters, scorecards and game sheets should include areas for officials to note their comments. Should they have additional concerns or feedback, intramural directors and staff should maintain and communicate an “open door” policy, where officials (and other participants, staff, and volunteers) can come to talk at any time. In addition, you may want to develop specific official surveys and questionnaires that report on the following:
>	Officiating competency
>	Officials ability to relate with participants, spectators, and colleagues
>	Suggestions for improving officiating
>	Clarity of rules and policies
>	Adequate support for officials from administration
Volunteers
Volunteers typically participate in a program because they agree with the mission of the program and want to contribute to that mission. Their input is valuable in terms of improving the intramural program and enhancing volunteers’ experiences. Both formally and informally they need to be asked about the program:
>	How do they feel intramurals is going?
>	Are there areas that need improvements?
>	Are there areas that are outstanding?
In terms of their own experience, they need to be asked:
>	Are you satisfied with your intramural experience? Why?
>	Were you adequately prepared and trained for the volunteer work you do?
>	Are there ways the intramural program can make the volunteer experience more positive?
Others
The main source of other information comes from parents. Students typically share the highlights of their school day with their parents (both the high experiences and the low experiences). If parents do not hear anything positive from their children about intramurals, then either the program is not very exciting, or the children of the parents you are contacting do not participate in intramural programs, or the parents are not aware of which programs and events are sponsored and run through intramurals. If the parents do not report on any low experiences, then either your program is doing well or their children do not participate in the program. It is helpful to ask parents the following questions.
>	Do you know if your child participates in the intramural program?
>	What are some of the positive things you hear about school lunch and recess activities?
>	What are some of the negative things you hear about school lunch and recess activities?
>	What skills or sponsorship could you contribute to the intramural program?
Evaluation Criteria
Armed with the information you’ve gotten by polling participants, officials, volunteers and staff, and others involved in intramurals, now it is time to use that information to evaluate your program. Whether you are evaluating the entire intramural program or specific activities and events, the evaluation criteria are essentially the same. The only difference is that event or activity evaluation should be specifically related to that program or activity, whereas program evaluation should encompass all activities and events as well as each component of an intramural program discussed in this book.
The following key questions are geared toward an overall program evaluation, but each can be fine-tuned to apply to the evaluation of an activity or event.
>	Is the intramural mission being satisfied?
>	Has the program stayed within budget?
>	Could more revenue be raised?
>	Is participation high?
>	Is participation inclusive?
>	Are promotions effective?
>	Are intramural policies and procedures working well?
>	Are sport and activity rules effective?
>	Have there been any injuries?
>	How can safety be improved?
>	Is fair play evidenced throughout the program?
>	Do officials handle players satisfactorily?
>	Is the programming calendar effective?
>	Are employees happy in their jobs?
>	Are people volunteering to help out?
>	Are officials satisfied with the program?
>	Are last-minute problems bogging down events and activities?

Hockey Could Learn From Intramurals
“In light of all the discussions over the state of hockey in our country, it is interesting how often I’ve heard, ‘We have to put the FUN back into the game.’ Competition, winning, more games, quick advancement, parental pressure, $$$, $$$, and more $$$ seem to be at the root of the problems related to our national winter game.
“As I think about hockey and the challenges facing the sport, I can’t help but self-evaluate my intramural program from last year.
>	Competition was downplayed and in its place was more participation. Scores were seldom kept since the emphasis was on fun and the object of all games was to ‘score, not to keep score.’
>	Winning became a secondary issue. The real issue was to produce an atmosphere of FUN. No one advanced or was eliminated. Participants only returned for more of the same FUN.
>	All ages, genders, and cultures were included in the program. No one was excluded.
>	The kids told their parents what a blast they were having during lunch hours in the gym. They couldn’t wait for their next hour of FUN.
>	Intramurals were FREE fun.
”Ah! Another passing grade. The state of intramurals at John Darling Public School is healthy. Everyone likes to have FUN. Fun in your programs overcomes ALL obstacles” (Doyle 1999).
Reprinted by permission of the Canadian Intramural Recreation Association—Ontario. From P. Doyle, 1999, “Hockey could learn from intramurals,” INPUT 18 (8):2.

Going through these questions, a pattern begins to emerge. The best way to evaluate an intramural program is to revisit each component of the program, one at a time. Here are the steps of evaluating an intramural program.
Step 1. Revisit mission. Look back at the purpose or mission of the intramural program. If the program mission emphasizes fun, then one of the program characteristics to evaluate is whether all those involved—the participants as well as staff, volunteers, and officials—are indeed having fun. Likewise, if the mission emphasizes mass participation, consider the total student population and determine the participation ratio. If participation is high and/or growing, that means you’re achieving your mission. If participation has dropped however, you’ll need to determine the cause and what can be done to change this negative trend. The key in this step is knowing your mission and measuring all program components accordingly.
Step 2. Revisit budget. Examine the financial records to determine whether you ended up with a balanced, surplus, or deficit budget. Then look at each activity or event budget and compare revenue to expenses to determine which programs made money and which ones lost money. Finally, evaluate the budgeting process itself to determine if any improvements can be made. For example, are tournament conveners aware of how much money they are able to spend? Does the convener know what to do when registration fees are given to her (or should conveners accept no money and direct all payments to a specific person) and how she will pay for things such as officials and prizes? Are those people who are in charge of budgets aware of the components of a budget?
Step 3. Revisit fair play. Look at your participation and leadership statistics. Intramurals should be for everyone, regardless of gender, age, race, skin color, and so on. It is important here to consider typically underrepresented populations as well. For example, are girls coming out for football? Are boys coming out for aerobics? Are African Americans coming out for hockey? Determine how you can include these groups in all activities. Likewise, you need to consider sportsmanship. Are participants getting in fights regularly? Is the spirit of play present at all games and contests, or are players trying to win regardless of the cost? Sportsmanship is such an important aspect of intramurals that it must be considered carefully when evaluating the program. It is not simply the respect participants show for the rules, officials, and each other, although that is a significant part of it. It is also the spirit of play and fun that must be communicated and perceived throughout the program.
Step 4. Revisit promotion. Consider your promotional campaigns for various events as well as the intramural program itself. Are the promotional vehicles you are using effective? Are you generating a lot of interest and traffic at the intramural office? Are students regularly stopping at the intramural bulletin board or surfing the Web site to see what’s going on? It is a good idea to keep copies of all promotional materials, including posters, signs, announcements, videos, and so on. That way, when you’re evaluating promotion, you can evaluate the materials themselves. Perhaps a poster, for example, was visually appealing but didn’t contain the necessary details about an event. In other words, it was nice to look at but did little to increase participation or interest in the program. It may also be a good idea to get some staff and participants together to evaluate these materials at a year- or season-end meeting.
Step 5. Revisit policies. If there were problems during the past year, did the policies and procedures help to deal with them effectively? Or were too few participants and staff aware of them? Such problems may have to do with harassment, inclusion, and safety. If there were several “special circumstances” or situations that were more specific than the policies you have in place, you may need to broaden your policies to apply to all situations.
Step 6. Revisit rules. This step is fairly specific, more so than the other steps so far, but it is important. You will need to know if game, activity, and event rules were effective. In some cases, the rules themselves are fine but the problem may have been in communicating those rules to the participants. In other cases, the rules may need revision. Perhaps they need to be spelled out in more detail. Or perhaps a demonstration is in order, as is often the case in new sports and activities or when lots of new students sign up.
Step 7. Revisit safety. The main question when evaluating safety is, of course, Were there any injuries? The natural follow-up question: If so, what was the cause? The safety of participants is of utmost importance in intramurals and should be considered carefully. Evaluate every program component that may affect safety. For example, are officials doing their jobs? Are officials, team captains, and event staff apprised of and trained in basic medical care and program safety procedures? Is the competitive nature of games causing injuries? If so, should the focus be switched from winning to having fun? Are the mission and promotion and rules communicating this?
Step 8. Revisit programming. This step involves the evaluation of not only the specific events and activities, including leagues and tournaments, but also the programming calendar itself. A poorly attended event may be a good event, but it may need to be offered at a different time of year or a different time of day. Look at the types of activities offered and when they were held. Also, consider the length of time devoted to each activity. Was it sufficient? Finally, look at the entire programming schedule. Are activities and events diverse enough to achieve high participation for the entire program? Are students’ needs and wishes being met?
Step 9. Revisit leadership. The last step in the evaluation process is looking at yourself and your employees. How are you doing as a manager? Are staff and volunteers satisfied in their work? Does the departmental structure help or hinder your mission? How effective are staff and conveners? Do things in the office run smoothly, or are staff members constantly rushing to put out fires? Do event and program details slip through the cracks, or does everything get done in an orderly, relaxed fashion? What is the mood in the intramural office? If your program relies on volunteer help, do you have an adequate pool of candidates wanting to join the team, or are you left shorthanded throughout the year? Finally, look at the official component of your program. Are officials satisfied with their intramural experiences? Are participants satisfied with them?
Sample Evaluation Forms
Now that you understand the evaluation process, including where to gather information as well as what should be evaluated, it is time to look specifically at different types of evaluation forms. Many institutions post these forms online for participants, staff, volunteers, officials, and so on to complete on their own time. This works extremely well. Online evaluation forms are effective not only because they are easy to assemble and update but also because they are easy to tally and assess, assuming you have the software to do that (see “Resources” at the end of this chapter). If the intramural department is not yet online, however, evaluation forms can also be printed and handed out. To help you create an effective evaluation form, the rest of this section is devoted to the topic, including several examples of different types of evaluation forms.
Figure 14.1 shows a questionnaire that would be useful in a high school setting, either mid year or at the end of the school year. It asks students—both those who participate and those who do not—to describe their involvement in intramurals. Those who participate are asked which activities they most enjoy. Those who do not participate are asked why. Finally, students are asked for their suggestions on improving the intramural program, including specific activities they would like to see added or dropped. This type of questionnaire, then, should be distributed to all students, not just intramural participants. It is important to understand non-participants if we want to include them in the program.

Intramural Survey
Please answer the following questions as best as you can.
1.	Grade: _____
2.	Sex:  n  Female  n  Male
3.	Do you participate in intramurals?  n  Yes  n  No
If you answered no to #3, please explain why and then go to question 4.

If you answered yes to #3, how many times did you participate in intramurals during the past four months?
n  1-10 times    n  11-20 times    n  21+ times
If you answered yes to #3, which activities did you enjoy the most? 	
	
4. Do you feel that the intramural department offers an activity for everyone?  n   Yes  n  No
Explain: 	
	
What activities would you like to see added and which would you like to see dropped?
Please add	Please drop

How do you think we can improve intramurals at our school? 	

Figure 14.1  Sample intramural program questionnaire.

Angela Lumpkin, dean of education at West Georgia State University and the author of several books on Physical Education and sport, and Samuel Halstead (1995), have come up with a simple survey that could be used to analyze the program in general or specific components of the intramural program, shown in figure 14.2. Primarily composed of statements participants can agree or disagree with, its main focus is determining the degree of participant satisfaction with the program. The statements on this survey are more general in nature, but they can be made specific fairly easily. If you were interested in a specific activity like a basketball league, for example, you could simply replace “intramurals” with “basketball league” or a similar modification. Likewise, to determine specific demographics, questions about gender, marital status, ethnicity, grade level, level of intramural involvement, and any other relevant questions could be added to the bottom.

Intramural Survey
For each question or statement below, please check the appropriate box.
1.	How did you learn about intramurals? (Check one.)
	n	Physical education class
	n	Program publicity
	n	Intramural staff
	n	Communication with students
	n	Other (please specify) __________________________
2.	Indoor facilities are adequate for intramurals. (Check one.)
	n	Strongly agree
	n	Agree
	n	No opinion
	n	Disagree
	n	Strongly disagree
3.	Outdoor facilities are adequate for intramurals.
	n	Strongly agree
	n	Agree
	n	No opinion
	n	Disagree
	n	Strongly disagree
4.	Intramural competitions are well organized.
	n	Strongly agree
	n	Agree
	n	No opinion
	n	Disagree
	n	Strongly disagree
5.	Intramural activities and events are managed competently.
	n	Strongly agree
	n	Agree
	n	No opinion
	n	Disagree
	n	Strongly disagree
6.	Management levels (competency) of student personnel in intramurals are appropriate.
	n	Strongly agree
	n	Agree
	n	No opinion
	n	Disagree
	n	Strongly disagree
7.	Recognition of efforts and accomplishments in intramurals is adequate and appropriate.
	n	Strongly agree
	n	Agree
	n	No opinion
	n	Disagree
	n	Strongly disagree
Adapted, by permission, from J. Kestner, 1996, Program evaluation for sports directors (Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics), 45-52.
Figure 14.2  Sample intramural satisfaction survey.

Figure 14.3 shows the third and final sample evaluation. Adapted from a format used by Jim Kestner in Program Evaluation for Sport Directors (1996), this evaluation form seeks more specific information than the survey in figure 14.2. Rather than being asked to classify their degree of agreement, individuals are asked to circle either “yes,” “no,” or “not sure.” Tabulating the results of this type of survey, then, is a bit simpler. So is the process of filling it out. To make sure that respondents are able to provide more information if they wish, each statement has room for comments or further explanation.

Intramural Survey
Date distributed: 	
Please return to: 	
Please return by: 	
Because we feel it is essential to monitor the breadth and depth of our intramural program, we are requesting that you take a few moments to provide feedback about our program offerings. Your responses will be kept confidential.
To complete the form, circle the response that best describes your opinion for each statement. If you are not familiar with a particular aspect of our intramural program or are unable to render an opinion, circle “Not sure.”
In the space below each statement, labeled “Comments,” write a brief explanation of your response.
Thank you.
Intramural program offers a good variety of choices.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program offers affordable opportunities for all individuals.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program provides equal opportunities for males and females.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program provides opportunities for individuals with disabilities.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program offers opportunities for individuals of all races and ethnicities.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program provides opportunities for individuals interested in high levels
of competition.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program provides opportunities for individuals interested in fitness and fun.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural offerings are safe for participants.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program encourages lifelong fitness and health.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program emphasizes individual development over winning.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Intramural program is a valuable part of students’ educational experience.	Yes	No	Not sure
Comments: 	
	
Are there any activities you would like the program to add?	Yes	No	Not sure
If yes, list them here (provide an explanation if appropriate):  	
	
Are there any sports you would like to see discontinued?	Yes	No	Not sure
If yes, list them here (provide an explanation if appropriate):  	
	
Please indicate your  Gender_____________  Grade/year_____________  Major__________________
Adapted, by permission, from J. Kestner 1996, Program evaluation for sports directors (Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics), 67-69.
Figure 14.3  Sample intramural evaluation.

Chapter Summary Exercises
This chapter explained the importance and process of the last component of an effective intramural program: evaluation. To help you build formal evaluation into your program, the following exercises will get you started on that process.
	1.	Develop a participant evaluation tool that will help you assess the success of a particular activity or event. Create the questionnaire and describe the method of distributing and collecting it.
	2.	Review this chapter’s section on information gathering and list three types of evaluation that will be effective for your program. If the budget is low and you don’t have an intramural Web site, for example, online surveys are probably not an option. Likewise, if most students are participating in intramurals, face-to-face interviews would probably be more time consuming than effective.
	3.	Using your three evaluation methods from number 2, list the pros and cons of each method in surveying participants, staff, and officials.
	4.	Review the evaluation criteria discussed in this chapter and the sample evaluations in figures 14.1, 14.2, and 14.3. Design a program questionnaire for one of the following groups:
>	Participants
>	Officials
>	Staff
>	Volunteers
References
Doyle, P. 1999. Hockey could learn from intramurals. INPUT 18 (8): 2. Used by permission of the Canadian Intramural Recreation Association-Ontario.
Kestner, J. 1996. Program evaluation for sport directors. Champaign, Ill.: Human Kinetics.
Lumpkin, A., and S. Halstead. 1995. North Carolina State University intramural-recreational sports program participants’ satisfaction survey. NIRSA Journal 20 (1): 26-27.
Resources
Survey Documentation and Analysis (SDA)
http://csa.berkeley.edu:7502
This Web site offers programs for the documentation and Web-based analysis of survey data.
University of Pudget Sound
www.ups.edu/pe/imquestionnaire.html
Offers a detailed online intramural questionnaire.
University of Western Ontario
www.uwo.ca/campusrec/
Offers an example of an online intramural questionnaire. Click on “intramural sport,” then “evaluation.”