Commentaries

Northern Lights Community Charitable Gaming Association
Evaluation Form Feedback

Community Gaming Grant Workshop April 06/19 in Dawson Creek & Fort St. John
Topic: Community Gaming Grant 2019 Program Overview & Changes

Facilitator: Matt Dell Outreach Manager of the Community Gaming Grants Branch

Evaluation Form Feedback

DC = Dawson Creek Workshop Morning FSJ = Fort St. John Workshop Afternoon
DC Workshop 22/25 Delegate forms received FSJ Workshop 23/26 Delegate forms received

1. What parts of the workshop did you find beneficial for you and your organization?
DC – 13 said all sections were beneficial
– 6 said it was very informative with clear explanations for all examples
– 2 liked the explanation on In-Kind labour
– 1 liked the capital Project sections

FSJ – 15 said all sections were good & informative
– 4 liked the organizational, financial and program eligibility/ineligibility sections
– 2 liked the Capital Project Section
– 1 liked the guideline update on the new changes

2. What parts of the workshop could be omitted?
DC – 22 said none, all sections were good
FSJ – 23 said none, all sections were good

3. What parts of the workshop could have more emphasis, more details or more time?
DC – 16 said all parts were covered sufficiently.
– 4 said more details were needed on Financial statements & liabilities and internal/external restricted funds
– 1 said more details were needed on new building acquisitions
– 1 said more details on Capital Projects

FSJ – 15 said all parts were covered sufficiently
– 4 said more details needed for Capital Projects
– 2 said more details on financial requirements
-1 said more details on the online application

4. Suggestions for improvement.
DC – 19 said no improvements needed
– 2 said that more details and time should be spent on the financial calculations & internal and external restricted funds.
– 1 said more information on Capital Project Funds

FSJ – 22 said no improvements needed
– 1 was concerned about how small societies with small budgets would be treated

5. Method of Delivery
Excellent Good Satisfactory Fine Poor
DC  18         4            0            0     0
FSJ 17         6            0            0     0
Suggestions for Improvement
DC – 1 said more time was needed to understand the information

6. Rate Workshop – Overall satisfaction
Excellent Good Satisfactory Fine Poor
DC  19        3           0              0      0
FSJ 17        6           0              0      0

7. Heard about the Workshop via the following:
NLCCGA Member Newspaper Facebook Other
DC –           16              2                 6            2
FSJ –          10              1               10            2

8. Beverages and Snacks
Excellent Good Satisfactory Fine Poor
DC –   20     2           0              0     0
FSJ –  10   11           2              0     0