Evaluation Report Brief

Mile High United Way: The Bridge Project 

What is the community challenge? 

Children residing in neighborhoods with significant challenges 

such as poverty, limited English proficiency, few early childhood 

education resources, and low expectations concerning academic 

achievement are at a higher risk for shortfall in school 

achievement. The Denver Housing Authority (DHA) estimates 

school drop-out rates in Denver housing neighborhoods to be 

upwards of 80%.

Program At-a-Glance 

CNCS Program: Social Innovation Fund

Intervention: ReadWell, GR8 Readers, one-onone tutoring

Subgrantee: The Bridge Project

Intermediary: Mile High United Way

Focus Area(s): Youth Development/Education

Focus Population(s): Elementary school students 

with low level of reading skills

Community(ies) Served: Denver, Colorado

nationalservice.gov/research 1

What is the promising solution? 

The Bridge Project seeks to provide a comprehensive early literacy 

intervention targeting children K-3rd grade, with the goal of 

achieving reading at grade level by the end of third grade, and 

promoting subsequent academic achievement. 

The intervention includes three program components: 1) ReadWell, which features mastery-based and 

research-validated instructional strategies delivered by trained educators. These strategies include multiple 

entry points for placement into appropriate small groups, a unique sound sequence, differentiated instruction 

with flexible pacing, and ongoing assessment/progress monitoring; 2) GR8 (Great) Readers, which provides 

kindergarten through third graders with eight books over the course of the school year and another eight 

books over the summer in the hopes of building their love of reading, their home libraries, and their access to 

age and content appropriate books; and 3) One-on-one tutoring for a minimum of 45 minutes per week where 

participants are matched with a trained adult tutor for the academic year and meet with the same tutor at least 

once a week throughout the school year. Through a combination of these three direct literacy programs, the 

Bridge Project offers participants the opportunity to experience many facets of literacy and allows them to take 

an active role in their learning.

What was the purpose of evaluation? 

To determine the effectiveness of this intervention, OMNI Institute (OMNI) developed a mixed-methods 

evaluation. Focused on program dosage, student characteristics, programming period (school year or summer), 

and implementation fidelity, the implementation evaluation consists of three research questions:

1. What level of program intervention was provided?

2. To what extent did volunteer tutors and education specialists deliver the program with fidelity? Was 

this consistent across Bridge sites?

3. What are implementation challenges associated with each type of intervention, and do these differ as a 

function of child characteristics, site characteristics, or timing of the intervention? What are acceptable 

solutions to these challenges?

The impact evaluation, consisting of a quasi-experimental, between-group design for a full sample and a 

propensity score matched group design sample. These analyses assessed whether students who receive Bridge 

Project services show greater gains in literacy skills than similar students who do not receive Bridge services. 

Students in K-3

rd grades entering the Bridge Project in four public housing neighborhoods served as the

Office of Research and Evaluation, Corporation for National and Community Service June 2018
treatment group. Comparison students were recruited from two similar public housing communities in 

which Bridge Project services are not currently available. Reading and services data were collected and 

analyzed to make comparisons between the two groups.

The impact analysis includes data from the 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16 school years and includes a

total of 263 Bridge Project students and 108 similar comparison 

students, for a total sample size of 371. The impact evaluation sought to 

answer three research questions:

1. Do more Bridge children show improvements in reading at or 

above grade level than comparison children?

2. Does the amount or type of programming predict reading gains?

3. Which program activities are most closely associated with 

reading gains? What are the critical program elements for 

success? Do those children who receive all three intervention 

components improve to a greater degree than children who 

receive only one or two components?

What did the evaluation find? 

The final summative evaluation report incorporates data from all five 

years of the project and has the following major findings:

•

•

•

•

The Bridge program appears to significantly benefit students’ reading proficiency, particularly after 

the first year of programming. By their second and third years in the program, Bridge students were 

outperforming their peers.

The number of programming elements received and the amount of programming received in each 

element was positively related to reading proficiency.

Overall, it does not appear that the Bridge program is related to school attendance.

Read Well and tutoring sessions were largely on-task and provided high-quality instruction to 

Bridge students. High quality indicators included educator competencies and demonstrated student 

learning in the five fundamental literacy skill areas.

Notes on the evaluation 

The evaluation encountered difficulties recruiting comparison group participants and faced challenges 

resulting from missing literacy outcome data. The research team in collaboration with Bridge staff 

improved their data collection and management processes.

How is the Bridge Project using the evaluation findings to improve? 

2 

Evaluation At-a-Glance

Evaluation Design(s): Impact evaluation 

(quasi-experimental design with propensity 

score matching) and implementation 

evaluation

Study Population: Kindergarten through 

3rd grade

(Independent) Evaluator(s): OMNI Institute

This Evaluation’s Level of Evidence*: 

Moderate

*SIF and AmeriCorps currently use different definitions of levels of 

evidence.

The current study identified opportunities to enhance program infrastructure and implementation, including 

adding and refining staff roles, strengthening its volunteer training program, and implementing standardized 

continuous quality improvement efforts.

The Social Innovation Fund (SIF), a program of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), combines public and private resources to grow the impact of 

innovative, community-based solutions that have compelling evidence of improving the lives of people in low-income communities throughout the U.S. The SIF invests in three 

priority areas: economic opportunity, healthy futures, and youth development.

The content of this brief was drawn from the full evaluation report submitted to CNCS by the grantee/subgrantee. The section of the brief that 

discusses evaluation use includes contribution of the grantee/subgrantee. All original content from the report is attributable to its authors. 

To access the full evaluation report and learn more about CNCS, please visit nationalservice.gov/research.

Office of Research and Evaluation, Corporation for National and Community Service June 2018

nationalservice.gov/research