2013 PLSC EVALUATION REPORT 
2

Contents

Executive Summary..........................................................................................................4

Acknolwedgements...........................................................................................................5

Evaluation Overview & Rationale....................................................................................5

Findings.............................................................................................................................5

Description of the Sample ................................................................................................5

Program Components and Processes................................................................................8

Importance/Performance Analysis....................................................................................8

Crew Dynamics...............................................................................................................10

Program Impacts.............................................................................................................11

Education and Employment Intentions...........................................................................11

Targeted Program Outcomes..........................................................................................12

Additional Influences on Program Outcomes ................................................................15

Conclusions.....................................................................................................................18

Follow-up Results...........................................................................................................19

APPENDIX A: Evaluation Procedures ..........................................................................22

Evaluation Procedures ....................................................................................................23

Action-Oriented Research...............................................................................................23

Research Design .............................................................................................................23

Retrospective Pre-Post Instrument..................................................................................24

APPENDIX B: Open Ended Responses.........................................................................25

Open Ended Responses...................................................................................................26

APPENDIX C: PLSC Survey.........................................................................................29
3

Tables and Figures

Table 1. Sample Demographics........................................................................................5

Table 2. Educational Attainment ......................................................................................6

Table 3. Race and ethnicity ..............................................................................................6

Table 4. Participants by Program .....................................................................................7

Table 5. Importance of Program Characteristics..............................................................8

Table 6. Crew Dynamic Scores......................................................................................10

Table 7. Education and Employment Intentions of Corps Participants .........................11

Table 8. Evaluation Measures and Definitions...............................................................12

Table 9. Follow-up Respondents by COrps ...................................................................19

Table 10. Follow-up Data Comparison ..........................................................................21

Figure 1. Outcome Change Scores...................................................................................4

Figure 2. Importance rating by corps type .......................................................................9

Figure 3. Outcome Change Scores.................................................................................13

Figure 4. Pre and post corps experience Outcome comparisons....................................15

Figure 5. outcome comparisons by age group................................................................16

Figure 6. Program Type Comparisons............................................................................17

Figure 7. Change in Overall Outcomes by Program Type.............................................18
4

Executive Summa

The evaluation strategy was developed collaboratively 

by leaders from the involved corps organizations and 

researchers at Brigham Young University and North 

Carolina State University. The purpose of the evaluation 

was to build upon previous corps-related evaluation 

efforts by assessing the impact of the corps experience 

on participants in terms of targeted outcomes (e.g., 

civic engagement, leadership, etc.), their intentions 

to pursue additional education, and their confidence 

to obtain employment. The evaluation also looked at 

the association between demographic and program 

characteristics with the experience on participants.

Statistically significant increases were observed across all 

outcome measures in contrast to the general population 

comparison group (see Figure 1). The greatest growth 

FIGURE 1. OUTCOME CHANGE SCORES

occurred on the Teamwork, Community Engagement, 

Leadership, and Environmental Engagement 

measures. Results also indicated younger participants 

(under 18) experienced significantly more growth 

in Environmental Engagement, Teamwork, SelfResponsibility, Critical Thinking, and Communication 

than older participants. 

Participants were also asked about the overall 

importance they ascribed to various program 

components. On average, opportunities to gain new 

knowledge and skills were most important to corps 

participants. Opportunities to gain more education 

and the quality of provided equipment were perceived 

as less important. 
5

Acknolwedge

Evaluation Overview & Rati

We would like to thank all participating PLSC organizations for their assistance in the development of the survey 

and subsequent collection of survey data.

The purpose of the evaluation was to assess the impact of participating in a conservation corps program on 

intentions to gain additional education, confidence to gain employment and key targeted program outcomes 

(e.g., teamwork, leadership, etc.). Efforts were also made to assess the perceived quality of importance of 

core program components and processes.

Finding

Description of the 

Data were collected from 1334 corps participants and 984 comparison group members. Table 1 provides a summary 

of sample demographics for both participants and comparisons. Overall, both participant and comparison groups 

were similar in average age. The comparison group had a higher percentage of females than the participant 

group, but both were representative of the proportion of males to females in their respective populations. The 

geographic distribution among participants and comparison was also similar. An examination of effect sizes (See 

information box below) indicated the magnitude of any statistically significant differences among the two groups 

of respondents was low. 

TABLE 1. SAMPLE DEMOGRAPHICS*

Mean 

Age

Gender Community of Origin

Male Female Urban Suburban Rural 

Fringe

Distant 

Fringe

20.74 741

(55.8%)

586

(44.2%)

415

(31.3%)

473

(35.6%)

195

(14.7%)

244

(18.4%)

21.70 434

(44.2%)

549

(55.8%)

339

(34.6%)

437

(44.5%)

100

(10.2%)

105

(10.7%)

Group 

Participant

Comparison

*Note: Totals may be different due to missing items from respondents.

Statistical significance means the results indicate with 95% certainty that differences between groups 

genuinely exist. Measures of effect size are standardized measures (generally between .0 and 1.0) that assess 

the magnitude of this difference. Effect size is often used to determine whether a statistically significant 

difference is meaningful in practice with larger effect sizes suggesting greater practical importance.
6

Table 2 provides an overview of the current educational status and overall educational attainment of both 

groups. Educational attainment was similar among the groups of respondents, although the comparison group 

contained a higher percentage of individuals with advanced degrees and members of the participant group were 

more likely to be continuing in high school.

TABLE 2. EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Group

Current 

Educational Status Highest Level of Educational Attainment

No Longer 

in School

Continuing 

in School

Less than 

High School

High School 

Graduate

Some 

College

College 

Graduate

Post-College/

Graduate School

Participant 547

(40.9%)

764

(57.1%)

399

(29.8%)

226

(16.9%)

330

(24.7%)

353

(26.4%)

17

(1.3%)

Comparison 439

(44.9%)

538

(55.1%)

206

(21.0%)

208

(21.2%)

305

(31.1%)

203

(20.7%)

60

(6.1%)

Table 3 presents a breakdown of race and ethnicity for the two sample groups. Corps participants had a higher 

percentage of White, non-Hispanic and Hispanic respondents and fewer African-American respondents. There 

was significant variation with small effect sizes in race and ethnicity based on corps types. Non-residential corps 

respondents were more diverse, with 59.5% non-White participants (41.1% Hispanic). Conversely, spike and 

residential corps respondents were predominantly white, non-Hispanic (81.3% and 73.0% respectively). (See note 

about program types on page 6).

TABLE 3. RACE AND ETHNICITY

Group Self-Reported Race/Ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic Black, Non-Hispanic Hispanic or Latino Other race or ethnicity

Participant 911

(68.1%)

33

(2.5%)

262

(19.6%)

95

(7.1%)

Comparison 611

(62.2%)

103

(10.5%)

158

(16.1%)

110

(11.2%)
7

Group # %

Montana Conservation Corps 400 30%

Northwest Youth Corps 216 16%

Southwest Conservation Corps 176 13%

Student Conservation Association 95 7%

Rocky Mountain Youth Corps 78 6%

Utah Conservation Corps 75 6%

California Conservation Corps 55 4%

Conservation Corps North Bay 47 4%

Coconino Rural Environmental Corps 45 3%

American Youth Works 43 3%

Los Angeles Conservation Corps 31 2%

Western Colorado Conservation Corps 29 2%

Canyon Country Youth Corps 28 2%

Colorado Youth Corps Association 20 1%

Table 4 provides a breakdown of corps participants involved in the evaluation by organization.

TABLE 4. PARTICIPANTS BY PROGRAM
8

Program Components and Process

Understanding program components and processes was a key evaluation objective. Therefore, efforts were made 

to assess participants’ perceptions of important program components as well as interpersonal dynamics within the 

program.

Importance/Performance Ana

Participants were asked to indicate the importance they ascribed to corps program components (Table 4) using a 

0 to 100 scale. The analysis of this data allows for the identification of how important program characteristics are 

to participants. 

TABLE 5. IMPORTANCE OF PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS

Program Importance Items Mean Scores

Opportunities to gain new knowledge 88.37

Opportunities to learn new skills 87.33

Having a meaningful work project 83.93

Opportunities to make a difference 83.45

Interactions with crew leaders/staff 82.24

The work project setting 81.77

Opportunities for career development 80.90

The provided training 79.44

Learning more about conservation 79.36

Leadership opportunities 79.26

Quality of the provided equipment 73.58

Opportunities to gain more education 67.08

As indicated by the table, opportunities to gain new knowledge and skills were most important to corps participants. Opportunities to gain more education and the quality of provided equipment were perceived as less 

important.

Some differences were found in the importance of program characteristics based on different groups of corps 

members. Older corps members (18 and older) perceived the work project setting as more important than 

younger corps members. Not surprisingly, younger corps members placed more importance on opportunities to 

gain more education than older corps members. There were also differences between white and non-white corps 

members. Leadership opportunities, the quality of equipment, and opportunities for more education were all 

significantly more important to non-white corps members. 
9

Because characteristics may differ based on type of corps program, Figure 2 below compares the importance 

ratings based on corps type (Spike, Non-residential and Residential). 

FIGURE 2. IMPORTANCE RATING BY CORPS TYPE

In comparison to the other types, urban corps placed higher importance on leadership opportunities, training, 

quality of equipment, opportunities to make a difference, opportunities for education, and learning more about 

conservation. Backcountry corps participants placed higher importance on the project work setting. Finally, participants in residential corps programs placed significantly lower importance on opportunities to learn new skills 

and knowledge and learning more about conservation.

Three types of corps programs were identified for this evaluation. Spike programs include field crews that camp 

together at a project site on 1-3 week “hitches”. In Non-residential programs, Corpsmembers live at home and 

are dispatched from the Corps program office daily. Crew members and program staff live and eat in Corps 

dorm facilities in Residential programs.
10

Crew Dynam

All items on the crew dynamic scale employed a 1 (very untrue) to 5 (very true) response scale. The mean score 

for the seven-item scale was 4.25 out of 5.0 indicating a high level of perceived positive group functioning. Table 

6 provides the mean scores for each individual item on the crew dynamic scale.

TABLE 6. CREW DYNAMIC SCORES

Comparisons of different corps types indicated that participants in Spike corps perceived higher levels of crew 

unity (Mean = 4.33) than participants in Non-residential (Mean = 4.16) and Residential (Mean = 4.13) corps. 

However, effect sizes (d = .28 – .33) were small.

Crew Dynamic Scale Items Mean Scores

Our crew keeps working to reach our goals 4.42

Our crew does not give up easily 4.38

Our crew is committed to its objectives 4.30

Our crew members work well together 4.23

Our crew can resolve problems 4.16

Our crew is united 4.15

Our crew members like to spend time together 4.14
11

Program Impac

Education and Employment Inte

As seen in Table 7, Corps participants demonstrated growth in their interests in obtaining additional education and 

confidence in their abilities to gain employment following their corps experience.

TABLE 7. EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT INTENTIONS OF CORPS PARTICIPANTS

Pre Post

I am interested in obtaining additional education 3.89 4.36

I am confident in my ability to get a job 3.63 4.27

KEY TALKING POINTS

• PLSC participants’ interest in 

obtaining additional education 

increased by 12.7%

• PLSC participants’ confidence 

in their own ability to get a job 

increased 18.3%
12

Targeted Program Outco

Working with PLSC Corps Administrators, six constructs were identified as targeted outcomes across all participating organizations. Table 8 provides an overview of the constructs and their associated definitions. Previously 

validated survey scales were selected to measure each construct. 

TABLE 8. EVALUATION MEASURES AND DEFINITIONS

All items on each measure employed a 1 (very untrue) to 5 (very true) response scale. Mean scores were calculated 

for each scale. To assess the changes on outcome measures from pre- to post-corps participation, participant 

scores across the two periods were compared with comparison scores measured across a similar time-period. 

Results indicated that participants saw statistically significant increases across all measures in contrast to 

comparison group members who experienced no significant changes across a similar period of time. The results 

indicated that corps participation was associated with significant positive change in participants across all measured 

outcomes. Based on measures of effect size, the magnitude of differences were all moderate to large effects. The 

greatest differences in growth were seen in Teamwork, Community Engagement, Leadership, and Environmental 

Engagement. Figure 3 provides a summary of participant and comparison change scores (post-corps minus precorps score) across all measures. Effect sizes of differences in change were all moderate to high, ranging from .45 

(Grit) to .78 (Teamwork).

Measure # of Items Definition

Community Engagement 4 Community engagement focuses on local and community involvement rather than on political activism.

Environmental Engagement6 Attitude towards the environment and pro-environmental behavior

Teamwork 8 Beliefs that one can be an effective and productive 

group member

Leadership 6 Beliefs that the respondent can be assertive, can organize a group or team, and can be action oriented. 

Self-Responsibility 6 Habit of owning and accepting consequences of personal actions

Grit 7 Perseverance and passion for long-term goals

Critical Thinking 5 Thinking that evaluates reasons and brings thought 

and actions in line with evaluations

Communication 6 Interpersonal communication skills
13

FIGURE 3. OUTCOME CHANGE SCORES
14

KEY TALKING 

POINTS

• PLSC participants’ growth in Community 

engagement was 369% more than members 

of the comparison group

• PLSC particpants’ growth in Environmental 

engagement was 386% higher than members 

of the comparison group

• PLSC participants’ growth in Teamwork 

was 566% higher than members of the 

comparison group

• PLSC participants’ growth in Leadership 

was 569% higher than members of the 

comparison group

• PLSC participants’ growth in Selfresponsibility was 248% higher than 

members of the comparison group

• PLSC participants’ growth in Grit was 

7,842% higher than members of the 

comparison group

• PLSC participants’ growth in 

Communication was 408% higher than 

members of the comparison group

• PLSC participants’ growth in Critical 

Thinking was 336% higher than members 

of the comparison group

As another means of examining the different outcomes for corps participants, Figure 6 below compares the 

pre and post scores across all outcomes for corps participants. This figure clearly illustrates the variation 

of baseline scores across the measures with Self-Responsibility having the highest baseline scores and 

Grit having the lowest. Figure 4 also allows for a comparison of growth trajectories across measures. For 

example, Grit has the flattest growth trajectory while Community Engagement and Teamwork have the 

steepest.
15

Additional Influences on Program Ou

Analyses revealed a number of differences related to the impact of corps involvement across participants based 

upon factors like age, education levels, and a variety of other factors.

Participants were divided into two age groups, Under 18 and 18 and Older. 

Results indicated the younger age group experienced significantly more growth in Environmental Engagement, 

Teamwork, Self-Responsibility, Critical Thinking, and Communication (see Figure 5). Based on measures of 

effect size, the largest differences in growth were found in Communication and Self-Responsibility.

FIGURE 4. PRE AND POST CORPS EXPERIENCE OUTCOME COMPARISONS
16

 *p < .05

Results indicated that corps participation had a greater impact on participants with less education on all outcomes 

except Grit. The strongest relationship between level of education and outcomes was related to Environmental 

Engagement. Comparisons based on race and ethnicity indicated that corps participation had a greater impact for 

participants who identified as racial and ethnic minorities, with the strongest growth in Communication. There 

were no significant differences in outcomes between male and female corps participants with the exception of 

males reporting more growth in Self-Responsibility.

ASSOCIATION OF PROGRAM COMPONENTS AND PROCESSES ON OUTCOMES

Analyses were conducted to determine whether or not any program processes were associated with differences 

the amount of growth participants experienced on the outcome measures. The components/processes considered 

in the analyses included the length of the program, overall mean crew dynamic score, and the type of program 

(e.g., Spike, Non-residential, and Residential). It is important to note that participants in all types of Corps 

programs experienced significantly higher changes in outcome scores than non-participants. Thus, this section 

is not designed as a comparison of program types. However, different programmatic elements may have unique 

associations with different outcomes. 

Correlations between crew dynamic scores and outcome change scores were generally low (range from .029 - 

.105). The highest correlation was between positive crew dynamics and growth in Grit. 

An interesting pattern emerged in the relationship between program length and outcomes. Based on distribution 

of responses, programs were broken down in three categories (2 months or less, 3-5 months, and 6 months or 

more). Participating in a program running at least six months was associated with higher growth in Community 

Engagement, Leadership, and Critical Thinking than shorter programs. However, growth in Environmental 

FIGURE 5. OUTCOME COMPARISONS BY AGE GROUP
17

Engagement, Teamwork, Leadership, Self-Responsibility, and Communication was lower for participants in 

programs lasting 3-5 months when compared to programs lasting 2 months or less and 6 months or more.

Participants were asked to indicate if they participated in a Spike program, Non-Residential program, or Residential 

program. There were no differences based on program type and growth in Community Engagement. Participants 

in Non-residential and Residential programs reported higher levels of growth than participants in Spike programs 

in nearly every other outcome except Grit. Participants in Spike and Residential programs reported higher growth 

in Grit than Non-residential program participants. Figure 6 shows differences in change scores based on program 

type.

It is important to remember that significant and meaningful growth was experienced by corps participants 

regardless of program length or program type. However, we identified an inter-related characteristic of program 

length and program type that was associated with observed differences in outcomes related to program processes. 

Corpsmembers in Spike programs were more likely to participate in programs for 3-5 months than Non-residential 

or Residential program participants. Spike program participants reported higher baseline levels on outcome 

measures than participants in other program types and thus had less room to grow through program participation. 

Figure 7 below shows the comparatively high growth in combined outcomes across all three program types and 

comparison sample.

FIGURE 6. PROGRAM TYPE COMPARISONS
18

FIGURE 7. CHANGE IN OVERALL OUTCOMES BY PROGRAM TYPE

Conclusio

Participating in one of the conversation corps program included in this evaluation appears to have produced a 

variety of benefits from increases in targeted outcomes (e.g., leadership, self-responsibility, etc.) to intentions to 

pursue additional education. Participants also reported high levels of satisfaction with interpersonal aspects of 

the experience. Significant growth was experienced for all participants, regardless of specific demographic or 

program characteristics across all targeted outcomes.

The data from this evaluation provide participating corps organizations with a good baseline from which to assess 

the impact of future programming innovations or management changes. Continued evaluation work will facilitate 

the ongoing assessment of program impacts and the identification of key programming processes. 
19

Follow-up Res

Participants were sent an email approximately 90 days after completing their respective corps program inviting 

them to complete an online follow-up survey. Through the provided survey link in the email, 348 surveys were 

opened, and 290 of those were submitted. Of the submitted surveys, 226 were useable for data analysis. This is 

attributable to individuals starting the survey but only completing small portions and individuals completing the 

follow-up survey who did not complete the initial end of program survey. The following data is the result of those 

226 useable surveys. Table 7 provides a breakdown of follow-up respondents with useable data by corps.

TABLE 9. FOLLOW-UP RESPONDENTS BY CORPS

Analyses were conducted to compare pre-program, post-program and follow-up data across different measures. 

First, we examined changes in participants’ intentions to pursue further education. Intention to pursue further 

education declined significantly between post-program and follow up. However, follow up scores remained 

significantly higher than pre-program scores.

Group #

Montana Conservation Corps 80

Northwest Youth Corps 39

Rocky Mountain Youth Corps 35

Los Angeles Corps 26

Student Conservation Association 21

American Youth Works 9

Coconino Rural Environmental Corps 6

Southwest Conservation Corps 6

California Conservation Corps 3

Colorado Youth Corps Association 1
20

Since completing their corps experience, 47.8% of respondents indicated that they had enrolled in a school or 

program to gain additional education. Of this group, 20.4% were pursuing undergraduate education at a four-year 

university, 8.8% were enrolled in a community or junior college, and 7.5% were either in high school or pursuing 

a GED.

Next, we examined participants’ confidence in their abilities to secure jobs. Similarly, scores on job confidence 

declined significantly between the time immediately following the corps experience and the follow up survey. 

However, follow up scores remained significantly higher than pre-corps experience.
21

Since the conclusion of their corps experiences, 51.8% of respondents indicated they had successfully obtained 

employment, 25.2% were not seeking employment, and 23.0% were still seeking employment at the time of the 

follow up survey.

Analyses were conducted to compare pre-program, post-program and follow-up data across all the outcome 

measures. No significant changes occurred from post-program to follow-up on community engagement, 

environmental engagement, teamwork, grit, or critical thinking. Follow-up scores decreased significantly from 

post-program scores but were still higher than pre-program scores for the leadership, self-responsibility, and 

communication measures. Table 8 includes mean scores for all measures across a time periods.

TABLE 10. FOLLOW-UP DATA COMPARISON

The follow-up results were interesting because it is not uncommon to detect an end of program peak in selfreported outcome data. Participants are usually especially excited about the program at its conclusion and some of 

this excitement can wear off after they return home. That scores in five of the eight outcome measures remained 

at post-corps levels 90 days following the conclusion of corps experiences was encouraging. Additionally, 

even though scores in leadership, self-responsibility, and communication declined from post-corps scores; they 

remained significantly higher than reported pre-corps scores.

Measure Pre-Corps Post-Corps Follow-Up

Community Engagement 3.13 4.01 3.95

Environmental Engagement 3.68 4.25 4.31

Teamwork 3.83 4.40 4.35

Leadership 3.61 4.21 4.11

Self-Responsibility 4.19 4.56 4.43

Grit 3.16 3.36 3.30

Critical Thinking 3.74 4.18 4.14

Communication 3.92 4.29 4.15
APPENDIX A: Evaluatio
23

Evaluation Proced

Action-Oriented R

Our approach followed many of the tenets of action-oriented research where the population under study contributes 

to the production of the research. Action-oriented approaches to research emerge from the realization that complete 

objectivity is unattainable in the social sciences. However, it provides significant potential to bridge the divide 

between theory and practice. For this evaluation, researchers and PLSC organizations collaborated in identifying 

relevant outcomes to be evaluated as well as developing practical approaches to data collection and analysis. 

PLSC organizations were engaged as partners in the research process, rather than simply subjects of or settings 

for the research being conducted. By using this approach, we sought to reduce barriers to participating in research 

previously identified by PLSC organizations and to build PLSC’s capacity to develop and sustain evaluation and 

research systems in order to improve programs and services in the future.

CITATIONS TO SUPPORT ACTION-ORIENTED RESEARCH APPROACH

•Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2, 34-46.

•Rodríguez, L. F., & Brown, T. M. (2009). From voice to agency: Guiding principles for participatory action 

research with youth. [Article]. New Directions for Youth Development, 2009(123), 19-34.

•Small, S. A. (2005). Bridging research and practice in the family and human sciences. Family Relations, 54(2), 

320-334.

RES

For the purposes of this study, we used a quasi-experimental design using a general public sample comparison 

group. The use of a comparison group allows researchers to compare experiences of PLSC participants with the 

general public. The comparison group was recruited from a national sample of Survey Monkey online panel 

members between the ages of 14 and 26 that 

were pre-screened to match demographic 

profiles (e.g., age, education level) as the 

participant group. This population was 

chosen for recruitment because we wanted 

a sample that represented the general 

public as much as possible in the same 

demographic as the participants in the 

experimental group. The use of online 

panels as a nationally reflective sample have 

demonstrated many of the same properties 

and limitations as other methods of 

collecting self-report data from household 

surveys or phone interviews. While the 

use of a randomized control group is often 

idealized as the gold standard in evaluation 

designs, our approach has proved to 

be a viable alternative. Additionally, 

randomized control studies are not without 
24

inherent disadvantages. For example, randomized control studies often require narrowing comparable traits to 

the extent they have limited external validity, and conducting randomized control trials can be very expensive 

and take much longer to complete; limiting the applicability and usability to organizations. It is also important 

to note that, according to The New England Journal of Medicine, using randomized control designs instead of 

other acceptable methods does not always guarantee higher quality evidence. Randomized control is especially 

problematic when using waitlists for random assignment as it is difficult to monitor the behaviors of the control 

sample that does not enroll in the treatment program.

CITATIONS TO SUPPORT QUASI-EXPERIMENTTAL EVALUATION DESIGN AND USE OF ONLINE PANELS AS GENERAL POPULATION COMPARISON GROUPS

•Benson, K., & Hartz, A.J. (2000). A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled 

 trials. New England Journal of Medicine, 342(25), 1878-1886.

•Concato, J., Shah, N., & Horwitz, R. I. (2000). Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and 

the hierarchy of research designs. New England Journal of Medicine, 342(25). 1887-1892

•Rothwell, P. M. (2005). External validity of randomised controlled trials: to whom do the results of this 

trial apply? Lancet, 365(9453). 82-93.

•Basil, M. D., Basil, D. Z., & Deshpande, S. (2009). A Comparison of Consumers and Dieticians: Nutrition 

Focus, Food Choice, and Mental Accounting. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 21(3), 283-297.

•Vining, J. (1992). Environmental Emotions and Decisions. Environment and Behavior, 24(1), 3-34.

•Taylor, S. M., Ward, P., Zabriskie, R., Hill, B., & Hanson, C. (2012). Influences on Active Family Leisure 

and a Healthy Lifestyle Among Adolescents. Leisure Sciences, 34(4), 332-349.

•Ward, P., & Buswell, L. (2009). Review of online data collection techiques in leisure research. Paper 

presented at the National Recreation and Parks Association National Congress: Leisure Research Symposium, 

Salt Lake City, UT.

RETROSPECT

Survey items used a retrospective pre-test design that asked participants to report their attitudes and knowledge 

following the program as well as before they began the program (e.g., Before participating in the conservation 

corps, how would you have responded to this statement?). Compared to traditional pre-post designs, this approach 

allows participants to more accurately report changes in conditions because they have a better understanding 

of their baseline condition. This is particularly true in the case for measures of perceptions, motivations, and 

intentions. For members of the comparison group, a standard time was chosen to represent a similar elapsed time 

to length of PLSC programs (e.g., How would you have responded to this statement two months ago?). Like a true 

control group, it is assumed that the comparison group would receive no treatment (i.e., corps participation) and 

therefore would expect no changes in perceptions and attitudes other than those that might occur naturally over 

a similar period of time. A qualifying question was asked of comparison group members to filter out individuals 

that may have participated in a similar experience to corps members during the time period.

CITATIONS TO SUPPORT RETROSPECTIVE PRE-POST INSTRUMENT

•Pratt, C. C., McGuigan, W. M., & Katzev, A. R. (2000). Measuring program outcomes: Using retrospective 

pretest methodology. American Journal of Evaluation, 21(3), 341-350.

•Davis, G. A. (2003). Using a retrospective pre-post questionnaire to determine program impact. Journal 

of Extension, 41(4). 

•Hill, L. G., & Betz, D. L. (2005). Revisiting the Retrospective Pretest. American Journal of Evaluation, 

26(4), 
APPENDIX B: Open
26

Open Ended 

Please share with us one or two sentences that best summarize your conservation corps 

experience. - Open-Ended Response

Categories: 

I had a Positive Impact:

•	 Was great. I made a big difference.

•	 18 MONTHS OD SHARED DIRT AND SWEAT, 

LAUGHTER AND TEARS. We left positive 

mark on the world and ourselves.This crew was 

the most inspiring, amazing experience of my 

life. I enjoyed every bit of it, from the people 

to the work to the lifestyle, and I fully intend to 

participate again.

•	 Participating in the [corps] has confirmed my 

love of nature, conservation, and environmental 

work. My life has been changed for the better. I 

now know that I have the strength and ability to 

achieve anything I set my mind to. This program 

has opened my world to the impact I can have 

and what can be done. Thank you!

•	 I like knowing the impact I was making on the environment. It makes me feel good helping rather 

than doing nothing this summer.

Experience and Knowledge:

•	 A wonderful, beautiful, eye opening and life changing experience.

•	 I loved my time with [the corps]. Spending time with my crew and working with my crew was an 

amazing experience. I would like to work for [the corps] or a similar program in the future.

•	 While working with the conservation crew I was provided experiences working in the outdoors 

which allowed me to further my interest in this field.

•	 My conservation corps experience was amazing. I feel like I have more knowledge now 

compared to when I first started working.

•	 My experience with [the corps] was not what I expected. The experience was much better than I 

was expecting.

Fun and Friendship:

•	 My experience was AMAZING. I made many new friends and meet great people along the way.

•	 It was fun, exciting, and hard. It gave me a good chance to meet new people

•	 Enjoyed everything and everyone. I learned a lot from this program and hope to retain it forever.

•	 I met some amazing people and learned a lot about camping and conservation. This opened my 

eyes to an entirely new and incredible outdoor culture.

Well-roundedness: 

•	 My experience allowed me to learn hard work, build character and greater understand 

community.

•	 I learned a whole lot about myself and my own priorities and goals. I saw and did a lot of cool 

things.

•	 I gained valuable skills and training for a future career in the forest or public lands management. 
27

I also made valuable contacts and was able to network with valuable project partners and 

potential employers.

•	 My experience [in the corps] was one of the best. Not only did I learn about the place I live in, I 

also learned about leadership, work ethic, and so much more. I would definitely come back!

•	 I really enjoyed it because it really improved my outlook on groups similar to this. It really has 

improved most of my leadership skills and others such in that genera of leadership.

•	 I felt that the conservation corps experience was very beneficial to me in multiple ways. I learned 

new skills in communication, self-confidence, and teamwork that will be used throughout my life.

•	 My experience was a lot of fun and it taught me many skills that I will be able to apply in my 

daily life.

•	 I learned a lot more to be a team player, and how to become a better leader. I now know how to 

be a better nature-outdoors person

•	 I gained valuable social skills and education in conservation work and the environment. 

•	 I learned a lot about work ethic, responsibility, and how to work at a faster pace. This has been a 

good work experience to help prepare me for future jobs and getting into a good college.

•	 The corps world has helped me to gain confidence in myself and gain valuable skills

Work Ethic:

•	 It was a definite learning experience and I took a lot away from the program that I feel I will be 

able to apply to everyday life. In particular my work ethic has drastically improved.

•	 It was really helpful for me because my work ethic got a lot better and that is really important for 

me!

•	 I worked hard with other kids and got to know them well. I also learned a lot of work ethics not 

previously established.

•	 It was a great way to improve my leadership skills as well as my overall work ethic.

•	 My conservation experience has opened many new opportunities to me as well as knowledge. I 

have become a strong leader and my work ethic is outstanding.

•	 My work ethic has increased dramatically. I suggest working for the corps to everyone.

•	 Honestly, it was another great experience. I feel that it has benefitted my work ethic and 

philosophy yet again. However, the crew (although I love them) was not united and talked about 

me behind my back as well as others.

•	 Great way to learn skills and work ethics. Helps you prepare for the real world.

•	 This experience has changed me in my group work and in my work ethic. It had been very 1un 

and hard and I would like to come back soon.

Well-rounded experience:

•	 My conservation corps experience was well rounded in many aspects of professionalism, educations, leadership and group work. I learned valuable skills and developed important qualities for 

myself being a part of the corp.

•	 My conservation corps experience was an experience of a lifetime. I learned to live with a group 

of people that I have never met before and became a family at the end. I have learned to communicate much better than I did before I started. I learned to work and clean a chainsaw. I have 

learned about myself and grown as an individual through this program than I ever have before. I 

have grown mentally, physically and emotionally stronger and healthier through this experience 

and knowing how much my body and mind are capable of doing.

•	 My conservation corps experience was literally the time of my life. I loved the landscape, the 
28

people both on my crew and the locals or tourists of the area, the wildlife and nature experiences, as well as the work.

Environmental stewardship and attitudes:

•	 I have worked and learned to be a better steward of the environment.

•	 [The corps] was such a great opportunity, I loved the chance to meet new people and become 

great friends with all of them. I loved the opportunity to learn about ways we can help the 

community and the environment.

•	 Joining [the corps] has changed my views on leadership and how much we, as young people, can 

make a difference

•	 I learned to appreciate the trails and land taken advantage of. I met a lot of awesome new 

people.

•	 I get an opportunity to work outside and improve the areas around my home.

•	 My experience with [the corps] was really great. It gave me a new outlook on the environment.

•	 During my experience with the conservation corps program, I would say that this program is 

very educational and focuses on restoring the environment and the habitat, the community, and 

also focuses on the main problem and what can be done for the conflict to be solved and gives 

you the experience that also gives you new skills after the program has been completed by the 

individual.

•	 I learned a lot, in various aspects. How to be a better leader, understand my leadership style. I 

had a lot of fun learning about new ways to protect the environment and I will keep doing so for 

hopefully the rest of my life.

•	 I had a lot of fun doing [the corps] and I learned a lot about the environment and how to 

conserve it.

•	 I’ve learned how to take care of the environment.

Suggestions for Improvement:

•	 My [corps] experience was loud, irratating, and no one says sorry or thank you. I liked it, but 

every weekend should be taken off to go home.

•	 To feel like you’re making a difference, the work has to be important, and you have to be 

appreciated.

•	 I enjoyed the work and loved many of the sights. In the future I wish to be a crew leader. There 

was some conflict with my crwe members in understanding each other and there was some 

favoritism. Other than that, it was great!
APPENDIX C:
30

2013 Conservation Corps Comparison Survey

The survey should only take about 15-20 minutes to complete. Your responses are voluntary and will be kept 

confidential.

Section 1: Reflective Statements

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS: The following items ask you to respond to statements about your current

and past attitudes, knowledge, and behavior towards a variety of topics. Each item has two parts:

•	 The first part is about your current attitudes, knowledge, intentions, etc..

•	 The second part asks you about your attitudes, knowledge, intentions, etc. before participating in 

a conservation corps program.

Please use the following scale to respond to each statement. Circle the number that best describes how true each 

statement is for you. Only circle one number

1 2 3 4 5

Very 

Untrue Untrue

Somewhat

True True

Very 

True

Section 1a – Future Plans

1 I am interested in obtaining additional education. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 I am confident in my ability to get a job. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

Section 1b - Community 

1 I am very interested in being a part of my community. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 I feel I have the ability to make a difference in my community. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

3 I try to find the time to make a positive difference in my community. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

4 I am very interested in joining local groups, projects or clubs. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5
31

Section 1c – The Environment

Please use the following scale to respond to each statement. Circle the number that best describes how true each 

statement is for you. Only circle one number

1 2 3 4 5

Very 

Untrue Untrue

Somewhat

True True

Very 

True

1 I like to learn about the environment 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 I think it is important to recycle 1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

3 I would spend time working to fix problems in nature 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

4 I am interested in learning new ways to help protect the environment 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

5 I would give some of my own money to help protect the environment 1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

6 I like to spend time outside 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

7 I would help to clean up green areas in my neighborhood 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5
32

Section 1d – Personal Attributes

Please use the following scale to respond to each statement. Circle the number that best describes how true each 

statement is for you. Only circle one number

1 2 3 4 5

Very 

Untrue Untrue

Somewhat

True True

Very 

True

1 I can be a good group leader 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 I can help a group be successful 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

3 I can be happy even when my group has decided to do something I don’t want to do 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

4 I can appreciate opinions that are different from my own 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

5 I can place group goals above the things that I want 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

6 I can cooperate with others 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

7 I can be a team-player in a small group 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

8 I know I can get along with other people in a small group 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5
33

Section 1e - Personal Attributes cont.

Please use the following scale to respond to each statement. Circle the number that best describes how true each 

statement is for you. Only circle one number

1 2 3 4 5

Very 

Untrue Untrue

Somewhat 

True True

Very 

True

1 Once I know what needs to be done, I am good at planning how to do it. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 When I see something that needs to be done, I try to get my friends to work on it 

with me. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

3 I am pretty good at organizing a team of people to do a project. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

4 If I’m the leader of a group, I make sure that everyone in the group feels important. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

5 I feel like I can stand up for what I think is right, even if my friends disagree. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

6 When I see something that is wrong, I try to change it. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5
34

Section 3f - Personal Attributes cont.

Please use the following scale to respond to each statement. Circle the number that best describes how true each 

statement is for you. Only circle one number

1 2 3 4 5

Very 

Untrue Untrue

Somewhat

True True

Very 

True

1 I accept responsibility for my actions 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 I own up to my mistakes 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

3 I don’t blame others for my mistakes 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

4 If I mess something up, I try to make things right 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

5 If I make a mistake, I try to fix it 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

6 If I hurt someone’s feelings, I apologize 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5
35

Section 3g -Personal Attributes cont.

Please use the following scale to respond to each statement. Circle the number that best describes how true each 

statement is for you. Only circle one number

1 2 3 4 5

Very 

Untrue Untrue

Somewhat

True True

Very 

True

1 I often set a goal but later choose to pursue a different one. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 New ideas and projects sometimes distract me from previous ones. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

3 I have been obsessed with a certain idea or project for a short time but later lost 

interest. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

4 I have difficulty maintaining my focus on projects that take more than a few months 

to complete. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

5 I finish whatever I begin. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

6 Setbacks don’t discourage me. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

7 I am diligent. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

8 I am a hard worker. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5
36

Section 3h – Personal Attributes cont.

Please use the following scale to respond to each statement. Circle the number that best describes how true each 

statement is for you. Only circle one number. 

1 I can easily express my thoughts on a problem 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 I usually have more than one source of information before making a decision 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

3 I compare ideas when thinking about a topic 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

4 I keep my mind open to different ideas when planning to make a decision. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

5 I am able to tell the best way of handling a problem 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5
37

Section 3i – When I communicate with others. . .

Please use the following scale to respond to each statement. Circle the number that best describes how true each 

statement is for you. Only circle one number. 

1 2 3 4 5

Very 

Untrue Untrue

Somewhat

True True

Very 

True

When I communicate with others:

1 I try to keep eye contact 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

2 I recognize when two people are trying to say the same thing, but in different ways. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

3 I try to see the other person’s point of view. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

4 I change the way I talk to someone based on my relationship with them (i.e., friend, 

parent, teacher, other adult, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

5 I organize thoughts in my head before speaking. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5

6 I make sure I understand what another person is saying before I respond. 1 2 3 4 5

How would you have responded to this statement two months ago? 1 2 3 4 5
38

Section 2

1. How involved have you been over the last year in similar programs where you work in the outdoors or learn 

about the environment?

a. Not at all involved 

b. Minimally involved 

c. Somewhat involved 

d. Very involved 

e. Heavily involved

6. What is your home residence ZIP code? _________________

7. Which of the following best describes the community in which you grew up?

a. Urban (generally inside a city or urbanized area with a population greater than 100,000)

b. Small Urban/Suburban (generally a city or urban area outside a principal city with a population less than 

100,000)

c. Rural Fringe (Generally inside a town or rural area that is within 10 miles from an urban area)

d. Rural Distant (Inside a town or rural area more than 10 miles from the nearest urban area)

8. Sex? Female_____ Male_____

9. How old are you? _______

10. What is your date of birth? ____/____/____

12. Please indicate your current education status.

a. No longer in school

b. Continuing in school

13. Please indicate the highest level of school you have completed.

a. Less than high school

b. High school graduate

c. Some college

d. College graduate

e. Post-college/Graduate School

14. Are you of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?

a. No b. Yes
39

15. What is your race? (Circle all that apply).

a. White

b. Black or African American

c. American Indian or Alaska Native

d. Asian

e. Pacific Islander

f. Other race

16. What is the highest grade your mother completed in school?

a. Less than high school

b. High school graduate

c. Some college

d. College graduate

e. Post-college/Graduate School

17. What is the highest grade your father completed in school?

 a. Less than high school

 b. High school graduate

 c. Some college

 d. College graduate

 e. Post-college/Graduate School

Thank you for your willingness to help with this evaluation!