The client was experiencing a lack of consistency between the original grant proposal and the final outcome of the grant-funded activity. For example, the provider promised to achieve certain objectives, yet some objectives were only partial fulfilled or not fulfilled.
The ability to conform to the grant proposal was important to the client to reconcile the appropriate use of the grant funds and also to make decisions about providing future grant funding to certain providers who did not deliver on their promises without adequate and reasonable explanations.
Key: Designing Customized Solutions
The client chose CME Peer Review because of their expertise in designing customized solutions to evaluate CME activities, as well as their knowledge of adult learning, instructional design, methods of conducting CME grant activities, and evaluation of outcomes to ensure program objectives were achieved in a measurable manner.
The client provided CME Peer Review with original grant proposals and their final reports. CME Peer Review audited, compared and documented variances between the original proposals and the final outcomes achieved.
As a result of the audit,CME Peer Review created a grant reconciliation system, including adding questions to more effectively compare the grant proposals to the final outcomes.
The client incorporated the new system into the grant reconciliation process and was now able to easily determine if the final outcomes compared to the original grant proposal. This enabled the client to more easily document the results of grant funding and to make more informed decisions about future grant support for organizations who didn’t deliver what they promised. Through this process, CME Peer Review was able to enhance their VerifyCE tool to more effectively evaluate CE activities.