Evaluator's Dilemma and Workouts

I've been feeling rather tired since Monday, and I decided to skip the gym on Tuesday, and just did 35 minutes of cardio yesterday before going home. I've taken a nap two days in a row, and made it a point to drink more water. I felt a lot better this afternoon and was able to do a full workout and lead an abs class again. I think I've just needed a little time to adjust to the change in schedule and stress. The heat has also been a little worse the last few days. I had adjusted nicely, but the almost-August temperatures, especially around noon in the sun, are a challenge.

Today I committed myself to a few more teaching activities: English at 4pm on Mondays and Wednesdays for any interested professors (and anyone else, but I'm not advertising) and abdominal workouts at the gym at 6pm on Tuesdays and Thursdays. We'll see how this new schedule goes...

I've started writing up parts of my evaluation already, during the class sessions. One of the first issues I'm tackling is sustainability or possibility of expansion in light of the low local involvement we face. It's a real problem, and I'd like to address it as such, but even as I write, I realize that I don't want to be responsible for a donor not giving money to a project I think is very worthwhile. In fact, if it is handled well, the program may very well lead to increased involvement and participation, but it's not an obvious likelihood. We're dealing with a small program, in some ways an experiment, and the level of funding and other resources it requires are still pretty minimal. At this size, the potential losses or gains are fairly small. But if you're looking at a large program, with millions or billions of dollars, affecting huge numbers of people? If a project is successful, it's great to be able to measure that and recommend that it continue or expand. On the other side, though, who wants to be the one responsible for cutting a program that, while it may not be generally efficient, significantly impacts at least some people who really need it?

I guess the goal is to find ways to pinpoint the weaknesses in worthwhile programs that can be improved while emphasizing the overall value, so as not to discourage potential investment. When highlighting problems, though, you have to hope that opponents of decent projects don't grasp at the weaknesses as excuses to end the whole thing- a realistic concern. And if a program is cut in favor of another, you have to hope that more people will benefit more from the change. But it's a lot easier to make those decisions when you're not the one losing aid...