Participant Assessment and Selection Process

• At least 25 candidates should be forwarded to the College for assessments to allow the selection committee a sufficient pool of eligible applicants to choose from.
• The assessment process that was followed was too in depth and potentially overwhelming when considering the target group. A one – on – one interview combined with the TABE results would be sufficient to make an informed selection.
• The participants for Bridging the Gap are individuals who have barriers in finding employment. They have many social issues and this has to be recognized. The Bridging the Gap model outlines a very comprehensive assessment and selection process, but based on observations in implementing Bridging the Gap, Pilot Phase II, some participants selected were not the most suitable participants for the program.
• It is recommended to have a probationary period and inform participants that they can be removed from the program based on performance and attitude. Participants should be monitored on an ongoing basis and assessed in the first four weeks of the Program by the participant selection sub–committee.

Design and Adjust the Training Component

• There should have been more clarity surrounding the expectations and role of the College. Beyond hiring an instructor to deliver a curriculum, it should have been clearly communicated that an actual curriculum had to be designed from scratch. It is crucial that the College understand that the instructor is responsible for curriculum design in addition to curriculum delivery.
• The instructors at each site should work more closely together in the preliminary stages to keep each other on the right track and to provide support and encouragement to each other.
• The initial meeting with Walter Smith should have been with all the academic instructors together to ensure that everyone received the same message. This would also help to create consistency between sites.