Special evaluation of the Guatemala CAPS project with an emphasis on impact on trainees and their significant others -- including a review of predecessor programs

External evaluation focuses on the project's impact, as determined by a questionnaire administered to 101 of 1,723 scholars participating in the program from FY85 to FY87, including impact on their families and friends; it also reviews leadership training programs of the 1960's and 1970's and assesses knowledge of and interest in CAPS on Capitol Hill. Strongly influenced by its predecessor programs at Loyola University (New Orleans) and Rafael Landivar University in Guatemala City, CAPS/Guatemala has reached out to the disadvantaged (women, Indians, and especially campesinos) and offers courses targeted to identified needs. It employs a case study method adapted to Guatemalan problems and conditions, and has added in-country courses and other activities to expand the follow-up program. Still, there is ongoing concern whether support for returned scholars is sufficient, and whether the project will result in "critical masses" of change agents to serve in Guatemala's communities and subregions. The questionnaire was used to determine measurable impacts in four areas. (1) The program was found to have improved the individual lives of returned scholars, and of their families and friends, but there was no evidence of change in community situation. (2) Scholars and their close associates believe that action, both individual and collaborative, can lead to positive changes for themselves and their community. These beliefs seem to be the result of program experience. (3) Characteristics of U.S. society related to wealth, power, and organization were rated highest by scholars, their families, and their friends. The quality rated by all three groups as least characteristic of the United States was compassion. Friends of scholars tended to see less justice, honesty, and opportunity in U.S. society than the other two groups, but family members rated the United States highly as a land of opportunity. Satisfaction with the experience of studying in the United States was widespread. (4) Scholars see far less shortfalls in U.S. democracy than the other two groups. This attitude seems to be the result of having actually lived and studied in the United States. The questionnaire also revealed that: (a) the responses given by men and women are strikingly similar; (b) those engaged in technical occupations see their personal situation as more improved by the program than do those engaged in manual labor; and (c) there is in all three groups a recognizable subgroup that is resistant to change, although whether this means they are more cynical or more realistic is unclear. Findings of the evaluation, whose methodology should serve as a model for future evaluations of the program, verify the assumption that returned scholars do, as a result of the scholarship experience, influence the attitudes and perceptions of their close associates regarding democracy, change, and other matters related to the development of Guatemalan society. Further, this impact is measurable in quantitative terms and can be traced over time. Future efforts should build on this foundation.