Training evaluation report, first aid course, September 2026, Marrowby Engineering

Training evaluation report on reaction, learning and behaviour after a course

A training evaluation report has to show whether a course was worth its cost: whether people turned up and rated it, whether they learned what it taught, and whether they did anything differently afterwards. This four page report on a first aid course for 24 staff measures all three, with attendance, a reaction chart, before and after test results, a four week follow up and five recommendations.

Create a document with OneCraft4 A4 pages, editable, then download as a PDF

The document, page by page

Every page as it renders and as it prints, with nothing summarised. Read the wording before you reuse it.

Marrowby Engineering · Training evaluation · First aid course, September 2026Page 1 of 4

Marrowby Engineering · Training evaluation · First aid course, September 2026Page 2 of 4

Marrowby Engineering · Training evaluation · First aid course, September 2026Page 3 of 4

Marrowby Engineering · Training evaluation · First aid course, September 2026Page 4 of 4

Training evaluation report: first aid course

Course

Two day first aid course with CPR, external accredited provider

Dates

Tuesday 8 and Wednesday 9 September 2026, on site

Participants

24 enrolled from the workshop, stores and office

Evaluated by

Priyanka Osei, HR and Safety Coordinator

Report date

Friday 9 October 2026

Summary. The course did what it was bought to do. 23 of 24 staff completed it, all 23 were assessed competent in CPR, and the average written test score rose from 54 percent before the course to 88 percent after. Four weeks later, 19 of 23 said they felt confident to perform CPR, against 7 before, and all three first aid incidents since the course were handled and logged by trained staff. Reaction was strong on content and trainer and weak on the venue. Five recommendations follow.

23 of 24

Completed

88%

Average post test

23 of 23

CPR competent

$198

Cost per person trained

1. How the course was evaluated

The evaluation follows the first three levels of a common four level model: reaction, how participants rated the course; learning, what they could do at the end; and behaviour, what they did differently back at work. The fourth level, results for the business, cannot be measured fairly after four weeks and three incidents, so it is left to the annual safety review.

Level	Measured by	When
Reaction	Six item feedback form, scored 1 to 5	End of day 2
Learning	20 question written test before and after; CPR assessment	Start of day 1, end of day 2
Behaviour	Follow up survey, supervisor check, first aid log	Tuesday 6 October, four weeks on

2. Attendance

Team	Enrolled	Day 1	Completed
Workshop	14	14	13
Stores and dispatch	6	6	6
Office	4	4	4
All staff	24	24	23

One workshop employee left sick on the afternoon of day 1 and is booked onto the provider's public course on Thursday 22 October. With 23 trained, every shift now has at least four trained first aiders on site, against a minimum of two set in the site first aid assessment.

3. Reaction

All 23 who completed the course returned the feedback form. Scores are the average on a scale where 1 is poor and 5 is excellent. Relevance and the trainer scored highest; the training room, a cleared meeting room with no space for six people on the floor at once, scored lowest, and 9 of 23 comments mentioned it.

Average reaction score by item, out of 5 (n = 23)

Practising on the manikins until it was automatic was the part that mattered. I would not have known what to do last month.

Stores team member, feedback form

4. Learning

Participants sat the same 20 question written test at the start of day 1 and the end of day 2. The pass mark is 80 percent. 21 of 23 passed at the first attempt and both others passed a supervised resit the next morning. The CPR assessment was practical, on an adult manikin with a feedback device, and every participant met the standard for compression depth and rate.

Measure	Before	After	Change
Average written test score	54%	88%	+34 points
Lowest written test score	25%	70%	+45 points
Passed written test, 80% mark	2 of 23	21 of 23	+19
CPR assessed competent	Not tested	23 of 23

The weakest topic after the course was recognising stroke and when to call an ambulance, answered correctly by 15 of 23. It is the topic most likely to fade, and the first one the refresher should cover.

5. Behaviour four weeks on

Measure	Before course	Four weeks on
Feel confident to perform CPR	7 of 23	19 of 23
Know the nearest first aid kit and defibrillator	11 of 23	22 of 23
First aid incidents logged completely	1 of 4	3 of 3

Three first aid incidents occurred in the four weeks: a burn from a hot workpiece, a cut hand and an eye irritation in stores. Each was treated by a trained first aider and logged in full, with the treatment given and whether the person returned to work. In the four weeks before the course, only one of four incidents was logged completely. Supervisors also report that two staff restocked kits on their own initiative after noticing missing items.

6. Recommendations

No.	Recommendation	Owner	By
1	Book a yearly CPR refresher for all 23, opening with stroke recognition	HR and Safety	Sep 2027
2	Use the training centre floor space, not the meeting room, for future courses	HR and Safety	Next course
3	Add a monthly first aid kit check to the stores checklist	Stores supervisor	Mon 2 Nov 2026
4	Train the remaining workshop employee on the public course	Workshop manager	Thu 22 Oct 2026
5	Review first aid incidents and outcomes at the annual safety review	HR and Safety	Mar 2027

The course cost $4,560, at $190 for each of the 24 places, or $198 for each of the 23 people who completed it. On the evidence above, it should be repeated as a refresher rather than redesigned.

Section by section

What each section is for, so you can keep the ones you need and drop the rest.

Course details and summary: Course, dates, participants, evaluator, the headline results and four figures.
1. How the course was evaluated: Reaction, learning and behaviour, how each was measured and when.
2. Attendance: Enrolled, day 1 and completed by team, and first aid cover per shift.
3. Reaction: Six average scores as a bar chart, the venue problem and a participant quote.
4. Learning: Written test before and after, the CPR assessment and the weakest topic.
5. Behaviour four weeks on: Confidence, knowing where kits are, and incidents logged before and after.
6. Recommendations: Five actions with owners and dates, and the cost per person trained.

How to adapt this document

First, for a course without a formal test, such as leadership or customer service training, replace the learning table with a short scenario exercise scored by the trainer, and keep a before and after comparison. Second, choose a behaviour measure your records already capture, such as complaints resolved at first contact or safety observations completed, so the follow up does not depend on self report alone. Third, for an online course, add completion time and drop out by module to the attendance table, because unfinished modules are the online equivalent of leaving at lunch.

What the numbers can and cannot show

Twenty three people and three incidents are a small sample, so the report avoids percentages where counts are clearer and does not claim the course prevented any injury. The before and after comparison uses the same people and the same test, which is the strongest evidence a small course can produce. Business results, such as fewer lost days, need a full year and are left to the annual safety review.

What makes this document work

Each level has its own evidence

The method table pairs reaction with a six item form, learning with a test before and after plus a CPR assessment, and behaviour with a survey, a supervisor check and the first aid log four weeks on. Nobody mistakes good feedback for proof the course worked.

Before and after on the same test

The same 20 question test at the start and end moves the average from 54 to 88 percent and the passes from 2 to 21 of 23. The report also names the weakest topic, stroke recognition at 15 of 23, and makes it the first item of the refresher.

Behaviour is shown in real incidents

Three first aid incidents in the following four weeks were all treated by trained staff and logged in full, against one of four logged completely before. That is the change the business paid for, and it is stated with numbers, not impressions.

Questions people ask

What are the four levels of training evaluation?

The widely used model looks at reaction, how participants felt about the training; learning, what knowledge or skill they gained; behaviour, whether they apply it at work; and results, the effect on the organisation. Most evaluations measure the first two well and the last two poorly. This report covers three and explains why results are left to the annual review.

Is a feedback form enough to evaluate training?

No. Happy participants are a good sign but say little about what they learned or will do. Pair the form with a test of knowledge or skill and a follow up some weeks later. Here the venue scored 3.6 out of 5 while learning results were excellent, which shows how far reaction and learning can differ.

How long after training should behaviour be checked?

Long enough for people to have had a chance to use what they learned, usually four to twelve weeks. Too soon and nothing has happened; too late and other causes muddy the picture. Four weeks worked here because first aid incidents happen often enough in a workshop to provide evidence.

How many trained first aiders does a workplace need?

It depends on the number of workers, the hazards, shift patterns and how far the site is from emergency services, and the law in your country. Most regulators expect a first aid needs assessment that sets the number. This site's assessment set a minimum of two per shift, and the course brought it to four.

How do I work out the cost per person trained?

Divide the total cost by the number who completed, not the number booked, because places lost to absence still cost money. Here $4,560 for 24 places is $190 a place but $198 for each of the 23 who completed. Add wages for time spent training if you want the full cost of a course.

Build your own in about a minute

The button below opens the generator with this use case already described. Change the wording to match your own, generate, then edit anything you like.

Make one like this

Sources

Written and checked by the OneCraft team. Last checked 5 October 2026.