The Resilient Educators (REds) Support Programme was compiled by the North West University in 2006. The aim of the REds Programme is to promote the quality of life of HIV and AIDS-affected educators. It is therefore geared towards assisting educators to cope more effectively with the challenges of the pandemic by supporting them to respond adaptively to a teaching context that demands responses more typical of counsellors or social workers, or medical personnel trained to prevent HIV (Theron, Geyer, Strydom&Delport, 2008:84). The content of the REds Programme is grouped into nine modules. Each module provides thematic structure, background information and interactive activities. Since its conception in 2006 and subsequent implementation, REds has continued to evolve, being continually informed by empirical research, with the future aim of disseminating REds to the National Department of Basic Education in South Africa (Theron et al., 2008:84-85). Continual refinement and development of REds have thus been occurring to the extent that the fourth version has been implemented in 2009. REds has to date been implemented in four South African provinces, namely Gauteng, Mpumalanga, Free State and North West Provinces, but not in the Northern Cape. However, its extended implementation in the Northern Cape may deem invaluable to the standardisation of the programme for the South African educational context The goal of the research project was to determine the effectiveness of the REds Support Programme (fourth version) in enhancing the quality of life of HIV and AIDS-affected educators in the Northern Cape. The researcher embarked upon programme evaluation as a type of applied research. The study utilised the triangulation mixed methods research design, as this study combines qualitative and quantitative research methods. The research design for the quantitative research approach was the quasi-experimental comparison group pre-test post-test design, whilst the collective case study design was used for the qualitative research approach. Quantitative data were collected through a group standardised questionnaire, the Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL) and for qualitative data different methods were used including narratives and drawings. The same standardised questionnaire was administered at both the pre- and post-test level with both the experimental and comparison groups. Narratives and drawings were also utilised for both groups before and after exposure to REds. The experimental group consisted of 11 respondents from a specific primary school in Kimberley, Northern Cape, while 10 respondents, from another primary school in Kimberley, participated as part of the comparison group. The quantitative research results suggested that even though a significant difference was indicated between the comparison group and the experimental group as it relates to the measure of burnout at the post-test level, it cannot be certain that this difference is as a result of the experimental group having been exposed to the REds programme, given that a significant difference between these groups already existed at the pre-test level. Qualitative research results, on the other hand, evidently indicated that participants have profited from the REds programme and that there was a positive mind shift in the post-exposure of respondents to the programme. This could be substantiated when comparing post-exposure findings of the comparison group and the experimental group. Based on the data obtained through ProQOL, the REds programme did not adequately address the support needs (Quality of Life) of participants. The qualitative results gathered through narratives and drawings seem to have given a better representation of the impact of the REds programme on participants when compared to the quantitative results. It is recommended that the qualitative component of the research project be elevated as the data gathered through this research method was much richer than the quantitative data. The impact of the programme is evident using this data collection method. It is recommended that other possible standardised questionnaires be explored or a self-structured questionnaire be compiled in order to identify a more applicable measuring instrument. It is also recommended that the possibility of excluding a quantitative measuring instrument be explored.