collaboration and evaluation morgan braganza, m.s.w., ph.d. student rethink research group
Post on 26-Dec-2015
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Enter Collaboration
“Collaboration shows promise for solving organizational and societal problems” (Gray & Wood, 1991, p. 3-4)
One “strategy” for building community capacity is “fostering collaborative relations” (Chaskin, 2001, p. 299)
Build community capacity = build relationships
Enter Collaboration Social services provide support to those in need
Agencies often work in silos (Braganza, 2009)
Individuals fall through the cracks Too challenging to navigate the system (Leviten-Reid, 2007)
Comprehensive community initiatives bring agencies together Coordinate services Inter-organizational collaboration Community member participation (Chaskin, 2001)
Collaboration is important in improving community building and improving society
“All sectors are responsible for addressing these problems, preferably through a planned and coordinated approach that combines resources and expertise in new and sustainable ways” (Torjman, 1998, p. 25)
Why Collaboration?
Working collaboratively “just makes sense” for addressing community issues It raises awareness of other agencies It brings attention to existing services and gaps in service Results in finding new and creative ways to develop high quality
sustainable services Better use of scarce resources Combined efforts to address issues Combat larger (rather than smaller) issues Minimize the duplication of services Shared knowledge and information exchange The development of best practices
According to the Literature…
a way of bringing together agencies to address social issues
to design/offer programs to address these complex issues
exchange information which has the potential for action in the interests of a common purpose
“…when a group of autonomous stakeholders of a problem domain engage in an interactive process, using shared rules, norms, and structures, to act or decide to act on issues related to that domain'”
true collaboration involves being willing to address issues using methods different than would typically be used
“more than simply sharing knowledge and information (communication) and more than a relationship that helps each party achieve its own goals (cooperation and coordination). The purpose is to create a shared vision and joint strategies to address concerns that go beyond the purview of any particular party”
But…What IS Collaboration?
…In Practice
Collaboration is understood and practiced differently
Commonalities in definition but no two definitions were the same
What does this Mean?
If people are working from their own definition they may be disappointed when their experience doesn’t match their expectations
Establishing a common understanding most important
Stumbling Blocks
Relationships
“Missing” people collaborations often begin through informal conversations
may be hard for smaller organizations who are not connected well to others or have few staff resources
Staff turnover Not having a “leader” Conflict between members Competing - particularly to acquire funds Members being unable to contribute equally to the collaborative Involvement in collaboratives solely to meet personal goals (i.e. career
advancement) Make others aware of these agendas (Winer & Ray, 1994)
Stumbling Blocks
Communication and Conflict
Not having a plan for how to resolve conflicts
Not having rules for communication Not having frequent enough
communication
Stumbling Blocks
Direction
Having unclear goals, expectations and limitations Having different values or beliefs Not having timelines established Not having written protocols and documents in
place (i.e. logic models, written agreements and contracts outlining rules and plans)
Strategies for Success
Direction
Define “collaboration” and the level of collaboration desired
Be clear about the purpose of the collaborative Be clear about the issue(s) being addressed Be clear about goals Be clear about what each member should contribute and
roles – define formal “contracts” whenever possible Determine timelines for activities but also for the
collaborative (when and why will it be terminated)
Strategies for Success
Planning for Action
Learn the gaps in services Learn what relevant services are already being offered Determine appropriate collaborative members – ensure
multisector viewpoints Determine who has the power within the community to
influence change
Strategies for Success
Meeting Management objectives for the meetings should be stated time lines for each objective established rules should be established for how to participate and to
make decisions progress of the meeting should be evaluated at the end summaries of each meeting should be developed contributions of members should be given positive
reception (Winer & Ray, 1994)
Strategies for Success
Conflict Management
Conflict should be expected Conflict resolution strategies should be designed (Winer & Ray, 1994)
Conflicts within collaboratives can be beneficial engage in “self-reflection” investigate “basic assumptions” - correct faulty assumptions glean greater understanding of the perceptions of others (Mai, et al., 2005,
p. 108)
Determine (with regular check-ins) whether member needs are being met
Strategies for Success
Freedom To share ideas To engage in free thinking and brainstorming To ask questions To challenge To take risks To clarify the collaborative
Have a good balance between planning and action Limit the number of activities
Collaboration is Risky and can be Challenging
To engage in collaboration: let go of own ideas and values
come to collective agreement (Chaskin, 2001)
let go of power differentials (Chaskin, 2001)
sacrifice time and resources accept constructive criticism be honest and transparent
Collaborative projects work best when: project itself is clear responsibilities of each organization
are clear (Chaskin, 2001)
So where does evaluation fit in?
Plans for projects make sense Figure out
progress made how well everything is going
Evaluation offers evidence of successes Evaluation offers tangible information to
inform policy decisions
So where does evaluation fit in?
How is it related to collaboration? Strengthens collaborative relationships
uncovers strengths, opportunities for growth, best practices and unexpected learnings
Greater likelihood of successful projects
stronger programs
stronger community
Sounds easy enough… Social change can get muddy and challenging
Challenges to community capacity building: An unclear understanding of the population(s) of interest Who will be involved and role (enter collaboration) An unclear idea of the outcomes
short or long term? individuals, agencies or the community? what are the goals? what are your indicators of success
Outcomes realistic and achievable? Tracking data?
Recommendation = get some help if possible
Levels of Evaluation
Level 1 Aspects of the Partnership
Level 2 Outcomes of Activities
Level 3 Impacts on the Community
Ideal: do a little of each Reality: Level 3 is very hard to measure – most do levels
1 and 2
Levels of Evaluation
Level 1 Aspects of the Partnership
Level 2 Outcomes of Activities
Level 3 Impacts on the Community
Ideal: do a little of each Reality: Level 3 is very hard to measure – most do levels 1 and 2
Level 1: Aspects of the Partnership
Member Survey
Purpose: Learn what activities, initiatives or efforts are already available in
the community and to begin with Alliance members What has brought members to the Alliance What may help members feel value in continuing to be part of
the Alliance Feedback from Members about Alliance activities
Level 1: Aspects of the PartnershipMember Survey
Preliminary Findings: Various reasons for becoming an Alliance Member (personal,
community focused, Alliance focused) Recommendation: Build on these reasons to ensure Members
are receiving the benefits they hoped for
Numerous ways time on Alliance would be considered a wise investment (more members, awareness, progress on activities, etc.)
Recommendation: Establish short term and process goals for the Alliance, for activities and the community
Level 1: Aspects of the Partnership
Member Survey
Preliminary Findings: Members would eager to contribute tangle supports and
resources (i.e. financial, data, equipment, etc.) Recommendation: Assign roles and responsibilities to
leverage contributions
Every Alliance member spoke about activities the Alliance could implement beyond current activities
Recommendation: consider ideas for other activities and determine how current or potential activities align with Alliance goals
Level 1: Aspects of the PartnershipMember Survey
Preliminary Findings: Variable feedback about activities offered by the Alliance but
buy in overall Recommendations:
Ensure all Members know about and have buy in for Alliance activities Ensure activities aim to achieve the goals of the Alliance Clearly conceptualize each activity (target audience, logic and theory of
change, etc.) Establish evaluation/measurement criteria Assign roles, responsibilities and timelines Have consensus
Level 1: Aspects of the PartnershipMember Survey
Next Steps: Survey put into an online survey format Each Alliance member will be emailed the survey for their
feedback
You remember this? The “Continuum of Partnerships”
How to Make progress:
1) Know where you are today2) Agree about where you want to be 3) Evaluate!4) Consider, as a group, how to move “up one notch”5) Measure again at a later point - determine progress6) Make collaboration an important activity - dedicate time to making it successful
Level 1: Aspects of the PartnershipMapping Exercise
Purpose: To capture current partnership information To strengthen relationships Consensus on purpose of the Alliance
Next Steps: All Alliance members will be asked to complete this exercise
(paper copy or email)
Level 1: Aspects of the PartnershipMeeting Checkup
Purpose: To capture feedback about Alliance meetings from members To strengthen meetings Ultimate goal: members will feel their time has been a wise
investment
Next Steps: All Alliance members will be asked to complete this evaluation
activity at some or all meetings (to be determined)
Levels of Evaluation
Level 1 Aspects of the Partnership
Level 2 Outcomes of Activities
Level 3 Impacts on the Community
Ideal: do a little of each Reality: Level 3 is very hard to measure – most do levels 1 and 2
Works Cited Beckley, T.M., Martz, D., Nadeau, S., Wall, E. & Reimer, B. (2008). Journal of Rural and Community Development, 3 (3), 56-75. Braganza, M. (2009). “Exploring Collaboration between Organizations Assisting Persons Experiencing Poverty”. Opportunities Waterloo
Region. Chaskin, R.J. (1999). Defining community capacity: a framework and implications from a comprehensive community initiative. Retrieved
January 15 2012 from www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/old_reports/41.pdf. Chaskin, R.J. (2001). Building community capacity: a definitional framework and case studies from a comprehensive community initiative.
Urban Affairs Review, 36 (3), 291-323. Gray, B. & Wood, D.J. (1991). Collaborative alliances: Moving from practice to theory. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 21 (1), 3-
22. Jakes, S. (2003). Community capacity building. Retrieved February 3 2012 from http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=collaboration
%20and%20community%20capacity%20building&source=web&cd=7&sqi=2&ved=0CFgQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ces.ncsu.edu%2Fdepts%2Ffcs%2Fpdfs%2Fcap.pdf&ei=jo8sT4eWLqLs0gGBnICRCw&usg=AFQjCNG7ESbpY7zKZTR_Y_uGuKBQf7ZWHw&sig2=fuZ2PnkgyojHyqZrww7gkw.
Leake, D. & Black, R. (2005). Cultural and linguistic diversity: implications for transition personnel. Retrieved February 4 2012 from http://www.ncset.org/publications/essentialtools/diversity/partIII.asp.
Leviten-Reid, E. (2007). Reflecting on vibrant communities (2002-2006). Caledon Institute of Social Policy. Retrieved June 6, 2007 from http://www.caledoninst.org/Publications/PDF/612ENG.pdf.
No Author. (2012). Dystopia: George Orwell web source. Retrieved February 3 2012 from http://www.netcharles.com/orwell/articles/col-dystopia.htm
The Associated Press. (2012). Davos financial group warns of a ‘dystopian future’. Retrieved February 3 2012 from http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/01/11/davos-economy-future.html.
Torjman, S. (1998). Community-based poverty reduction. Caledon Institute of Social Policy. Retrieved June 6, 2007 from http://www.caledoninst.org/Publications/PDF/260ENG%2Epdf.
Westley, F., Zimmerman, B. & Patton, M.Q. (2006). Getting to maybe: How the world is changed. Toronto: Vintage Canada.
top related