involving the community in decisions: data gathering for silc’s june 12, 2008
DESCRIPTION
Involving the Community In Decisions: Data Gathering for SILC’s June 12, 2008. Presented by: Judy Sharken Simon Manager Board & Volunteer Services [email protected] 651-632-7222 Brad Williams Executive Director, New York SILC [email protected] 518-427-1060 voice & TTY. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
1
Involving the Community In Decisions: Data Gathering
for SILC’sJune 12, 2008
Presented by:Judy Sharken SimonManager Board & Volunteer Services [email protected]
Brad WilliamsExecutive Director, New York [email protected] voice & TTY
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
2
What we’ll cover
I. Community Input – Why Bother?
II. Commonly Used Methods for Gathering Input
III. One SILC’s StoryIV. Possible BarriersV. ResourcesVI. Next Steps
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
3
What we’re hoping you leave with…
Identify primary data gathering methods
Recognize advantages and disadvantages of each method
Identify appropriate methods and resources needed for successful implementation
Cite the importance of consumer and other stakeholder involvement in the decision making process
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
4
Community Input – Why Bother? It is a way to involve people and create
investment It is good business practice It creates buy-in It helps to legitimize the choices It affirms or denies assumptions It allows us to make more informed, and
presumably, better decisions While it takes more time up front, it speeds the
process down the line It promotes 2-way communication and collaborations
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
5
Commonly Used Methods for Gathering Input
Interviews Surveys Community Forums Focus Groups Email comment
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
6
Interviews
Typically used… Before: planning, ideas for program design, upfront advice
After: assessment, summary, reaction
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
7
Most Important Things to Remember about Interviews
Good for more in-depth conversation
They are time consuming Important when key
relationships are at stake
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
8
The Downside of Interviews
Lack of synergy Require time Limited quantities are possible Difficult to standardize and
quantify responses
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
9
Surveys
Typically used… Before: market research Ongoing: name changes, recruit new clients
After: evaluation
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
10
Most Important Things to Remember about Surveys
Survey design is very important
Quantitative analysis of results is critical
Helpful in reaching broadly
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
11
The Downside of Surveys
Response rate can be low Little opportunity for probing Can be costly to administer Online survey instruments have trade-
offs Cost (ongoing). Training curve. ACCESSIBILITY!
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
12
Community Forums
Typically used in: Collecting opinions, beliefs and
attitudes about issues of interest to your organization
Building energy, ideas, and excitement about a topic
Providing an opportunity to learn more about a topic
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
13
Most Important Things to Remember about Community Forums Logistics are critical Orchestration of the event can
make all the difference Great opportunity for PR
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
14
The Downside of Community Forums
Logistics can be overwhelming – need good staffing
The group can take on a life of its own
Capturing the data can be challenging
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
15
Focus Groups
Typically used… Before: planning, program design, market research
Ongoing: name changes, recruit new clients
After: assessment, summary, post mortem, image
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
16
Most Important Things to Remember about Focus Groups They are most useful in
capturing people’s ideas, beliefs, feelings
Helpful in combination with other methods
Create opportunities for fun, engagement, interaction
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
17
The Downside of Focus Groups
Need a skilled facilitator Time is limited so number of
questions is also limited
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
18
Email Comment
Typically used in… Collecting opinions, beliefs and attitudes
Ongoing: during the course of public comment period
After: feedback, further thoughts
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
19
Most Important Things to Remember about Email Comment Be prepared for large volume Set up your processes
beforehand It is the most accessible and
least “controlled” medium
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
20
The Downside of Email Comment
Difficult to analyze the data Lacks ability to probe or bounce ideas off one
another Responses tend to come from those most
passionate (pro or con) Some responses come from targeted or
organized efforts to support popular initiatives as opposed to random comments.
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
21
The Process for Any Method
Step 1: Define the purpose Purpose needs to be very clear so that you can:
Communicate why you’re doing it to participants, Develop focused questions Get the information you really want
Examples: To gather input on service needs in the disability
community.Why do you want to know that? To find out if the top priority needs in the state were
adequately reflected in the state plan.CLEARER: To gather community input to ensure that the service
needs matched with the components outlined in the state plan.
To hear what our constituents think we do.Why do we want to know that? Because we need to revise our mission statement.
CLEARER: To hear constituents’ ideas about our current mission statement and how to revise.
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
22
Step 2Establish the timeline New York SILC
May 2006 - SPIL committee meets to make decisions about process
August 2006 – Develop important outreach materials September 2006 – Distribute outreach materials to the
statewide network and post them on website for review and comment
Early October 2006 – Conduct three statewide public hearings at CIL sites
Late October 2006 – Conduct four additional hearings at breakout sessions of statewide annual conferences to expand feedback beyond the CIL network
November 2006 – SPIL committee meets face-to-face to review increased input
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
23
Steps 3 & 4
• Identify and invite the participants• Generate the questions to be asked
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
24
NYSILC ExampleFACILITATION OUTLINE
USE OF TITLE VII, PART B FUNDS: These funds are resource oriented. Approximately $750,000 is available.
What is the best way to maintain and/or improve support for the statewide systems advocacy network?
What do you think are the top technical assistance and training needs of the statewide network?
What is the best way to increase public awareness about CIL’s and issues important to people with disabilities?
What is the best way CIL’s can conduct outreach to unserved and underserved populations? What has worked in your community?
USE OF TITLE VII, PART C FUNDS: These funds are for center operations. Sixteen CIL’s presently receive twenty-one grants totaling $4 million. The previous SPIL used new funds for the establishment of new CIL’s. The current plan directs all new funds to the existing Federal network of CIL’s until they receive a minimum of $200,000 each.
How can the statewide network best use new Title VII, Part C funds?
How can NYSILC encourage the maintenance and growth of a statewide network of centers?
What unserved or underserved areas of the state still exist?
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
25
NYSILC Example continued DESCRIPTION OF EXTENT AND SCOPE OF INDEPENDENT LIVING SERVICES.
With housing such a priority, and CIL’s being non-residential, what can be done to increase affordable and accessible housing options?
What resources do CIL’s need to effectively divert or transition people with disabilities outof institutional settings?
What role should CIL’s play in the transition of students with disabilities?
What role should CIL’s play in the implementation of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)?
OPEN COMMENTS.
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
26
Step 5
Maybe • Develop a script• Select a facilitator• Choose the location
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
27
Steps 6, 7, & 8
• Initiate the Method• Interpret and report the results• Translate the results into action
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
28
Questions to Ask Yourself
• What kind of information am I trying to obtain?
• Who would conduct this kind of research?
• Who would be participating?
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
29
What’s Worked for You? Additional Questions or Comments?
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
30
One SILC’s Story
Transition Over Several State Plans From two to three sparsely attended hearings
and the state plan partners hashing out the SPIL to…
An empowered SPIL committee directing the process
Developing outreach materials Defining modes of feedback/venues Greatly increasing involvement in the process and
input into the plan
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
31
The SPIL Committee
Efficient at completing work tasks. Facilitation Outline Accomplishments Public Hearing Schedule
Made important decisions when necessary.
Summary of increased input. Comment period on preliminary SPIL draft
Good at “stepping back” and letting the process work.
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
32
How Did We Achieve Expanded Input?
Besides three statewide public hearings at CILs (facilitation notes/audio tape), other methods included:
Breakout sessions at four statewide conferences – especially to gain a non-IL perspective (facilitation notes)
CIL focus group discussions at the local level (four CILs held events/submitted comments)
Written comments submitted by individuals online via the NYSILC website (almost 400 comments received)
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
33
People Drive the Priorities The facilitation outline helped to structure the
feedback. The SPIL Committee tallied the feedback in
relation to support for various initiatives. The people and public comments defined the
PRIORITIES. With the priorities identified, the SPIL committee
matched them up with budget amounts. A preliminary SPIL draft was then sent out for public comment.
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
34
The Final PUSH Only a few comments were received on the preliminary
SPIL draft – appropriate changes were made. Was this a fluke, lack of interest, or a sign that we had
done our job? The final SPIL draft was sent out to SILC members in
January 2007 for review. At the February 2007 NYSILC meeting, the SPIL draft
passed with minor edits – no major debates, arguments, or filibusters occurred at the meeting!
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
35
What Worked?
Concepts of “participation,” “ownership,” and “legitimacy.”
Investment of time to gather data/input upfront saves confrontation later. The real battles occurred during
committee work.
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
36
Other NYSILC Surveys
Statewide CIL Consumer Satisfaction Statewide CIL Technology & Equipment Statewide Housing Needs for People with
Disabilities Statewide Needs Assessment (related to
funding priorities) Focus Group Testing of Ballot Marking Devices Voting Trends of New Yorkers with Disabilities
(with Siena Research Institute & Zogby International)
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
37
Possible Barriers – What Might Get in the Way? Additional Questions?
• Money• Time• Access to people
© MAP for Nonprofits - 2007
38
Resources That Can Help Books
“The public participation handbook; making better decisions through citizen involvement”, Creighton, James L., Jossey-Bass, [c]2005
“Nonprofit Guide to Conducting Community Forums: Engaging Citizens, Mobilizing Communities”, Carol Lukas, Linda Hoskins, Fieldstone Alliance
“Nonprofit Guide to Conducting Successful Focus Groups”, Judith Sharken Simon, Publisher: Fieldstone Alliance
Websites• http://www.ce.communitiesscotland.gov.uk/stellent/groups/public/
documents/webpages/scrcs_006693.hcsp• http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/participation.pdf• http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/360902/constitut
ionsandethics/constitutionalarrangements/guidanceenhancing/guidanceenhancing/
• http://www.nysilc.org/spil_plan_2005-7_final/NYSILC%20SPIL%20Development%202008%2020101.htm
• IL NET Project Partners (ILRU, NCIL, and APRIL)