measuring community development: moving beyond jobs and investment
Upload: center-for-governmental-studies-at-northern-illinois-university
Post on 20-Dec-2014
51 views
DESCRIPTION
A presentation made by Dr. Norman Walzer and Andy Blanke to the 2013 Community Development Society meeting in Charleston, South Carolina on July 24, 2013.TRANSCRIPT
Measuring Community DevelopmentMoving Beyond Jobs and Investment
Norman Walzer and Andy Blanke
Presented to
2013 Community Development Society MeetingsCharleston, SCJuly 24, 2013
Presentation Overview
• Theoretical Framework and Principles
• Historical Interest in and Reasons for Measurement
• Key Components Involved
• Major Approaches ‐ Strengths and Limitations Universal
Contingent on Local Conditions
• Examples of Successful Approaches Based on Principles
• Needs for Future Research and Practice
• Pending Journal of Community Development Issue
Indicators
Relevant Cost‐Effective Diversified
Strategic Plan
Measurable goals Stakeholder support
Policy Priorities
Social Economic Environmental
Policy
improvem
ent
Policy implementation
Policy formation
Outcome Measurement Framework
Key Measurement Concepts (Hart, 2012)
• Goal‐‐ change desired by community
• Indicator‐‐ measures progress toward goals
• Levels of indicators
SystemE.g. Percent in poverty
ProgramE.g. Number of clients
ActionE.g. Number of housing units
built
Successful Indicators*
• Validity‐ sound data depicts real situation• Relevance‐ pertinent to community issue• Consistent and Reliable‐ can be used over time• Measurable‐ can be obtained for community• Clarity‐ unambiguous and understandable• Comprehensive‐ represents many parts of issue• Cost‐effective‐ relatively inexpensive to collect• Comparable‐ sufficient general to allow city comparisons• Attractive to media‐ gain exposure and discussion
*Rhonda Phillips. Community Indicators. American Planning Association, Report 517
Ongoing challenges
• Cost‐effectiveness vs Relevance State/national sources 1 year behind
Local quantitative studies are expensive
• Relevance vs ComparabilityCommunities have unique goals
Need benchmarks, best practices
• Cost‐effectiveness vs ComparabilityCase studies not generalizable
Local quantitative studies are expensive
Models of Measurement
Universal Contingent‐Independent Contingent‐ Facilitated
• Quantitative focus
• Common goals
• Comparable
• Secondary data
• Technical assistance
from larger organization
• Unique goals
• Not comparable
• Own strategic plan and
consultants
• Qualitative and
quantitative
• Primary and secondary
data
• Unique goals
• Limited comparability
• Technical assistance
from larger organization
• Qualitative focus
• Mostly primary data
Trends in Measurement Practices
• 1960’s ‐ quality of life measures nationally• 1970’s ‐ quality of life locally in CA and NY• 1980’s & 90’s
Sustainability in SeattleBenchmarking economic development in Oregon
• 2000’s ‐ application to rural communities• Recent years‐ growing technical assistance
Developmental modelsFocus on SustainabilityMeasuring community wealth
• Growing Interest by Foundations in Measuring Investment Outcomes
Early Interest by Nonprofit Sector*
• Financial Accountability
• Program Products or Outputs
• Adherence to Standards of Quality in Service Delivery
• Participant‐related Measures (need)
• Key Performance Indicators
• Client Satisfaction (not instituted until later)
* Margaret Plantz, Martha Taylor Greenway, and Michael Henricks. 1997. “Outcome Measurement: Showing Results in the Nonprofit Sector.” New Directions for Evaluation, no. 75.
Success MeasuresNeighborworks USA
• National Grant‐making Organization• Provides Online toolkit• 122 possible indicators
Social, environmental, economic Local choice Survey guides/templates State/national sources
• Used by 300 organizations in 48 states • Common use ‐ housing programs
Changes in property values Survey satisfaction w/ home quality, safety
• Strategic plan ‐ choose own indicators• Cost‐effective ‐ technical assistance
Youthscape Initiative in Canada
• Engage youth in 5 cities• Hired evaluators
Participant observation Frequent interviews w/ clients, employeesID successes, concerns
• Monthly conference calls5 local evaluators reportNational coordinator looks for patterns
• Quarterly reports• Cost effective
Technical assistanceUpdated quickly Enables quick corrections (eg: replace problem employee)
Vibrant Communities CanadaTamarack Institute for Community Engagement
• Poverty reduction in 13 cities• 3‐part process:
Local theory of change (strategic plan)
Stories about progress (process indicators)
Semi‐annual report‐ # clients served, partner orgs., program narrative (systems indicators)
• Refine goals with client input (policy improvement)• Cost‐effective ‐ simple to measure
Minnesota CompassWilder Foundation
• Dashboard for Minnesota counties• Indicators chosen by business leaders, academics, local
officials. Relevant to policy goals
Clear meaning
• Outcomes before/after program 1995‐2010
• For other counties In progress: custom geographies
• Social, environmental, economic focus Eg. transportation, economic disparity, air & water quality
Central Appalachian Network(Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia)
• Strategic plan for improving quality of life for farmers • 7 forms of capital
Intellectual‐ stock of knowledge, creativity, innovation
Social‐ new relationships‐ restaurants putting local food on menus
Built‐ freezing facilities built to aid farmers (economic)
Natural‐ acres of farmland preserved (environment)
Political – stock of power ands goodwill held in region
Financial‐ growing farm income (social, economic)
Cultural‐ influences ways how people define and approach issues
• Cost‐effective Secondary sources for economic Indicators
Case studies for social capital
Indicators collected as part of operations
Summary
• Plan must come first Define goals Gain support
• Smaller organizations need technical assistance Current data sources Guides/templates Consultants
• Be qualitative when measuring processMore timely Case studies
• Use quantitative measures when measuring outcomes Identifies problems, results
• Conduct research to understand indicators and policy intervention
For Additional Information
Norman Walzer Andy BlankeSenior Research Scholar Research Associate
Center for Governmental Studies148 N. Third StreetDeKalb, IL 60115www.cgs.niu.edu