presented by geoffrey woolcock

Urban Research Program www.griffith.edu.au/centre/urp

Developing Indicators and Data Sets for Measuring Community Capacity

Regional Social Impacts of Growth ForumCQU, Mackay, August 21, 2007

Presented by

Geoffrey Woolcock


Measuring Wellbeing and Social ProgressMeasuring Wellbeing and Social Progress

International and multi-national developments

Australian state initiatives

Community Indicators Queensland?

Department of Communities: Developing Indicators and Data Sets for Measuring Community Capacity


Measuring Wellbeing and Social ProgressMeasuring Wellbeing and Social Progress

www.oecd.org/oecdworldforum

http://www.communityaccounts.ca/communityaccounts/onlinedata/getdata.asp

http://www.tbf.org/indicators/

State of the USA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/happiness_formula/default.stm


Departmentof Communitiessafe, valued and empowered communities

The Department of Communities Needs Based Planning and Resource Allocation

Framework

Is designed to answer just 3 questions



What is an outcome? Change in the wellbeing of individuals, families and communities

attributable, in whole or in part, to an intervention or series of interventions

Who and where are our clients? Valid and reliable indicators of disadvantage, need and risk

affecting the wellbeing of individuals, families and communities

What are our interventions? Best practice policy and services delivered to identified high need

populations-locations

NBPRAF Core Q&A NBPRAF Core Q&A


INDICATIVE NEED- defined by analysis of

objective indicators incl. SEIFA maps, surveys of

clients, comparison with state measures and benchmark

data (if avail)

SERVICE SUPPLY- defined by analysis of

quantitative and qualitative data

NEEDS BASED APPROACH TO PLANNING ANALYSES MEASURES OF NEED AND EXISTING SERVICE SUPPLY IN LIGHT OF KEY PRIORITIES (local, regional, departmental and State Government) IN ORDER TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT IS PRIORITY NEED AND WHAT CHANGES TO A SERVICE SYSTEM

ARE REQUIRED TO MEET THAT NEED

GAP ANALYSIS: Is there a service or set of services to meet this potential need?

COMMUNITY CAPACITYto provide a service or set of services

SERVICE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CONTINUUM

No service development

required

Quality improvement

Scope expansion

Realignment Increased access through integration of

services

Reform New service



COMSIS

Communities Statistical Information System - purpose built and maintained by OESR for the departmentA key tool and platform to progress, across the state, a core set of common standards and information for identifying disadvantage, need and risk


Academic and Practice Literature ReviewAcademic and Practice Literature Review

The focus of the project is the identification and review of

relevant, recent Australian and international :

Academic literature on the development of concepts, definitions and indicators of community capacity; and

Practice literature on the development and application of standards and measures of community capacity in the public and private sector and the results of applying those standards and measures.


Developing Indicators and Data Sets for Measuring Developing Indicators and Data Sets for Measuring Community CapacityCommunity Capacity

Chapter 1 Why Measure Community Capacity?

Project Overview and GoalsScope of Review and Recommendations

Chapter 2‘Unpacking’ Community Capacity

Chapter 3Indicators of Community Capacity: Development, measurement and evaluation

Chapter 4Challenges and Opportunities

Implications for communitiesImplications for governmentImplications for researchImplications for partnership


Initial findings/Decision pointsInitial findings/Decision points

Defining community capacityCommonalities: (1) The existence of resources (ranging from the skills of

individuals to the strength of organizations to access to financial capital)

(2) Networks of relationships (sometimes stressed in affective, sometimes in instrumental terms)

(3) Leadership (often only vaguely defined), and (4) Support for some kind of mechanisms for or processes of

participation by community members in collective action and problem solving. (Chaskin, 2001, pp. 292)



Conceptualising community capacityCommunity

Capacity and agendas for change Participation and partnership Community capacity building as means and end

‘Is capacity valued, and thus appropriately measured, as capacity to carry out specific tasks and solve specific problems, or can it be useful to measure it more generically, as a feature of community context in the same way as health status or demography?’ (Smith et al. 2003, p. 24-25).

Program specificity versus community problem solvingInter-organisational capacity versus community capacityContext and local applicability



Measurement challenges First, there is a lack of consensus as to what community capacity means or how it is characterized. Second, consequently there is limited research on which indicators are valid and reliable for the measurement of community capacity. Third, unlike measures of individual health status (e.g., blood pressure), community capacity appears to reflect a broader “community” or population level that is more complex than just the sum of measures at the individual level.

(Kwan et al., 2003, p. 24)


Key findings and outcomesKey findings and outcomes

Measurement and Indicator Exemplars

John Wiseman, Warwick Heine, Anne Langworthy, Neil McLean, Joanne Pyke, Hayden Raysmith & Mike Salvaris. (2006). Measuring Wellbeing, Engaging Communities. Developing a community indicators framework for Victoria: The final report of the Victorian Community Indicators Project (VCIP).

G. Thomas Kingsley. (1998). Neighbourhood Indicators: Taking advantage of the new potential. Working Paper. Chicago, IL: American Planning Association, October 1998.


The Victorian Community Indicator Project filter criteria test both individual indicators and the overall indicator framework:

Each indicatorIs relevant and valuable to the communityIs grounded in theory (expert endorsement)Measures progress towards sustainability/community visionIs likely to give information about the future/early warningIs measurable (good data available at LGA level or reasonably confident that it will be available by end of 2007)Can be measured over time/show trends. Is regular (contingent on data source; eg, the Census)Can be disaggregated by population groupsCan be benchmarked against relevant jurisdictions (State as a default, potentially ‘like’ council groupings or national/international where relevant)Is methodologically defensibleIs unambiguous/clear – resonates with the general populationIs realistic – collection methodology or data access, reporting and so onApplies to all Victorian LGAs (metro, provincial and rural groupings like councils)Is supported by consultation feedbackIs consistent with other key government/local government indicators


The Victorian Community Indicator Project filter criteria test both individual indicators and the overall indicator framework:

Overall suite of indicators

Are conceptually sensible (consistency with project aims)

Have a balance of objective and subjective measures

Have a limited number of indicators (each indicator may have more than one measure)

Are relevant to resource allocation.


http://www.civ.net.au/welcome_to_community_indicators_victoria_civ


Next StepsNext Steps

Challenges and Opportunities

Implications for communities

Implications for government

Implications for research

Implications for partnership


A Scenario to Avoid!A Scenario to Avoid!

presented by geoffrey woolcock

Documents