Policy Development

Annotated Bibliography

Policy Development Section

The following bibliography is of references considered key pieces in the area of policy development and policy evaluation. The first section is comprised of policy theory and programming references, and the second section is evaluation and research design references. These annotations were written to provide the essential learning points from the reference and the implications for the CYFAR initiative.

Andranovich, G. and Lovrich, N. (1996). Editors' introduction: Community-oriented research. American Behavioral Scientist (39) 5, 525-535.

The authors' introduction focuses on three contextual forces affecting urban policy: the economy, politics, and society. The new global economy has produced an uneven distribution of benefits among and within regions and cities ultimately affecting community life. This global trend emphasizes a service-oriented, information-based economy and forces an infusion of specialized jobs within communities. Politically, communities have struggled to survive on tighter budget and community conflict arises characterized by "getting our share" from the federal, state, and local governments. Finally, socioeconomic stratification and group fragmentation will provide communities with challenges in the future. Many public policy issues such as medical care and housing will reflect the challenges of inclusion to all community members. These three contextual forces, economy, politics, and society are driving forces in policy development. Although the article focuses on urban communities these same forces are impacting rural communities.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives The article suggests that CYFAR initiatives need to examine the economy, political climate, and societal factors as forces that influence the well-being of children, youth, and families. These forces need to guide visioning and action planning of what is best for families in the community.

The author suggests communities shift from the problem-focus approach of viewing problems to asset building approach, where youths are viewed as resources. Benson identifies and defines 30 assets that are crucial for preventing risky or health-compromising behavior by youths. Sixteen are external assets (assets that surround youth and are provided by families and social systems) and the remaining 14 are internal assets, provided by the youths themselves. Benson also provides a 7 step process for communities that seek to develop an asset-building plan for youth. This 7 step process includes: Establish a representative "vision team" (up to 30 people) and executive committee (fewer than 10 people) to build commitment, gather information, set priorities, and plan. Identify a local coordinator who manages the process and unleashes multiple volunteer-initiated efforts. Gather data about youth, adult perception, and community resources for asset building. Use surveys, focus groups, interviews, town meeting and other techniques. Raise community awareness of the asset-building model, using newsletters, fact sheets, newspaper articles, speeches, cable television, computer networks, and other mechanisms. Develop a vision, priorities, and action plans based on the information you gathers and the work of the task forces. Address issues of funding, leadership, organizations, and strategies. Develop a vision, priorities, and action plans based on the information you gathers and the work of the task forces. Address issues of funding, leadership, organizations, and strategies. Formally launch the initiative once action plans are in place.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives Many of the CYFAR initiatives have a youth component and this article provides a process for communities to use as they address youth issues.

The authors present an ecological, risk-focus model to use in planning youth prevention programs. The model suggests that addressing risk and protective factors at multiple levels will increase the success of the prevention program. The model identifies the child at the center of the model and suggest the child is influenced by the widening environments of family, peers, school and work settings, and communities. The authors also identify a number of implications in using the model in developing effective prevention programs. These are: Assess youth to be sure program developers know what the real problems or issues are facing local youth Assess communities to gain a sense of what programs and resources already exist in the community. Set realistic and well-defined goals. (Without measurable outcomes, success will be difficult to assess.) Target multiple risk factors at multiple levels of the social ecology. (Avoid the temptation of simple answers; adopt an ecological view.) Comprehensive prevention efforts should involve cooperation and collaboration because no single organization has the resources to do the whole job. Consider how the implementation of a particular program might affect other programs and institutions in the community and recognize changing one part of the system will cause the others to shift. Whenever possible, involve the target audience in the planning and implementation of the program to help the program "fit" the community and creates commitment to continuing the program. When replication a model program, be sure that it is developmentally and culturally appropriate. (The causes and solutions of problems vary across contexts and change with developmental age of the youth.) Know the relevant literature in the area in which you're working.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives This risk-focused ecological model suggest community-based, comprehensives efforts are needed to address and prevent youth problems. CYFAR initiatives will need to address multiple levels of society to impact and change the environment for children.

In this working paper, Bruner defines where the citizens of the United States are in relation to improving the condition our children's' lives. In Chapter 2, the author suggests two dimensions of the current problem include unprepared parenting and residing in disinvested neighborhoods. Chapter 3 identifies the conditions Burner views as needed for bettering the conditions of children in the USA. These conditions include: Safety and Security economic and physical security environmental and public safety Social Support and Resiliency a nurturing stable family environment adults mentor and role models in the community positive peer activities opportunities to exert effort and achieve success Professional Services and Supports health care for medical needs decent schools and schooling access to professional services to treat any conditions or needs that may arise and require professional care The author concludes the paper by suggesting a need for a compelling national vision and role to address the current crisis of children living in at-risk situations. In addition, he argues for grassroots social movement to embrace the vision and mobilizes to changes in policies.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives Bruner has provided a list of conditions or standards to better the lives of at-risk children. Local CYFAR initiatives can use the list as a guide when they address policy development in their communities. The list can also be modified to use as indicators in an evaluation tool when a community assesses it's strengths.

Chapin suggests that effective social policy is built on the cornerstone of a careful problem definition. The author suggests a strengths perspective focusing on the strengths and resources of individuals and their environments rather than their problems and deficits as the central focus of the helping process in social work. The perspective assumes that people can continue to grow and change and need to have equal access to resources. Chapin argues that the integration of the strengths perspective in policy development can provide policy makers with new tools for identifying social needs and problems, a more inclusive approach to policy formation, and policy options that reflect the reality of its intended participants. The author includes a table outlining the steps in the strengths approach which includes searching the environment for opportunities and resources. The strengths approach challenges policy makers to be open to identifying and using formal and informal community resources. Strengths Approach Identify basic needs and barriers to meeting needs of clients. Definition of needs and barriers are negotiated with participants. Identify what barriers are currently overcome by clients and through programs (best practices). Identification of opportunities and resources necessary for people to meet their needs Policy formation. Negotiation of consensus on policy goals with participants. Program design. Program implementation. Evaluation and assessment of client outcomes. The author suggests that by using the strengths approach to policy development the policy will be more inclusive, involving the individuals the policy is affecting. The strengths perspective addresses the need for participatory research and client involvement in the policy making process. The approach also focuses on common human needs and the barriers to meeting these needs.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives The article suggest policy development is most effective when focusing on participants strengths and including participants in the policy making process. Challenges to CYFAR initiatives will include providing a policy development process which: focuses on participants' assets identifies both formal and informal community resources include participants' voices, views, and ideas

This publication serves as a guide for individuals who want to initiate the process of exploring public issues and policy development. Chapter 1 identifies ways education can help resolve public issues. Chapter 2 outlines eight step-by-step approaches to public issues education. The models provide alternative approaches to address public issues. The models are: Alternatives and consequences model This model assumes that an issue has been defined and focuses on clarifying options and anticipating the impacts of each. Issue evolution/education intervention model This model includes eight stages or steps. Early stages include the emergence of a problem, the middle stages include identifying alternatives and making a choice, and the final stages include implementation and evaluation of the choice. The Ladder model The Ladder model emphasizes the step-by-step process of group discussion among people with diverse perspectives. Key points stressed in the Ladder model include reaching decisions which satisfy all participants and connecting the evaluation to the initial concerns. Discovery & Analysis model The Discovery and Analysis model emphasizes two approaches to thinking about issues: expansive, "discovery" thinking and systematic, critical analysis. SHAPES model The SHAPES model is a matrix designed to provide a descriptive historical record of what the group was doing. The matrix identifies the group process over time, critical incidents which influenced accomplishments, and key participants in the process. Interest-based problem solving model This model places emphasis on the difficulties of communicating and making decision in situations with heightened conflict and emotion. The goal if the model is to help stakeholders work out mutual solutions. National issues forums model This model explores alternatives with ordinary citizens. This model takes the form of a town meeting and engages the public in discussion about the issue. Citizen politics model The goal of this model is to engage the public in politics by helping participants build relationships with key players working toward redefining and solving problems. Chapter 3 identifies and discusses the three key steps in designing education programs: 1) focusing on an issue; anticipating, selecting and framing it; 2) identifying and recruiting participants for the educational program; and 3)selecting appropriate education delivery methods. Chapter 4 includes information on special topics associated with public policy education including: creating new structures, such as coalitions. sciences and dialogue: blending technical information and process information; helping scientific experts contribute effectively to public issues education. collaborative conflict resolution with polarized groups. the news media. evaluation The evaluation section includes the following questions to help individuals focus the evaluation: For what potential outcomes will you seek evidence or information? Will the evaluation focus on pre-determined outcomes, or will it be designed to pick up whatever impacts may emerge? Will the outcomes represent acceptance of existing policy-making processes or a change-oriented critique? This section also lists possible outcome indicators for individuals that include changes in knowledge, attitudes or opinions, skills, and behavior about the political process. Challenges of evaluating public policy issues identified by the authors includes: -the complexity of publics issues. -the fact that educational programs typically evolve and change over   time. -difficulty in measuring the impact with all the audiences the   educators hope to reach -the absence of "tried and true" measurements techniques. -the need to provide reliable and valid measurement instruments.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives This publication offers CYFAR initiatives a wide range of information to help the initiatives in the development of public policy education programs. Initiatives will want to review the indicators of individual impact and the challenges of evaluating public policy issues as they plan and design their evaluation programs.

In this article Guba identifies policy definitions that reflect three kinds of policies. These three kinds of polices are: Policy-in-intention refer to verbal or written statements. Examples include policy as: -an assertion of intents or goals. -the accumulated standing decisions of a governing body by which it   regulates, controls, promotes, services and otherwise influences   matters within its sphere of authority. -a guide to discretionary action. -as a strategy undertaken to solve or ameliorate a problem. Policy-in-implementation are the behaviors or activities displayed in the process of implementing policy. Examples include policy as: -sanctioned behavior, formally through authoritative decisions, or   informally through expectations and acceptance established over       (sanctified by) time. -a norm of conduct characterized by consistency and regularity in   some substantive action area. -the output of the policy-making system, the cumulative effect of all   the actions, decisions, and behavior of the millions of people who     work in bureaucracies. Policy occurs, takes place, and is made at every point in the policy cycle from agenda setting to policy impact. Policy-in-experience is what is actually experienced by the client as the result of a policy. Examples include policy as: -the effect of the policy-making and policy-implementing system as   it is experiences by the client. Guba suggests that the definition of policy determines what the policy will look like and the point of action of the policy. Point of action refers to where the policy will be enforced -- whether at the local, state, or federal level. Each definition of policy calls for unique data, sources of data, and methodology, and produces unique outcomes. The definition an evaluator elects to use depends upon the purpose of the evaluation. What constitutes a better definition is of course a matter of values. To be ethical, the policy evaluator should explain the particular definition used in an analysis and identify its consequences for the variety of stakeholders.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives Guba suggests that members of CYFAR initiatives be clear about the kind of policy the initiative is attempting to address. A clear policy definition is necessary to ensure evaluators use applicable data, identify appropriate sources of data, and appropriate methodology in the evaluation process.

This article provides suggestions for assessing the impact of public policy education programs on individuals and issue resolution. Hahn describes the issue evolution process and provides an educational intervention model. This model is a useful tool for planning public policy education programs and explaining their relationship to the policy-making process. The 8 Stage model includes: Stage 1 - Concern Someone identifies a concern, problem or vision of how things could be better. Activities: listen actively ask clarifying questions provide background information based on research Stage 2 - Involvement People with a concern seek additional support and perhaps establish contact with decision makers. Additional people may become involved. Opposition may also arise in this stage. Activities: provide information about organizations or individuals who might be helpful facilitate communication among interested parties Stage 3 - Issue An issue is defined that people can agree on. However, there may not be agreement on what should be done about it. Activities: document and disseminate alternative views on the issue help clarify the issue through discussion Stage 4 - Alternatives People seek and propose different ideas about what should be done to resolve the issue. Activities: help people generate alternatives seek objective information on alternatives facilitate communication and exchange of viewpoints Stage 5 - Consequences Alternatives are evaluated and discussed in terms of anticipated consequences. Activities: assemble and distribute objective information on consequence of each alternative help people make their own predictions about consequences Stage 6 - Choice Different people try to influence policy makers. It may be decided to forget the whole issue, respond to one group or another, or reach a compromise. Activities: inform people about how the choice will be made (formal/informal; decision arena; decision-making process) inform them about opportunities for effective participation Stage 7 - Implementation A decision is implemented. Activities: inform people about how the policy came to be; what it is intended to do; and who will be responsible for implementation and enforcement Stage 8 - Evaluation Results are evaluated. Activities: encourage objective analysis of the policy help people conduct evaluations If anyone is seriously dissatisfied the entire process may begin again. Hahn provides two tables of information to use in evaluating the policy process and education. The first list indicators that show the effect of public policy education on individuals in terms of knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behaviors. The second list indicates the steps in the evaluation process related to issue resolution, possible indicators for each stage, and characteristics that suggest a move to the next stage. A copy of each table can be found in the tool bibliography.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives Hahn's model provides a step-by-step process for developing policies at the community level. The article also suggest approaches to evaluating of the policy development process, both at the individual and process level. At the process level, members of CYFAR initiatives must design the evaluation to measure the process at the stage it is and not the stage the group strives to reach. Hahn's model also helps members of the policy development community (coalitions) determine if the group is ready to move to the next stage of the process.

This publication identified several lessons learned from public policy education projects. Lessons relating to evaluating public policy education projects include: -Several viable staffing models were used for evaluation but project   staff were often the sole evaluator of their projects. These authors   recommend that this practice be reduced in the future. - Impacts on participants in project activities were reported far      more frequently than impacts on public issue or on the   policy-making process, even though the latter were clearly of   interest to the educators. In the future more emphasis should be   given to the assessment of issue or process impacts. -Issue or process outcomes were more likely to occur when the   scope of a projects audience corresponded with the policy arena   in which the issues addressed by the project were resolved. More   attentions should be given to this relationship in future projects. -Different outcomes appeared to be associated with different stages   of development in the issues addressed by the projects. Future   projects should devote more attention to this relationship. -Attention to capacity building within public policy educators' own   organizations is another important consideration, in addition to   participants and issue or process outcomes. -Realistic and significant target for sustainability from public policy   education endeavors are changes in the way participating   organizations understand, value, or conduct their work (i.e.   capacity-building outcomes). -Creating new organization legacies is a legitimate secondary   purpose of public policy education projects and should be a   primary target for sustainability. This, in turn, requires that the   institutions participating in the projects be learning organizations.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives These lessons can serve as guides to CYFAR initiatives as staff plan and design evaluations for their projects.

The author discusses the lack of a precise definition of policy and suggests that because public policy is developed over time, the policy process cannot be explained as a simple unit or event. Several characteristics of the policy development process are identified: -involves a large number of decision points -involves the presence of a large, heterogeneous group of     participants -includes the complexity of each of the events that contribute to   policy formation -incorporates a dynamic process that is not susceptible to   description by simple additive models The policy process as discussed in this article suggests that the process is a complex, evolving process that can not be explained by simple models. The evaluation of the policy process must therefore seek to provide various data sources in an attempt to fully measure the policy impact.

Implications for CYFAR Initiative The article emphasizes the need for the policy evaluation focus to match the level of the policy development process. Reliance on one source of data is not recommended. The author suggests that because the evaluation process is very complex evaluators need to seek many sources of data as a way to measure the impact of policy.

The author suggest that if "policies" are to direct real world actions and be subject to criticism and improvement from human experiences, the "policy" must have certain attributes and capacities. These attributes and capacities include: an identifiable actor (coalition) with some capacity to produce change a way to project future outcomes within the limits of the actor's (coalition's) capacity a set of concepts that states the outcomes in terms that define the outcomes as completely as possible a mechanism for selecting the preferred outcome from among available options a program of action for achieving the preferred outcome a monitoring system for adjusting the action program in the light of results actually produced a researched knowledge base what demonstrates how the required instruments can be produced and serves as a base for action; within the limits of ordinary human capacity

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives The article outlines distinctive steps needed in a successful policy development process. CYFAR initiatives can evaluate their policy development process against these steps.

The authors suggest that government acts as a catalyst for community change in building the 30 identified assets for youth. Strategies suggested by the authors include: -gathering information about community and young people -convening leaders and citizens to discuss available and needed   information -incorporating asset building into the community vision through   public dialogue -getting people involved by forming partnerships between public,   private, and philanthropic arenas -balancing asset building with specials services by developing   mutually responsive systems that reinforce services -re-examining policies and spending by asking the questions Would this action increase or decrease asset-building programs and service for youth? Would this action reduce or increase barriers to youth participation in asset-building activities or receiving asset-building services? Would this action male it more or less difficult for communities to coordinate programs and services across sections?

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives Many of the CYFAR initiatives have a youth component. This article provides CYFAR initiatives questions for examining youth policies in the community and strategies for rethinking youth policies.

The article examines the relationship between alternative evaluation approaches and the concerns of policy communities (coalitions). The author introduces a framework for utilization-focused evaluation (Figure 1) that allows the evaluator to choose criteria and methods appropriate for the information needs of particular policy communities. The model provides evaluators with evaluation criteria and data collection methods when agreement and/or disagreement over policy ends (goals) and means (way to reach goals - process) arise. Evaluation criteria and methods of collecting data are placed in each cell because each cell produces unique information relevant to the focus of that policy community. The model is not intended to categorize all of the debates but depicts how evaluators may think about the information needs of different audiences. For example, policy development in Cell 1 is characterized by substantial agreement over both ends and means. The major problems that the policy addresses are well defined, goals of policy are understood and patterns of interaction are stable. Thus the focus is on monitoring outcome and maintaining consensus. This is unlike Cell 4 where there is no agreement over the ends or the means of the policy. The function of policy evaluations is then to evaluate the equity (fairness) of different ends and means arrangements. Cell 2 represents agreement about the ends of the policy but not the means. This may happen when agreed upon goals are sidelined by poorly designed programs or inadequately administered. Emphasis in this cell focuses on finding less costly alternatives or better ways to administer the current program. The policy community in Cell 3 agrees abut the means of the policy but disagrees about the ends. The group has developed and implemented programs without a clear set of goals. The task of the evaluator may be to rank the policy goals in relation to the community values. A survey can be used to measure the communities support or opposition toward the existing or proposed policy goals. Figure 1. Framework Policy ends (GOALS) Agreement (PROCESS) Disagreement Policy Mean Cell 1 Criterion: Effectiveness Method: Experimental research Cell 3 Criterion: Responsiveness Method: Survey research Agreement Cell 2 Criterion: Efficiency Method: Cost-benefit analysis Implementation analysis Cell 4 Criterion: Equity Method: participatory research Disagreement This model helps clarify the importance of the policy development process to policy evaluation. For example, cost-benefit analysis of a farm policy may be less useful than survey data that reveals inconsistent goals. Also the model implies that evaluation exists to clarify complexity. It also suggests that evaluation should incorporate an assortment of criteria and methods applicable to distinct policy debates.

Implications for State Strengthening Projects In the language of this article, coalitions involved in the CYFAR initiatives could be substituted for term "policy communities." This model provides alternative evaluation processes for evaluators when coalitions may not be in complete agreement over policy goals or the ways to reach these goals. The model outlines criteria the evaluator may want to consider at various levels of coalition agreement and suggest methods to use in the evaluation process.

This publication identifies six guiding principles for evaluating policy impact on families . These principles suggest that policies should: -support and supplement family function and provide substitute   services as a last resort. -encourage and reinforce family commitment and stability, especially   when children are involved. -recognize the interdependence if the family relationship , the   strengthens of family ties and obligations, and the resources   families have to help members. -encourage family members to collaborate as partners with   professions in service delivery. -acknowledge and value the diversity if family life and recognize the   different ways families may be impacted. -address families with the greatest economic and social needs first.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives These six guiding principles can serve as guidelines for CYFAR initiatives focusing on evaluating and changing family policies.

The author defines policy as the voice of a school board or community coalition. "Policy speaks when the board is not convened and cannot address an issue directly." (p. 28) Ramirez suggests that the goal of a constructive policy is to advance the system toward the vision of the school or coalition. Ramirez identifies these stages of policy development. Identify issues - scan environment to discern trends and issues; both positive and negative Set priorities - judge where the trend fits into the direction your organization has set Analyze and study - determine how best to grapple with the issue or trend - including imput from a variety of sources Take action - delineate your options, then deliberate on those options and then make a decisions Follow through - create formal evaluation mechanisms to monitor expected results or improvements. In using this proposed approach to constructive policy, the policy development process begins in the planning stages of an organization and develops evaluation procedures upon implementation of the policy.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives Ramirez relates policy development to the vision and mission of the organizations and suggest that a policy evaluation process be determined at the beginning stages of organization planning. The article challenges members of CYFAR initiatives to identify and incorporate evaluation procedures at the initial stages of the planning.

The authors identify key questions to consider when planning efforts to influence policy development: Who is responsible for making decisions? What processes do they intend to use to make decisions? What mechanisms are available for public input? What timeline are they working under? Who else needs to give approval? When will the decision go into effect? The authors also identify numerous techniques for influencing legislators. A ranking of the most effective ways to communicate with legislators (with one representing the most effective approach to communicate with legislators is given (complied by the Burston-Marsteller public relations firm). This ranking includes: Government information resources including government sponsored reports/surveys Spontaneous letters - a personal letter from a constituent Orchestrated letters - form letters sent by many individuals Telephone calls Newsletters - may include organization or agency newsletters Position papers on a particular issue Personal visits by constituents News articles Petitions Editorial

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives The article provides questions for members of CYFAR initiatives to consider when planning to influence policy development. Key questions can help coalitions direct actions and resources to achieve maximum results.

Stevens adapts Zimmerman's (1988, 1992) definition of family policy "refers to a perspective for understanding and thinking about policy in relation to families. It is used in the singular as a policy perspective and also as a way of conveying the idea of a cluster of policy measures with identifiable family content that then find expression in family-related program activities. It also is used in the plural to refer to all the individual policies that affect families, both directly or indirectly." (p. 3) The historical assumption that families are to be self-sufficient is no longer true because the impact of work on families is felt in millions of homes and workplaces. Over two-thirds of all mothers with children under the age of 18 are now employed outside the home. The public and private sector can respond to this trend by developing "family-friendly" policies. However, the author cautions that these "family-friendly" polices are not spontaneous, but are developed through a step-by-step process as employees, employers, and communities recognize the trends and begin to take measures to address these trends. Please refer to the tool section for a list of interview questions which could be used to assess local communities policy for "family-friendliness."

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives One of the challenges for CYFAR initiatives will be to confront the assumptions held by employers, employees, and communities that do not support "family friendly" policies. Initiatives seeking change must realize that the public and private sector response to policy change may be a slow, time-consuming process.

Voydanoff introduces the use of the family perspective framework and an ecological systems model as a rationale for policy development of integrated family service delivery systems. The author also includes the goals and characteristics of effective integrated systems. Roles for policy makers are also outlined in the article. The goals of an integrated system are to: -serve a broad population group rather than specific clientele -provide a comprehensive system that addresses the whole child   and adult with a continuum of intensity -coordinate service so they complement and reinforce each other -locate services in community -focus on family strengths and respect diversity -view family members as collaborative partners -involve families in program planning, policy development and   implementation Characteristics of a successful program include: -comprehensive, flexible, and responsive delivery system -dealing with the individual child in relation to family and family as   part of the community (ecological) -staff with the training, time, skills and support to create and build   relationships with children and families -competent, creative, risk-taking administration and management -a focus on prevention Policy makers need to: -understand the systemic nature of community and family needs -focus on the client and family in a community context -diagnose multiple systemic problems in families and their   environment -support accessible programs that address clients multiple needs

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives The article outlines goals of an integrated system and characteristics successful programs that policy makers need to address through policy development. CYFAR initiatives will need to create or persuade policy makers to create polices that support these goals and characteristics of an ecological model of service delivery.

In this book, the author outlines a conceptual framework in which policies can be analyzed based on eight views of policy. Policies can be viewed as: -rational choice -a reflection of political culture -incremental choice -elite preferences -the equilibrium reached between contending interest groups -choice under competitive conditions of no authority -system output -the outcome of institutional structure and processes Zimmerman suggests that family policy can be very direct (e.g., enacting child support laws or family preservation services legislation) or indirect (e.g., the impact of zoning laws and budget cuts on certain groups). All policies have intended and unintended family consequences. The decision to enter WWII reflected the US policy to protect the national security of families yet many families were hurt by the loss of family members. Researchers need to evaluate both the intended consequences and the unintended consequences of policy in an attempt to fully assess the impact on family well-being.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives A challenge for CYFAR initiatives will be to come to a general agreement of policy definition and provide a framework for policy development and evaluation. The definition of policy will guide the initiative in visioning and planning and guide the direction of the evaluation process.

Implications for CYFAR Initiatives
Partnerships or coalitions need to be proactive in the evaluation planning process by identifying and securing access to essential data needed to measure intended outcomes. The framework also provides evaluators with activities to help determine the need for partnerships, measuring the effectiveness of the partnership process, and determining the achievements of the partnership.

Thurman, Q. & Reisig, M. (1996). Community-oriented research in an era of community-oriented policing. American Behavioral Scientist, 39 (5), 570-586.

This article identifies several methods of data collection for assessing the interest of community in local government services. Strengths and weaknesses of each method of data collection are identified in the article.

The methods include:
1. Community forums- scheduled public town meetings to hear and discuss planning and/or implementation issues

Strengths: provides a first impression of community-wide sentiment regarding issue.
                     identifies motivated persons as possible committee volunteers.
Weaknesses: will not hear from disengaged citizens who do not attend the forums.
                            voice of average citizen many be drowned out by passionate citizens.

2. Interviews- conducted with community elite and key persons knowledgeable about community sentiments

Strength: provides initial sense of issue's importance and context
Weaknesses: identifying the best people to interview is difficult may not provide                            input from all groups in the community

3. Surveys-administered to a representative cross-section of the community

Strength: provides systematic, firsthand data collection
Weakness: usability dependent on return rate

4. Focus groups: planned group interviews useful for assessing opinion of relevant community subgroups

Strength: provide first hand-data collection from various subgroups
Weakness: limited generalizability

Implications of CYFAR Initiatives
This article provides CYFAR initiatives with a variety of methods to collect data relating to policy development. Evaluators will need to select method(s) appropriate for their resources and data needed.

Indicators and Measures		Other Tools	For More Information	Internet Links
| Policy Development |
| Program Outcomes for Communities |
| NOWG Home |