Involving the Community In Decisions: Data Gathering for SILC’s June 12, 2008

1. Involving the Community In Decisions: Data Gathering for SILC’s June 12, 2008 Presented by: Judy Sharken Simon Manager Board & Volunteer Services jsharkensimon@mapfornonprofits.org 651-632-7222 Brad Williams Executive Director, New York SILC bradw@nysilc.org 518-427-1060 voice & TTY

2. What we’ll cover • Community Input – Why Bother? • Commonly Used Methods for Gathering Input • One SILC’s Story • Possible Barriers • Resources • Next Steps

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

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

5. Commonly Used Methods for Gathering Input • Interviews • Surveys • Community Forums • Focus Groups • Email comment

6. Interviews • Typically used… • Before: planning, ideas for program design, upfront advice • After: assessment, summary, reaction

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

8. The Downside of Interviews • Lack of synergy • Require time • Limited quantities are possible • Difficult to standardize and quantify responses

9. Surveys • Typically used… • Before: market research • Ongoing: name changes, recruit new clients • After: evaluation

10. Most Important Things to Remember about Surveys • Survey design is very important • Quantitative analysis of results is critical • Helpful in reaching broadly

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!

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

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

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

15. Focus Groups • Typically used… • Before: planning, program design, market research • Ongoing: name changes, recruit new clients • After: assessment, summary, post mortem, image

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

17. The Downside of Focus Groups • Need a skilled facilitator • Time is limited so number of questions is also limited

18. Email Comment • Typically used in… • Collecting opinions, beliefs and attitudes • Ongoing: during the course of public comment period • After: feedback, further thoughts

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

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.

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.

22. Step 2 Establish 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

23. Steps 3 & 4 • Identify and invite the participants • Generate the questions to be asked

24. NYSILC Example FACILITATION 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?

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 out of 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.

26. Step 5 Maybe • Develop a script • Select a facilitator • Choose the location

27. Steps 6, 7, & 8 • Initiate the Method • Interpret and report the results • Translate the results into action

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?

29. What’s Worked for You? Additional Questions or Comments?

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

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.

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)

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.

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!

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.

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)

37. Possible Barriers – What Might Get in the Way? Additional Questions? • Money • Time • Access to people

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/constitutionsandethics/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)