Assessing Deliberation: Setting the Agenda, Implementing Policy, and Outcomes Lisa-Marie Napoli, Ph.D. Becky Nesbit, Doctoral Candidate Lisa Blomgren Bingham.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Moving the process forward Sálvano Briceño UN/ISDR.
Advertisements

Making consultation and community engagement meaningful David Jones in Scotland.
Module 4 Planning SP. What’s in Module 4  Opportunities for SP  Different SP models  Communication plan  Monitoring and evaluating  Working session.
INITIAL ON BOARDING COACHING
DR Heather Robertson (RN PhD) A single case study: an evaluation of the impact of the implementation of the Primary Health Care Strategy on the primary.
Multi stakeholder forums and Extractives in Africa Public participation & environmentally and socially responsible natural resource use.
Renée A. Daugherty, Ph.D. and Sue E. Williams, Ph.D. Developing Effective Leaders Citizen Engagement through Public Deliberation.
Local Big Data: The Role of Libraries in Building Community Data Infrastructures John Bertot, PhD, Brian Butler, PhD & Diane Travis, MLS University of.
Project Monitoring Evaluation and Assessment
The Child Care Council of Onondaga County Board Effectiveness Project By Maxwell Consulting Team I James DeWan, Isaku Endo, Amy Fedigan, Elanit Rothschild,
Assessing Impacts of Citizen Engagement Through Public Deliberation Presented by Sue Williams, Ph.D. Ron C. Powers, Ph.D. Renée Daugherty, Ph.D. Wendy.
Promoting Student Engagement: Involving Students with NSSE Planning and Results William Woods University NSSE Users’ Workshop October 6-7, 2005.
A Healthy Place to Live, Learn, Work and Play:
Notes for a presentation to the EEN (Canada) Forum Blair Dimock Director, Research, Evaluation and Knowledge Management October 1, 2010 Sharing Practical.
Assessing the Heritage Planning Process: the Views of Citizens Assessing the Heritage Planning Process: the Views of Citizens Dr. Michael MacMillan Department.
1 Qualitative Evaluation Terms Coding/categorization The process of condensing qualitative data through the identification of common themes. Data Matrix.
Shared Decision Making: Moving Forward Together
1 Assessments of the Environment in the European Quality of Life Perception Surveys Klaus Trutzel German KOSIS Association Urban Audit c/o Bureau for Statistics.
Edward M. Haugh Jr. ESC Consultant. III. Recommendations for Applying Outcomes Planning to ESC  I. Introduction to Outcomes Planning II. A Sample ESC.
From Evidence to Action: Addressing Challenges to Knowledge Translation in RHAs The Need to Know Team Meeting May 30, 2005.
Accepting the Call: Making the Most of your Board Archdiocese of Cincinnati August 4, 2015.
Techniques in Civic Engagement Presented by Bill Rizzo Local Government Specialist UW-Extension Local Government Center
Abstract: More and more cities are choosing to implement a Regional Visioning Effort to help guide them into the future. Most efforts state community engagement.
Local Government Programming In-service October 22 & 23, 2014 Deliberative Governance: Civil Discourse and Public Engagement Presented by Bill Rizzo Professor.
Too expensive Too complicated Too time consuming.
EVALUATION RESEARCH. Evaluation Research  How do we begin?  What are the different types of evaluation research?  How do these different types fit.
Successful Contract Training: A Grounded Theory for a Sustainable Business Model presented at the National Council for Workforce Education Conference by.
Canada/US Experiences in Public Involvement Learning from our Neighbours C2D2 Presentation Miriam Wyman and Sandra Zagon Collaboration Practitioners Network.
October  The Economic and Social Council (ESC) is “the civil parliament” of Bulgaria. It unites a variety of Bulgarian civil society organisations.
Framework for Monitoring Learning & Evaluation
1 Mid-Term Review of the Hyogo Framework for Action Roadmap to Disaster Risk Reduction in the Americas & HFA Mid-Term Review.
The Life of a Policy Council Member
 How do we begin?  What are the different types of evaluation research?  How do these different types fit together?  What purpose do they serve?
Strategic Academic Visioning and Empowerment (SAVE) Final Report to UWF BOT December 2011.
American Community Survey (ACS) Program Review Webinar March 6, 2012.
PRESENTATION IV Cycle of the Structured Dialogue.
Prepared by the North Dakota State Data Center July HNDECA and ECCS Evaluation Dr. Richard Rathge Professor and Director North Dakota State Data.
Stakeholder consultations Kyiv May 13, Why stakeholder consultations? To help improve project design and implementation To inform people about changes.
TOPIC 12 STAKEHOLDERS AND SUSTAINABILITY. Introduction to Agenda 21 The Earth Summit held in Rio De Janerio, Brazil was attended by 178 country leaders.
Project Stakeholder Management
Public Health Advocacy in Low Income Settings: Views and Experiences on Effective Strategies and Evaluation of Health Advocates in Malawi IFGH Conference:
The shift to programs in the LAC region. What is a program? A program is a coherent set of initiatives by CARE and our allies that involves a long-term.
Stakeholder analysis for project design Ingvild Oia, Programme Specialist,UNDP Photo by: Konomiho/flickr.
Nancy L. Weaver, PhD, MPH Department of Community Health School of Public Health Saint Louis University 16 July 2010 LOGIC MODEL FUNDAMENTALS.
Integrating Knowledge Translation and Exchange into a grant Maureen Dobbins, RN, PhD SON, January 14, 2013.
Situation Analysis Determining Critical Issues for Virginia Cooperative Extension.
The Major Steps of a Public Health Evaluation 1. Engage Stakeholders 2. Describe the program 3. Focus on the evaluation design 4. Gather credible evidence.
AMERICASPEAKS Engaging Citizens in Governance Citizens Role in Policy Development NVAC Public Participation Working Group September.
CR TOOLKIT WORKSHOP SOCIAL IMPACT & OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSMENT (SIOA) Ref- ICMM CD Toolkit # 12 Trainer: Jane Wiyawa Date Friday 13 th September 2013 Venue:
Influence analysis of community resident support for sustainable tourism development By Tsung Hung Lee. Presented By Ibrahim Zubairu Abubakar Auwalu Sani.
The Formation of Public Policy Promoting Civil Society in the 21st Century.
Developing a Framework In Support of a Community of Practice in ABI Jason Newberry, Research Director Tanya Darisi, Senior Researcher
Community Needs Assessment LIS 490CEL Oct 6, 2009 Jaime Schumacher.
“Participation is a Goal, not just a Means, in NFPs.” Margaret A. Shannon, Ph.D. COST Action E-19 Vienna, September 15, 2003.
Bringing people together to create great places to live, work, and play Planning for Rural Success APA Idaho October 7, 2015.
DEVELOPING THE WORK PLAN
AMERICASPEAKS Engaging Citizens in Governance.
11/15/11website: PAC RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATIONS: KEY TO EFFECTIVE ACCOUNTABILITY Simbarashe Mashonganyika Programme.
Increasing Evaluation Transparency: A Dialogue Strategy Sheila A. Arens June, 2003.
The Strategy – PRERED, Forum outcomes Pablo Torrealba.
Contextualizing the Evaluand: Considering Context in Data Collection and Analysis Jamie Weinstein, MPH The MayaTech Corporation, With CDC’s National Center.
Update: South Africa’s Preparatory Process for HABITAT III Presentation to Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements 15 March
What is Public Deliberation? Deliberation is an approach to politics in which citizens, not just experts or politicians, are deeply involved in public.
United Nations Environment Programme
IT Governance Planning Overview
The Community as a Client: Assessment and Diagnosis
Facilitating Routine HIV Testing in Clinical Settings: The Role of the AIDS Education & Training Centers FTCC Meeting- July 14th, 2010 Beth-Anne Jacob,
New Mexico First Town Hall 2017
Community Integration and Development USP Conference May 2013
Purpose of engagement To engage with citizens, elected members and staff in identifying actions to achieve the goals of a new Stakeholder Engagement.
Presentation transcript:

Assessing Deliberation: Setting the Agenda, Implementing Policy, and Outcomes Lisa-Marie Napoli, Ph.D. Becky Nesbit, Doctoral Candidate Lisa Blomgren Bingham Keller-Runden Professor of Public Service and Director, Indiana Conflict Resolution Institute Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

AmericaSpeaks 21st Century Town Meetings Format: Deliberative democracy taken to scale (1000 to over 1,300 people in the cases studied here) Deliberative dialogue combined with computer technology and keypad polling Facilitated table discussions (10-12 people at each table) Includes both small and large group discussion for collective decision making Theme teams collect information, develop report Goal to examine relationship of deliberation event to the policy process, not quality of deliberation itself AS provides successful model in increasingly widespread use and thus good subject.

Research Questions How did agenda setting for these 21st Century Town Meetings™ occur? Were there policy recommendations that government implemented? What are the impacts or outcomes of the process?

Methodology Qualitative Research Structured interview protocol in person and on telephone Descriptive data, some Likert scale questions Analytical grounded theory N6 NUD*IST qualitative software for analysis Interview Data 66 people; 69 total interviews 24 participants: Citizens who attended Town Meeting 38 clients: Government, stakeholder organizations 4 AmericaSpeaks staff -- multiple interviews

21st Century Town Meetings in Three Cities Cincinnati, Ohio: Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission (January 12, 2002) 19 participants, 15 clients, 3 AS staff Chicago, Illinois: Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (October 27, 2001) 5 participants, 11 clients, 1 AS staff Charlotte, North Carolina: United Agenda for Children under the auspices of The Lee Institute (December 11, 2004) 12 clients, 3 AS staff Participant survey research ongoing and not reported here

Agenda Setting Citizens played a substantial role in shaping the agenda for the 21st Century Town Meeting. AS used similar approaches in Midwest cities: public workshops to identify challenges and values relevant to regional plan. Collected and synthesized into an agenda for discussion at the Town Meeting In Charlotte, AS organized meetings with civil society in the form of nonprofit and social service organizations, government, and AS staff

Midwest Participants: Percent agree or strongly agree Better Under- standing Percentages Issues became Important

Town Meeting and Policy Process What is relation of Town Meeting agenda to policy process? Interviews: What decisions did the client organizations want to make as a result of the forum? Were there policy issues that emerged or surfaced during this project?

Client Interviews: Policy Recommendations? General policy areas discussed24% (9) Process intended to get public input, not recommendations 18% (7) School nurse recommendation (Charlotte) 18% (7) Final report created; not recommendations 16% (6) Specific policy recommendation11% (4) Don’t know recommendation5% (2)

Midwest Participant Interviews: Policy Recommendations Can not recall specific recommendations 63% (15) Regional plan created; not specific policy recommendations 25% (6) Not aware of policy recommendations 8% (2) General policy areas4% (1) Conclusion: Lack of Clarity on Relation of Forum to Policy Process

Implementation Open question: Is policy implementation a necessary part of planning for the deliberative process? During period of , AmericaSpeaks process helped Midwest communities generate priorities and recommendations for regional plans; implementation was up to clients. Committees, community action teams, accountability are issues OH had CATs (community action teams) AS changing process to plan for implementation up front

Client Interviews: Lack of Clarity about Implementation Too early to discuss18% (7) Policy recommendations implemented 16% (6) School nurse policy (Charlotte)16% (6) Don’t know anything13% (5) Committee responsible for overseeing implementation 11% (4) Not much implementation11% (4) Some implementation8% (3)

Midwest Participant Interviews: Implementation Do not know anything54% (13) Implementation process is just beginning 17% (4) Regional plan created13% (3) Involvement of community action group 4% (1) No policies implemented4% (1) Conclusion: Confusion about implementation

Impacts and Outcomes Positive, short-term outcomes: participants find the process energizing and engaging Participants gain a better understanding of community issues through their participation Cincinnati and Chicago produced planning reports, cited as successful implementation Longer term outcomes and impacts may depend on implementation and follow-through

Comparing Midwest Participants and Clients: Agree or Strongly Agree Percentages

Midwest Participants: Agree or Strongly Agree Percentages Reconsidered own Opinion Better Understanding of Policy Changes

Midwest Participant Interviews: Impacts & Outcomes Positive impact on citizen- government relationship 50% (12) Positive short-term impact of meeting; Uncertain future 17% (4) Negative or no impact on citizen- government relationship 17% (4) Potential is present to impact citizen-government relationship 8% (2)

Client Responses: Agree or Strongly Agree Satisfied with Recommendations Attention to Marginalized Groups Percentages

Client Interviews: Impacts & Outcomes Forum did not alleviate policy conflicts 42% (16) Process helped alleviate policy conflicts 39% (15) Positive impact on citizen- government relationship 66% (25) Town Meeting does not affect citizen-government relationship 16% (6) Unaware if citizen-government relationship affected 5% (2)

Conclusions 21st Century Town Meeting agendas are citizen driven Citizens and and client organizations need more clarity up front about the relationship between the forum and the policy process Impacts will depend on follow through, and right now there is limited evidence of government making concrete use of the plans or agendas from the meetings.