Downey, L., & Anyaegbunam, C. (2010). Your lives through your eyes: Rural Appalachian youth identify community needs and assets through the use of photovoice. Journal of Appalachian Studies, 16(1&2), 42-61.

This reading also applies to Chapter 4.

Downey and Anyaegbunam describe an application of the photo voice technique in a rural setting. The article provides a good illustration of how to use the methodology and how to incorporate the community in the interpretation of data and discussion of future options. It is important to note the particular environment in which the procedure was employed.

How could this be used in a different setting?
What about sampling in a large city?
What kind of bias might be inherent in the technique?
What could be done to make it better?
What other kinds of data might complement photo voice results?

Altschuld, J. W., & Eastmond, J. N., Jr. (2010), Chapter 5. Needs assessment: Getting the process started. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

This chapter contains an extensive discussion of the continuum from cooperation on the one end and to collaboration on the other. The context for the discussion is needs assessment but the principles generalize to asset/capacity building or to it in combination with NA. Principles for how organizations and groups might work together are given.

What are the incentives for collaborating and cooperating?
How does one facilitate either of these processes?
How would one maintain either of them over time?
What are the downsides to each of them?
What might lead to failure for collaboration?

Balogh, R., Whitelaw, S., & Thompson, J. (2008). Rapid needs appraisal in the modern NHS: Potential and dilemmas. Critical Public Health, 18(2), 233-244.

This reading also applies to Chapter 7.

This article brings up the issue of community preparedness for an asset/capacity building and needs assessment effort. It was an investigation done in 4 communities in the U. K. and one key observation was that experience with such activities might pay big dividends when a new one is implemented. This is a very provocative concept implying that there is a certain readiness that enhances subsequent ventures.

How could readiness be assessed?
What are indicators of readiness? Qualitative? Quantitative?
How could a community and subgroups within it brought up to a state of readiness?
Might prior experience interfere with openness? What do you think?
Could this lead to the same old voices involved to the detriment of new players?

 

Altschuld, J. W., & Eastmond, J. N., Jr. (2010). Needs assessment: Getting the process started. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

This part of the chapter is pertinent to how one might go about micro-ethnography with an emphasis on cultural auditing. In-depth examples of cultural audits and in one instance an audit is viewed from the independent perspective of international individuals familiar with the situation. It is utilitarian to see multiple examples of such ethnography.

How you sell this idea to a funder?
Are there indicators besides what is in the chapter and new book that should be looked at in a cultural audit?
How should members of a team doing such an audit operate so as to take maximum advantage of their efforts?
How should negative results if uncovered be handled?
If they are there, should the team consider withdrawing from the effort?
If potential respondents are uncooperative, how might this situation be handled?

 

Hites, Fifolt, Beck, H., Su, W., Kerbawy, S., and Wakelee, J. (In press). A Geospatial Mixed Methods Approach to Assessing Campus Safety, Evaluation Review.

This is a good example of mixing methods with one being geospatial and the other a unique approach to conducting focus group interviews. Both methods are done well and for the latter, in particular, the study shows a deep sensitivity to the subtle nature of the process and how it should be led for maximum effect.

How could efforts like this be done more cheaply?
What are your perspectives on how the focus group interviews were conducted?
Did the procedure as conducted lead to different results than if the groups were led by individuals in positions of more authority? Discuss.
What are other sources of data that might have been studied?
Should observations have been used and if so, what might have been their nature?
How would you have presented the information to decision-makers?

Hung, H.-L., Altschuld, J. W., & Lee, Y.-F. (2008). Methodological and conceptual issues confronting a cross-country Delphi study of educational program evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 31(2), 191-198.

This paper is based on cross-cultural/county needs study employing the Delphi procedure. How the investigation was carried out is explained as well as the many issues and difficulties encountered. Of particular interest is a table that highlights the advantages and disadvantages of the Delphi.

Consider doing this study by phone interviews, what might be the advantages and disadvantages of doing so?
How could the study have been changed so that respondents were clearly thinking about the region rather than their home country?
Would an open-ended survey have been better, explain your perceptions?
If this study were to be followed up, what would or should that investigation consist of and what would key questions in terms of needs and possibly assets?
In your judgment, what are the benefits and dis-benefits of cross cultural investigations?

 

Altschuld, J. W. (2010a). Needs assessment: Collecting data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Altschuld, J. W. (Ed.). (2010b). The needs assessment kit. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chapter 3 consists of an overview of the survey aspect of needs assessments. It guides the reader through first steps in designing such surveys through to the completed product and has many sample items embedded throughout the chapter. The items could be easily adapted to other contexts. It also underscores potential problems in creating high quality surveys.

What might be some adaptations of surveys for assets/capacity building?
How would or should questions be worded of handled around touchy issues such as administrative support?
What about asset type questions for Levels 1, 2, and 3 and how should they be worded?
What might be good probing, open-ended questions?
Are surveys best used for hidden assets like group interactions, explain your reasons why?

 

Stevahn, L., & King, J. A. (2010). Needs assessment: Taking action for change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

The authors deal with the last phase (post assessment) of a 3 phase model of needs assessment and its focus is on decision-making and action plans. The selected pages first and foremost include a table that shows a ‘double dozen’ methods and where they fit into the NA process. The other pages pertain to specific techniques included in Chapter 5 in the current book.

There are 24 techniques noted by the authors, how might some not covered in the assets and needs book be used? What are your ideas?
What techniques stand out to you and why?
If you have seen techniques like these employed or if you have taken advantage of them yourself, what did that implementation look like and how well did they work?
Stevahn and King, assigned the double dozen to the three phases of needs assessment, how might you place them in terms of the 8 main steps of the Hybrid Framework?

 

Altschuld, J. W., & Lepicki, T. L. (2010a). Needs assessment and education. InP. Peterson & E. Baker (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 786-791). Oxford, England: Elsevier.

Altschuld, J. W., & Lepicki, T. L. (2010b). Needs assessment in human performance interventions. In R. Watkins & D. Leigh (Eds.), The handbook for the selection and implementation of human performance interventions (Chapter 32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

The concern of this manuscript is to describe needs assessment and its three phases as might be used in education and related enterprises. A major distinguishing characteristic is how a NAC or a guiding group could role play what it has learned about assets and needs before offering findings to a much larger audience. The content came from work done in a complex organizational setting.

Would it have better to sample actual members of the recipient audience for the role playing? How would you actually do this?
Should the working group have designed the roles rather than the facilitators of the process? How would this have differed from what was done?
Should the roles have included those of administrators and what questions might be asked of them?
Describe what you think could go wrong with this procedure?

 

Altschuld, J. W., & Witkin, B. R. (2000). From needs assessment to action: Transforming needs into solution strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

The denoted text is the genesis for the checklist in the Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment book (Chapter 6). The thinking behind the 2000 checklist has been updated and improved for the 2014 version. It is of value to see how the new checklist built off of and evolved from what was done previously. The foundation was clearly established more than a decade ago.

The items in the checklist for the 2000 book were much simpler than in the new text, compare the two and provide your perceptions?
Both checklists rely on categorical responses and not more open ended views of what might be in an investigation, what about doing both in a more qualitative fashion? Please discuss.
What items are more critical to observe and why?
What items would you drop and why?
Are some sections of the checklists more important than others, explain?

Williams, K. J., Bray, P. G., Shapiro-Mendoza, C. K., Reisz, I., & Peranteau, J. (2009). Modeling the principles of community-based participatory research in a community health assessment conducted by a health foundation. Health Promotion Practice, 10(1), 67-75.

This paper is notable in that it tests 3 models for doing hybrid work. To a large degree each approach is provided in sufficient detail to afford an understanding of their distinctions. Comparisons like this are difficult to do and it was the only case located that attempted to attempt such contrasts. It emanated from long terms endeavors in public health. The resultant model that worked best was predicated on what seemed to be the best features of the other two.

Speak to the issue of doing research efforts like this in terms of feasibility and costs?
Learning occurs via a two headed arrow as observed in this case and especially for the funding agencies, how would you emphasize this benefit to the agencies at the start of the endeavor?
How generalizable is something like this to other settings?
What about the time elements involved from initiation to completion of the efforts and the patience involved?

 

Williams, R. J.,Kittinger, D. S.. Ta,V.M., Nihoa, W. K., Payne, C., and C.R.
(2012). An assessment of community capacity to prevent adolescent alcohol consumption. Health Promotion Practice, Vol.13, No.5. 670-678.

Basically an asset/capacity building project with recognition of a need (youth alcohol abuse) that could be helped via an intervention. A rich set of methods were part of the procedures and there was a clear recognition of the voice of the people and the importance of coalitions in information gathering and the eventual implementation of solutions.

Change is based on coalitions from information gathering all the way to interventions, what might be necessary to get such involvement?
Issue criticality of issues (alcohol abuse, drugs, guns) is a trigger for getting a community going, but what about others, such as building infrastructure, maintaining community character, and so on? How do we ignite the imagination of people?
What role could or should the literature play in such ventures and should they be attempted without a lot of preliminary groundwork?
How might benchmarking be applied here?

 

Fuertes, C., Pasarin, M. I., Borrell, C., Artazcoz, L., & Diez, E. (2012). Feasibility of a community action model oriented to reduce inequalities in health. Health Policy, 107, 289-295.

A rich example involving community coalitions, extensive data collection about needs and assets, an advisory group and other features of hybrid work proposed in the new text. They even extend to participative prioritization of an intervention and its description including evaluation plans. The intervention was implemented in two neighborhoods in Barcelona and what resulted from its use.

Many of the questions and concerns raised for the prior reading are applicable to this article.

Notice how the results differed in the two neighborhoods, with that in mind suggest what might be difficulties from relying too much on benchmarking and literature sources?

 

Hausman, A. J., Siddons, K., & Becker, J. (2000). Using community perspectives on youth firearm violence for prevention programming. Journal of Community Psychology, 28(6), 643-654.

A very good paper about a hybrid framework (asset/capacity building and needs assessment) done in the U.S. in regard to youth gun violence in a major city. The complexity of what was undertaken and especially notable is that community members suggested the indicators for measuring the success of new initiatives to reduce or rectify the problem.

Again, many of questions and discussion points for previous cases are relevant here.
The idea of having community members identify criteria of success is novel, have you done this in any of your own work and if yes, please describe?
Think of major cities in the US or in other countries, what kind of time frame is necessary to do this work and how is that explained to administrators and funders who are always impatient in regard to change?

 

Griffin, D., & Farris, A. (2010). School counselors and collaboration: Finding Resources through community asset mapping. Professional School Counseling, Vol.13, Issue 5, pp. ????

Community asset mapping as employed in the context of school counseling programs. The increasing needs of students for counseling services are amply cited with the proposition that finding additional assets and resources are critical. Ideas for community mapping are reminiscent of those suggested by Kretzmann and McKnight in 1993. The benefits of describing what is available are underscored and a four step model is provided. Detailed procedures for each step are also explained.

See above cases

Provide examples of how you might adapt and utilize the 4 steps in your own work and context..
What are limitations to the use of local assets that you might run into (willingness to cooperate, resource quality, etc.)?

Thomas, L. R., Donovan, D. M., & Sigo, R. L. W. (2010). Identifying community needs and resources in a native community: A research partnership in the Pacific Northwest. Int J.Mental Health Addiction, 8:362-373.

This was a case where there is a sharp cultural difference between the individuals with responsibility for the investigation and the population being studied. If the investigators took the wrong stance or were not fully cognizant of the context the study could (would) have easily failed. Fortunately in this needs assessment and asset/capacity building project they became participant observers on the journey which was entirely appropriate and made for a much higher degree of success. This is a solid illustration of the reconnaissance required for hybrid type work.

See above cases
Culture must be taken into evaluation, needs assessment, and asset/capacity building endeavor - describe where it has come to the fore in your endeavors and how you handled the situation(s).
What are indicators or guideposts in this regard that you attend to and how they change what you do?
How does the role of say a participant observer look unique as compared to that of an external facilitator?

 

Supplemental Readings are not necessary for this chapter, since it is more of an idea generator than a chapter based on literature.