1998 Community Assessment


 

Methods and Procedures

The original intent of this assessment was framed on three key decisions regarding the design of the research. First, the assessment needed to be fully grounded on the CANs Strategies for Building a Stronger Community: A Community Guide, published in 1997. This document was to be used as the sole source of outcomes or objectives for the health and social well-being of the community. Second, the assessment was designed to measure the gaps between service needs and available delivery capacity. This gap analysis was to be achieved with the use of a capacity survey that had been initiated in late 1997. Third, the assessment was to match specific resources with specific needs.

Barriers and Difficulties Encountered

Several difficulties, some anticipated and others not, were encountered in the course of the assessment. These difficulties required various modifications and adjustments to the process and caused delays in the production of the report.

During the assessment, among the challenges encountered and the resulting solutions or modifications were the following:

  • The number of outcomes had to be limited because many outcomes were not linked to any measurable indicator and others were too imprecise to determine reliable indicators.
  • The use of capacity had to be abandoned because there were few reliable measures that appropriately captured the relevant capacity in the community.
  • Acquiring relevant input, and the need to secure consensus on the interpretation of that data, on the appropriateness of social indicators, and on the key findings and themes, was much more difficult than anticipated. In most areas, there were extensive and apparently legitimate differences of expert opinion. The reconciling of these differences, where possible, took much longer than had been initially estimated.
  • The most important challenge is also part of the recommendations. This assessment cannot be viewed as a one-time effort. This effort can only succeed if it is an ongoing process. This report must be viewed as a work in progress and must be maintained and expanded with current data (including capacity information), more interpretation, priority setting, better measurement of gaps, and identification of the resources that impact services.

Data Searches and Overview of Sources

Between December 97 and May 98, the assessment staff solicited data from more than 100 different local, state, and regional agencies. (The list of sources is being prepared as an appendix to this report).

Data sources differ widely in frequency, purpose, type, reliability, and availability to users. Because of these variations, data sources presented significant challenges in access, interpretation, and use for this Community Assessment Report. It is essential that a repository of current social indicator data be established so that future assessment efforts can be periodically and regularly updated.

Consultation and Review Process

Several quality assurance strategies were utilized during the assessment process. For each of the issue areas, field experts and/or well-known service providers were identified and contacted for input and review of early drafts of the documents. In addition, for each issue area, a focus group (consultation session) involving six to 14 individuals with varying types of involvement in the issue area was convened. These professionally moderated sessions were used to solicit input on the drafts, to secure additional data sources, and to review the validity of key findings and themes.

In addition to these field expert reviews, the CAN Administrative Team and its Assessment Committee (including CAN Resource Council members) regularly met and reviewed the process and the content of the Assessment Report. CAN staff had a further involvement in reviewing both the content and the format of the assessment report chapters.

Final Review and Responsibility

NuStats International and its project manager, Carlos Arce, were responsible for Phase One of this process which included compilation of the data and information contained in the Assessment Report and the initial drafting of its content. The Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Department provided leadership and oversight for Phase Two which included data verification for accuracy and coverage, redrafting of the content, and preparation of the final assessment document. Members of the CAN Assessment Team provided data and other expertise in the process, and along with area experts, reviewed and modified the content to improve accuracy and applicability. The CAN Resource Council has approved release of the Assessment Report to the community. The Assessment Report is the first step in an ongoing, evolving process to continously monitor and evaluate community conditions relating to health and human services. Comments, suggestions, and corrections should be submitted as soon as possible by any reader to Blanca Leahy by phone: (512) 707-3291, Fax: (512) 707-5400 or email: .

USE

As stated above, this Assessment Report is the first step in an ongoing, complex process to describe current community conditions. It contains substantial, detailed information but is not comprehensive or exhaustive. It should be used only as one reference among several for any decisions made about health and human services. It should not be used as a stand alone source. The authors acknowledge that there may be issues, subjects, elements, topics and concepts that are not included in a particular section of this report which are of special concern to certain users. Please advise us as soon as possible about these concerns so that they may be considered for inclusion in the follow-up work.

Plans are underway to put in place the next steps in this process to continously research, collect and analyze data on community needs, gaps in service, and trends relating to health and human services. The process and the data will be made available to the community as soon as possible.

Assessment Home