Effective Grant Writing and Program Evaluation for Human Service Professionals E-Book

Francis K. O. Yuen

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 424

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2009

Beschreibung

A state-of-the-art guide for developing grants witha strong emphasis on using program outcome measurement to underscore need and accountability Based on the authors' many years of experience in the public and nonprofit sectors, Effective Grant Writing and Program Evaluation for Human Service Professionals integrates the topics of grant proposal writing and program evaluation, offering grant seekers the practical guidance they need to develop quality proposals, obtain funding, and demonstrate service results and accountability. The authors clearly and succinctly illustrate and describe each stage of the grant writing and evaluation process. Problems or issues that arise frequently are highlighted and followed by specific advice. In addition, numerous real-world examples and exercises are included throughout the book to give readers the opportunity for reflection and practice. This timely reference incorporates a strengths perspective, providing: * An inside look at the grant writing and evaluation processes, with insights from experienced grant writers, agency administrators, foundation program managers, and grant reviewers * Specific examples of successful grant proposals and evaluation plans and instruments serving as models for learning and practice * Field-tested individual and group exercises that facilitate the development of grant writing and evaluation skills * Discussion of electronic technology in grant writing and evaluation, including writing and submitting grant proposals online, and identifying funding sources This grant writing and program evaluation guide follows a needs-driven, evidence-based, result-oriented, and client-centered perspective. Its authoritative discussion equips human service professionals to effectively develop grants with a strong emphasis on measuring program outcomes.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright Page

Dedication

Acknowledgements

About the Authors

About the Contributors

CHAPTER 1 - Introduction

Purpose of This Book

The Organization and Approaches Used for This Book

Grant Writing and Program Evaluation: Outcomes and Evidence

Defining Program and Program Planning

The Ethics and Secret Handshake of Grant Writing and Program Evaluation

References

CHAPTER 2 - Community and Target Population, Service Providers, and Funding Sources

The Good Idea Program

What Is a Community?

Macro Practice, Grant Writing, and Program Evaluations

Target Populations and Needs

Service Providers

Funding Sources

References

CHAPTER 3 - Basic Research Methods and Program Evaluation

Program Evaluation: A Practice of Social Research

Research Question

Research Designs

Four Major Types of Research Designs

Validity and Reliability

The Relationship between Validity and Reliability

Sampling

Data Collection and Instruments

Data Analysis

Statistics

References

CHAPTER 4 - Program Planning and Evaluation

Needs Assessment

Program Planning Formula

Logic Model as a Tool for Planning and Evaluation and Theory of Change

References

CHAPTER 5 - Grant Proposal Writing: Beginning with the End in Mind

Grant and Contract

Request for Proposal, Request for Application, and Program Announcement

Letter of Intent/Letter of Inquiry

Getting Ready, Logic Model, and Program Planning and Evaluation Worksheet

Key Components of a Grant Proposal

Proposal Reviews

Summary

References

CHAPTER 6 - Program Evaluation

The Level of Rigor

Outcome-Focused Evaluation

Empowerment Evaluation

Outcome-Focused Empowerment Evaluation

Evaluation Section of a Proposal

Beyond the Grant Proposal

References

CHAPTER 7 - Learning by Doing: Exercises, Templates, Samples, Checklists, and ...

Samples and Self Help Materials

References

CHAPTER 8 - Real-Life Samples

Grant Proposals

A Coordinated Approach to Youth: Prevention and Intervention Services in Sun Town

Mandarin Chinese Class in Your Schools Proposals

Evaluation Plans

References

CHAPTER 9 - Application of Information Technology

Information Technology

Evaluation Methods and Technology

References

Author Index

Subject Index

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Copyright © 2009 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.

Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Published simultaneously in Canada.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, [phone], fax [phone], or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, [phone], fax [phone].

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. In all instances where John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is aware of a claim, the product names appear in initial capital or all capital letters. Readers, however, should contact the appropriate companies for more complete information regarding trademarks and registration.

For general information on our other products and services please contact our Customer Care Department within the U.S. at [phone], outside the United States at [phone] or fax [phone].

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data:

Yuen, Francis K. O.

Effective grant writing and program evaluation for human service professionals / by Francis K.O. Yuen, Kenneth L. Terao, Anna Marie Schmidt. p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

eISBN : 978-0-470-56443-1

1. Proposal writing in human services. 2. Human services. 3. Proposal writing for grants. I. Terao, Kenneth L. II. Schmidt, Anna Marie. III. Title.

HV41.2.Y.15’224—dc22

To all dedicated and resourceful education, health, and human service professionals and volunteers, who with unflagging desire and commitment make a difference in our communities.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the contributors for their generosity in sharing their professional insights. Marquita Flemming, Senior Editor at Wiley, has been most supportive, considerate, flexible, and patient with us throughout the development of this book—thank you! We appreciate the editorial support of Kim A. Nir, Senior Production Editor; and Kathleen DeChants at Wiley; and Ginjer Clarke, copyeditor; as well as the initial editorial assistance of Meredith Linden, particularly on those last-minute turnarounds.

We are grateful for the inspiration, encouragement, critiques, and sharing of talents from the staff of Project STAR of JBS International Inc., Aguirre Division. Special recognition must go to the Project STAR training coaches, who have infused their training with creativity, energy, and humor, and who collectively have made it their mission to pull back the veil of mystery that enshrouds evaluation and ensure that it is both accessible and meaningful to program staff in the field. It is through their work with thousands of programs and training experiences that we have been able to field test much of the supportive material and interactive exercises. We want to express our appreciation to the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) for their recognition and support of quality program planning and program evaluation. Some of the materials in this book are based on work supported for Project STAR of JBS International Inc., Aguirre Division by the CNCS under Grant No. 05TAHCA001. Appreciation is also extended to Chrystal Barranti who was a co-evaluator for several of the example projects used in this book.

Then, there are the hardworking human service professionals, who are social workers, public health workers, psychologists, community organizers, nurses, doctors, counselors, and administrators. They are affiliated with government agencies such as CNCS or are independent shoestring community organizations. Our shared learning experiences and their valuable feedback, candid discussion of challenges, and insightful guidance have shaped our ideas and approaches in writing this book. We are truly indebted to them.

With great affection and love, we acknowledge our spouses, Cindy Kellen-Yuen, Elizabeth Sheldon, and Bob Roat; and our children, Amanda Yuen, Emily Yuen, Eric Terao, Russell Terao, and Abby Roat. They have provided unconditional support during this writing adventure.

About the Authors

Francis K. O. Yuen, DSW, ACSW, is a Professor in the Division of Social Work at California State University, Sacramento. He has published widely in the areas of social work practice, children and families services, evaluation and grant writing, and human diversity. He has served in many capacities as human service agency administrator, principal investigator for government grant projects, grant writer and reviewer, and program evaluator for local, state, and international projects. He has also been an evaluation coach and trainer for the federal Corporation for National and Community Services and its grantees.

Kenneth L. Terao, MA, is a senior evaluation specialist with JBS International Inc., a social science research firm located in the San Francisco Bay Area. He has served as project director for a number of national contracts including Save the Children Inc., United Negro College Fund, American Diabetes Association, and federal Corporation for National and Community Service. He is an author and former administrator of educational prevention service projects for public and higher education, juvenile diversion projects, and public health projects.

Anna Marie Schmidt, MA, is an evaluation specialist with JBS International Inc., a social science research firm located in the San Francisco Bay Area. She has provided technical assistance and training in the area of performance measurement and evaluation to the federal Corporation for National and Community Service and its grantees. She has contributed to the development of Independent Living, train-the-trainer curriculum for Senior Corps programs. Ms. Schmidt has worked in Latin America in elementary and adult nonformal education and urban community development, and has also directed several projects for nonprofits.

About the Contributors

Edie L. Cook, PhD, is a senior evaluation researcher who has provided methodological assistance to universities and community-based organizations for nearly 20 years, including the University of Pittsburgh, PITT’s Center for Public Health Practice, the Corporation for National and Community Service, the Mayo Clinic Psychiatry and Psychology Treatment Center, the University of Iowa, the U.S. General Accountability Office, and Cornell University. She is president of the Fox Chapel Area American Association of University Women and was recently named one of their 2009 Outstanding Women of the Year.

Adele James, MA, has spent more than 18 years working in the public sector, including 11 years in foundation grant making. Most recently, she served as a Program Officer for the California Endowment, the state’s largest health foundation, where she managed the foundation’s portfolio for its Community Health and Elimination of Disparities Goal for the 26-county Northern California Region. Prior to that, she was a Program Officer for The Women’s Foundation based in San Francisco, where she managed three California-wide gender-based funds benefiting low-income women and girls.

D. Maurie Lung, MA, is a licensed Marriage Family Therapist and licensed Mental Health Counselor with almost 20 years of experience ranging from counseling, facilitation, and teaching to program management, curriculum development, and outcome evaluation. Currently, she is the owner of her own business as well as the Director of Performance Improvement for a national nonprofit. Her most recent endeavor is coauthoring the book, Power of One: Adventure and Experiential Activities for One-on-One Counseling Sessions.

Ann Mizoguchi, LCSW, is an Assistant Bureau Chief with the California Department of Social Services. She has 12 years of experience in administering grants. She was a former Division Chief at the Governor’s Office of Criminal Justice Planning and Branch at the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services.

Elizabeth (Betsy) Sheldon, MA, is an Education Program Consultant in the Counseling, Student Support, and Service-Learning Office of the California Department of Education. She is responsible for working with local education agencies and other groups to increase the capacity of school mental health services in California. Ms. Sheldon worked as a manager at the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs overseeing federal grant programs, including the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities. She has also worked as a Project Manager for the Little Hoover Commission, a state oversight and accountability body.

Donna L. Yee, PhD, MSW, is the Chief Executive Officer at the Asian Community Center in Sacramento, California. She has more than 35 years of experience in long-term care. Before moving to Sacramento, her work at the National Pacific Asian Center on Aging and policy research at the Institute for Health Policy (Heller School, Brandeis University) focused on capacity building and Medicare access. Her health administration and clinical experience includes work at an 1,100-bed public chronic-care facility, On Lok Senior Health Services, and a home health agency in San Francisco.

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Purpose of This Book

The Organization and Approaches Used for This Book

Grant Writing and Program Evaluation: Outcomes and Evidence

Grant Proposal and Performance Measures

Evidence-Based Practice

Defining Program and Program Planning

What Is a Program?

What Is Program Planning?

The Ethics and Secret Handshake of Grant Writing and Program Evaluation

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Scheme for Effective Grant Writing and Program Evaluation for Human Service Professionals

Purpose of This Book

Human service professionals are dedicated people who want to serve the community and assist their clients in addressing various life challenges. They have been trained as social workers, public health educators, counselors, psychologists, nurses, teachers, community organizers, lawyers, and many other allied health and service workers. Alongside these professionals are the volunteers and grassroots individuals who understand and are concerned about their community and neighbors. These individuals are diverse in many aspects but are the same in that they engage themselves in services to improve the conditions that concern them. They understand that it takes resources to support the much needed services they plan to deliver.

There are many needs in the community but very few resources. Jean, a youth counselor, is interested in bringing more resources to meet these needs and decides to take on the challenge of writing a grant proposal. Jean is confident she will do a good job. After all, she has many great program ideas, and she enjoys writing. Her agency director is very impressed and decides to send her to a well-known, one-day grant-writing training program from the local nonprofit development center. The director shows her some previous grant proposals and Internet resources. A coworker also agrees to work with Jean and edits her draft proposal.

Jeff, a program coordinator, is busy managing several service programs, experiencing many successes as well as challenges. He wants to spend more time in one great program increasing his clinical work with his clients. However, there is the program report he needs to complete. To prepare for that, he needs to collect and organize all of the program data to tell his story. He has so much to tell but does not know where to start or what to tell. His old social research methods and statistics books provide some hints, but he is still not sure how best to proceed.

Many human service practitioners begin their involvement in grant writing and program evaluation, voluntarily or involuntarily, through their assignments in a service agency. Some of them learn how to complete the tasks by diving in with both feet and hoping for a safe landing. Some attend specific workshops and training to get a head start. A few of the lucky ones are mentored by experienced colleagues. No matter how one learns the crafts of grant writing and program evaluation, there is no replacement for hands on learning, mentoring, and a few useful reference guides.

The purpose of this book is to provide human service professionals and students with the knowledge and skills they could use to advance quality and accountable services to serve their clients and the communities in need. This is both a user friendly and practical book, as well as an academic text backed by current literature. Specifically, it aims to help readers acquire the advanced knowledge and skills of grant writing and program evaluation. In turn, this will enhance their ability to obtain the proper and much needed funding to deliver quality services and to demonstrate service results and accountability.

The Organization and Approaches Used for This Book

This grant-writing and program evaluation book follows a needs-driven, evidence-based, results-oriented, and client-centered perspective. “Beginning with the end in mind,” “Keep it simple and sweet,” and “Tell the stories” are some of the main aphorisms that drove the writing of this book. The general scheme for the structure, logic, and development for this book is presented in the Scheme for Effective Grant Writing and Program Evaluation for Human Service Professionals (Figure 1.1). This book is organized into three main logically connected sections.

The first section is the Four Key Components: (1) community and target population, (2) service providers, (3) funding sources, and (4) the craft of research and management evaluation. This section lays out the foundation knowledge essential to the grant writing and program evaluation activities. The second section is the Grant Writing and Program Evaluation section. This section provides the skills and knowledge on why and how to write grant proposals and conduct program evaluation. The final section is the Show and Tell: Learning by Doing and Real-Life Samples sections. Exercises and examples are included to facilitate more effective learning of grant proposal writing and program evaluation execution.

Figure 1.1Scheme for Effective Grant Writing and Program Evaluation for Human Service Professionals

The authors view grant writing as a capacity building macro practice in human services. It is not a stand alone fund-seeking activity. The grant-writing effort should be driven by the needs of the community, guided by the mission of the service organization, and directed by the current research and literature. As to the program evaluation, it is an activity driven and empowerment-oriented process. Grant writing and program evaluation are macro practice approaches for social change. This book targets practitioners who are program developers, program managers, program evaluators, and agency administrators. Graduate and undergraduate students in human services would also find this a very useful book for grant writing, program evaluation, data analysis, and social research methods.

Several special features are included to aid readers in getting hands on experience and gaining insiders’ insight into grant writing and program evaluation.

1. Strength perspective and holistic orientation. This book joins together grant writing and program evaluation. It integrates both professional practice and academic rigor. Readers will learn more than knowledge and skills in grant writing and program evaluation. They will learn the application of holistic and strength perspectives in the understanding, designing, implementing, and evaluating of human services. Service programs are client-centered and needs-driven, not agency-centered and funding-driven.

2. Professional insights. These are notes from practitioners who are grant writers, agency administrators, program managers from government agencies and foundations, as well as grant reviewers. These experienced practitioners offer their professional insights, insiders’ look, and tips to the grant-writing and evaluation processes in short segments throughout the book. These straightforward practice wisdoms are survival guides for new and experienced practitioners alike.

3. Samples, grant proposal, evaluation plan, and instruments. These concrete examples give readers a sense of what the end products would be or should not be like. They serve as models for learning and practice. Guidelines and examples of instruments for data collection and analysis provide readers with a head start in setting their proposal and evaluation in place.

4. Individual and group learning exercises. Different learning exercises for developing and practicing grant writing and evaluation skills are included in the appropriate sections of the book for hands on learning. Most of these exercises have been developed and field tested in training workshops conducted by the authors. Some of these exercises are organized to become a training module for a particular topic (e.g., writing effective objectives, identifying results, and developing appropriate data collection tools).

5. Technology and other resources. Internet and printed resources for grant writing and program evaluation are included throughout the book for quick reference and access to further studies.

Grant Writing and Program Evaluation: Outcomes and Evidence

How are grant proposal writing and program evaluation—two different functions—related? Simply speaking, many grant proposals are not considered to be complete unless they have included a strong program evaluation component. Many federal grant proposals, such as those for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), would not be reviewed unless they had a clear program evaluation plan. For major funding sources, a grant proposal without a program evaluation piece is similar to a budget without the accounting.

Grant Proposal and Performance Measures

Since the early 1990s, many federal service grant applications have been “demonstration projects” that are quality service project proposals with a strong evaluation component. They are expected to be able to demonstrate the effectiveness, successes, and challenges of the projects. This emphasis on outcome oriented programming and assessment put program evaluation and program planning together as two sides of a coin. Program evaluation is such an important element that some funding sources would set aside a certain percentage of the funded budget for program evaluation expenses.

The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) was established as an independent federal agency when President Clinton signed the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993. The CNCS “merged the work and staffs of two predecessor agencies, ACTION and the Commission on National and Community Service” (www.nationalservice.org/about/role_impact/history.asp). As the nation’s largest grant maker, CNCS serves more than 4 million Americans through its National Service programs, Senior Corps, AmeriCorps, VISTA, NCCC (National Civilian Community Corps), and Learn and Serve America, and it supports millions more through a variety of other initiatives. It aims to improve lives through direct service (education, health, environment, human services, public safety) and building organizational capacity. In this way, CNCS strengthens communities and fosters civic engagement through service and volunteering (www.nationalservice.org/pdf/factsheet_cncs.pdf).

The National Service programs are required to do annual internal evaluation (performance measurement) and, therefore, must create project capacity for program evaluation. Program evaluation is part of the grant application, indicating the importance of a strong performance measure plan in its funding decisions.

All three authors of this book have many years of experience in human services and working with SAMHSA and CNCS programs at the local, state, and federal levels. We have seen many outstanding programs so well planned and sufficiently evaluated that they continue to improve. We have also witnessed the politics of funding in that the least deserving programs are poorly planned and disappointedly evaluated, if at all, and received the much-sought-after funding. Politics and other concerns aside, programs that produce results are the ones that receive board support and serve the needs of the community.

Evidence-Based Practice

Evidence-based medicine, or evidence-based practice (EBP) as it became known, offers a balance between professional judgment and current medical research. Scottish epidemiologist Archie Cochrane published his influential Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services in 1972. Cochrane suggested the use of the most reliable information or the best evidence to guide health care services. He advocated the use of well designed evaluations such as randomized controlled trials (RCT) to collect important evidences.

Gordon Guyatt and David Sackett of the McMaster University research group further developed the concepts and the practice of evidence based medicine. They support the “conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients” (Sackett, Rosenberg, Gray, Haynes, and Richardson, 1996, p. 72).

Established in 1993, the Cochrane Collaboration (www.cochrane.org) “is an international not for profit organization, providing up-to-date information about the effects of health care.” It publishes its database of systematic reviews, clinical trials, and other high quality studies in the Cochrane Library.

Different disciplines have also developed special studies and projects to explore how evidence based practice could be applied to various disciplines. Johnson and Austin (2006) report that the “development of systematic reviews for the human services is still in its infancy but is growing largely due to the efforts of the Campbell Collaboration, a sibling of the Cochrane organization for research reviews in the social and behavioral sectors, criminology, and education” (p. 79).

Zlotnik (2007) reports that evidence-based practice is applicable both on an individual (micro) level as well as on the organizational and community (macro) levels. Although randomized controlled trials (RCT) is the ultimate standard for establishing evidence, social sciences and human services often find RCT not feasible. Zlotnik asserts that evidence from qualitative studies should also be considered. Many agencies find that it is difficult to fund basic program evaluation efforts; funding program evaluations that include RCT is certainly a stretch.

Without a program, there will be no evaluation. Without funding support and resources, there will be no program or service to meet community needs. Attaining and developing resources and funding are integral parts of human services. Evidence based practice is more than direct service and evaluation; it is also about the use of the best evidence to advocate for funding and organizational support. Zlotnik (2007) further reflects that it is not enough to teach the evidence based practice process, to undertake high quality research, and to teach students to think critically. The human and social service communities should prepare students, faculty, and practitioners to be advocates for the funding, not just of the research, but of program funds as well so that services can be implemented in the way they were intended.

Grant writing and program evaluation are two interrelated parts of the whole. Their connection is illustrated in the scheme (see Figure 1.1). Understanding the needs of the service recipients, being informed by the best evidence collected, deciding on the appropriate interventions, focusing on the outcomes, and improving based on findings are all part of the process of ensuring that the best services are planned and delivered.

Defining Program and Program Planning

What Is a Program?

Program, in general, refers to a set of planned and purposive activities. Yuen and Terao (2003) define it as “a coordinated change effort that is theory based, goal-oriented, often time limited, target population-specific and activity driven” (p. 1). Royse, Thyer, Padgett, and Logan (2006) view program as “an organized collection of activities designed to reach certain objectives . . . a series of planned actions designed to solve some problem . . . to have some kind of an impact on the program participants” (p. 5). Some have compared a program to a recipe. It has different ingredients with clear instructions or production procedures to bring about the end product. A service program has different components, interventions, or activities (ingredients); through a service delivery system or mechanism (instructions), particular end results (end products) are expected to be achieved.

There are different levels of program. At the organizational or community level, it may mean a set of coordinated service activities. At a more macro level, such as one at county, state, or federal government, it is used to refer to a social program that is the implementation of certain social or legislative policy.

What Is Program Planning?

Program planning is a need based and goal-oriented process. It is “an organized process through which a set of coordinated activities or interventions is developed to address and facilitate change in some or all of the identified problems” (Yuen and Terao, 2003, p. 2). Program planning is a dynamic process that lays out strategies to meet identified needs. It involves the identification of needs and the development of goals, objectives, activities, and evaluation. “The [program planning] process presents the logic and the argument that justify the need, the significance, and the relevance of the proposed plan” (Yuen and Terao, 2003, p. 10).

Program planning and grant proposal writing are two closely related processes. “Program planning provides the process and the framework for the development of a service grant proposal. Grant proposal is a specific type of product of program planning. Both of them involve logical thinking and are objective driven” (Yuen and Terao, 2003, p. 11).

The Ethics and Secret Handshake of Grant Writing and Program Evaluation

Grant writing has evolved into an independent specialty and a specialized field of practice within established professions. The American Association of Grant Professionals (AAGP), “a nonprofit membership association, builds and supports an international community of grant professionals committed to serving the greater public good by practicing the highest ethical and professional standards” (http://grantprofessionals.org). AAGP is a national organization representing the needs and concerns of grant writing professionals. It has an established code of ethics and organizes conferences and other events for its members. Grant writers from different disciplines, such as social work, sociology, psychology, public health, and public administration, participate in their own professional organizations and abide by the profession’s standards and codes of ethics (e.g., National Association of Social Workers [NASW] Code of Ethics, www.socialworkers.org/pubs/Code/code.asp).

In addition to membership in their own professional organizations, many program evaluators join the American Evaluation Association (AEA). It is a “professional association of evaluators devoted to the application and exploration of program evaluation, personnel evaluation, technology, and many other forms of evaluation. Evaluation involves assessing the strengths and weaknesses of programs, policies, personnel, products, and organizations to improve their effectiveness” (www.eval.org/aboutus/organization/aboutus.asp). The evaluators are expected to follow the codes of ethics of their professional organizations, as well as those of the AEA.

Grant writing and program evaluation are not trivial tasks but professional activities that are altruistic, service oriented, accountable, and ethical in practice. Also, they are not mysteries and full of secrets that only the fortunate few would know how to solve. The secret for grant writing and program evaluation is that there is no secret handshake or magic bullet. The only open secret is that applicants need to understand what the funding source wants and what the community needs are. They then develop a proposal that meets the needs of the community and matches the requirements of the funding organization. Innovativeness and creativity that bring about measurable results and accountable outcomes further distinguish an outstanding proposal from a good proposal.

Grant writing and program evaluation often differ for organizations of different sizes or with different capacities. Smaller or less established organizations may find that local or regional funding opportunities, such as local foundation, city, or county funding, are more appropriate for them. Larger or more established organizations may be more interested in seeking out major funding sources, such as state or federal multiyear funding. There is, however, no rule to say that smaller organizations should not seek out major grants from big funding sources. The simple factors for success in grant writing are knowing your organization, knowing your funding source, knowing your clients, and knowing your grant proposal. The only way to ensure getting funding support for your proposal is to submit one!

A good idea in your head is only a good idea; a good idea written in an organized and achievable format is a proposal; and an implemented good idea that meets the needs of clients is a successfully funded service program.

References

American Evaluation Association. About us. Retrieved January 11, 2009, from www.eval.org/aboutus/organization/aboutus.asp.

Cochrane, A. L. (1972). Effectiveness and efficiency: Random reflections on Health, (2nd ed.) London: Nuffield services, Provincial Hospitals Trust of health services.

Corporation for National and Community Service. About us and our program. Retrieved January 10, 2009, from www.nationalservice.org/about/role_impact/history.asp.

Corporation for National and Community Service. Fact sheet. Retrieved January 10, 2009, from www.nationalservice.org/pdf/factsheet_cncs.pdf.

Johnson, M., & Austin, M. (2006). Evidence based practice in the social services. Administration in Social Work (3) 3, 75-104.

National Association of Social Workers. Code of ethics. Retrieved April 23, 2009, from www.socialworkers.org/pubs/Code/code.asp.

Royse, D., Thyer, B., Padgett, D., & Logan, T. K. (2006). Program evaluation: An introduction (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.

Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J. A., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal 312, 71-72.

The American Association of Grant Professionals. Our mission. Retrieved January 11, 2009, from http://grantprofessionals.org.

The Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved January 11, 2009, from www.cochrane.org/docs/descrip.htm.

Yuen, F., & Terao, K. (2003). Practical grant writing and program evaluation. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/ Cole-Thomson Learning.

Zlotnik, J. L. (2007). Evidence based practice and social work education: a view from Washington. Research on Social Work Practice (17) 5, 625-629.

CHAPTER 2

Community and Target Population, Service Providers, and Funding Sources

The Good Idea Program

What Is a Community?

Macro Practice, Grant Writing, and Program Evaluations

Target Populations and Needs

Service Providers

Funding Sources

Government

Foundations

List of Professional Insights

Professional Insight 2.1: Agency Administrator to Get Support for Service Projects

Professional Insight 2.2: Important Suggestions Related to State or Federal Grant Funds

Professional Insight 2.3: Ten Tips on Successful Grant Seeking

Community and target population, service providers, funding sources, and basic social research knowledge and skills are the four key components that form the basic framework for proposal writing and program evaluation in this book. Based on needs of the target populations in the community, a service provider seeking funding support from a funding source can employ basic social research methods to plan and evaluate the results of the program interventions. This chapter describes the first three components: community and target population, service providers, and funding sources. The following chapter will discuss the basic social research knowledge and skills.

The Good Idea Program

The Big Help Agency aims to use its newly funded Good Idea Program to improve racial relationships and facilitate economic recovery of the Shoestring community. Shoestring was once a growing town in the 1950s. Eighty five percent of the residents were White, and the majority of them were employed by the only local industry, Comfort Shoe Factory. Since the closure of the factory in the late 1970s, the town and its residents have experienced economic hardship. Many residents moved out to the neighboring towns for better employment opportunities.

In the early 1980s, gentrification in the Upward City, 30 miles away, forced many African American families to move to Shoestring to find affordable housing. African Americans brought new lives to the town and opened up many new businesses and economic opportunities. Unfortunately, the growth was hindered by the recession of the 1980s and did not last. The expansion of several nearby towns, with the opening of a meatpacking plant in the 1990s, has not benefited Shoestring. In fact, the towns have diverted many of the economic investments from Shoestring. Currently, Shoestring does not have a bank or a major grocery store.

The arrivals of the Korean, Vietnamese, and Mexican immigrants since the mid 1990s have pumped new energy, as well as conflicts, into this community. Asian immigrants have taken over 60 percent of the local small businesses. However, according to the local residents, these business owners provide very few employment opportunities for the community, because “they only hire their own families.” The only obvious growth of the community is the number of liquor and cigarette stores. Again, Asian immigrants own most of them. Hispanics are also competing with longtime residents for jobs at all levels. The influx of new immigrant families increases demands on the school system. Unfortunately, the local real estate and retail tax bases are not strong enough to support any increase in the school budget.

Many long-time residents feel they are displaced, and some, those who could, moved. New immigrant families are also slowly leaving Shoestring. Residents of all racial backgrounds grumble that they do not feel safe living in town. Older residents complain, “This is not the town I used to know anymore.” They worry about the young people because there is too much violence in the homes and on the streets. Almost 30 percent of the elderly have been victims of crimes. Domestic violence and child abuse cases have been on the rise.

Recently, there were four incidents of suspicious burning and destruction of two African American churches, one synagogue, and one Metropolitan church. No one has claimed any responsibilities. Local youth problems have intensified due to the increase of ethnic gang groups, high dropout rates in schools, and the lack of employment opportunities. In the last couple of years, several major political figures dropped by to make speeches and held photo ops with the few self proclaimed ethnic community leaders. But so far, only empty and broken promises have been made.

You are a community social worker with the Good Idea Program for the Big Help Agency in the county. You are assigned to work with this community. What will you do? You are also the program manager and grant writer. What kinds of programs will you propose, and what kinds of funding sources will you look for?

What Is a Community?

There are many ways to define the construct of community: “Some focused on community as a geographical area; some on a group of people living in a particular place; and others which looked to community as an area of common life” (Smith, 2001). A community is a social system similar to an organism that is alive, organic, evolving, interactive, and dynamic. It is a collection of living entities sharing a common environment.

A community could be a settlement of people who are living in a particular geographic area or locality. This may be a city, a ranch, a neighborhood, or an apartment complex. A community, however, is not limited by physical boundaries. It could be defined by the shared values or cultural backgrounds that distinguish a group of people from others. People who share common religious beliefs or cultural backgrounds may consider themselves to belong to community although they live in different parts of the world.

A community could be formed based on a common purpose, interest, or characteristics. People are linked together because of their professions, work, schools, hobbies, or needs. Human service providers may consider themselves a community. A school is naturally and intentionally structured to provide students a sense of belonging and a community of learning. People who face a common life challenge or success, such as illness, addiction, or achievement, would also consider themselves part of a community. In human services, service recipients or target populations who have common issues are often referred to as a community.

A community is a social network that links people together. This network may be local and have limited boundaries, such as the business or educational communities. It could also be widespread and have no physical boundary, such as the virtual community over the Internet. The cyberspace social networks, such as the many chat rooms, blogs, and networking sites, provide a means for people to connect and relate in an unprecedented manner.

There are also communities within a community. People in a community share something in common, but there is diversity within the community. A student body in a university is a community. Within this community, there are many smaller communities, such as graduate students, undergraduate students, students of different majors, student clubs, sororities and fraternities, and on campus and commuting students.

While a community is a dynamic and multifaceted social system, each community has common norms and functions. A community is organic in that it grows and dies. It has activities to help it sustain itself and allow it to continue to develop. Although it is a collective entity, the community as a whole is greater than the sum of its parts. A community has its own values, culture, norms and roles, functions, and purpose.

In order to better understand a community, one may have to explore the following questions. Together they provide the basic assessment of a community:

• Why is it a community? How is this community defined? Is it defined by its geographic location, its sociocultural significance, its nature and function as well as structure, or other characteristics?

• What are the community context, problems, assets, and strengths?

• Population: diversity, socioeconomic status, types of households, educational level, etc.

• Cultural values/norms/traditions/beliefs most emphasized and supported

• Community resources, economic and political structure, and social issues. Who controls resources and power? What are the issues of power, influences, and leadership within the community? Who is considered a member or an outsider?

• Are issues such as discrimination, neglect, or oppression a problem?

• What are the community’s strengths and limitations?

• What are the community needs? How are they defined?

• What are the most urgent of the identified community needs?

• Are there gaps between identified community needs/issues and resources?

• Is data available to support identified community needs?

• What are the linkages between service agencies and community needs?

As a human service provider with a local agency, which identified need(s) will you be able to address and why?

Macro Practice, Grant Writing, and Program Evaluations

Macro practice engages community and organization as the unit of intervention to promote positive changes. It is often referred to as community practice. Macro practice is a “professionally directed intervention designed to bring about planned change in organizations and communities. . . . (It) is built on theoretical foundations, proceeds within the framework of a practice model, and operates within the boundaries of professional values and ethics” (Netting, Kettner, and McMurtry, 1993, p. 3). It has many types and levels of practice approaches, such as community organizing, community development, social planning, social actions, policy, and administration. Macro practitioners perform many roles, including community organizer, program manager, program planner, agency administrator, program evaluator, and grant proposal writer.

Rubin and Rubin (2001) describe the mobilization model, social action model, and social production model. The mobilization model organizes people in the community to take collective actions, and the social action model uses planned and coordinated strategies to pressure the power structure for change. The social production model focuses on program planning, evaluation, fundraising, proposal writing, program implementation, and management.

The purpose of community work is “to work with communities experiencing disadvantages and enable them to collectively identify needs and rights, clarify objectives and take action to meet these within a democratic framework which respects the needs and rights of others” (Federation for Community Development Learning 2009). A grant proposal writer and program evaluator play a key role in the identification of needs, development of appropriate service programs, and monitoring of program performance and outcomes.

Target Populations and Needs

Many issues and needs exist in the community, thereby affecting its various populations. Human service providers are often called upon to serve the most vulnerable or at risk populations with limited resources. For a program to be successful and effective, it is crucial for the program to clearly identify and have knowledge of the population it intends to serve. Simply speaking, a target population is the potential service recipients within the population in the community. Many factors contribute to why certain groups are being targeted for services. A common reason is that the target populations are in disadvantaged and risky situations such that their unmet needs would affect theirs and society’s well-being.

What is a need and how is it defined? Need is different from but related to want. Children at the checkout counter in a grocery store may whine to have candy because they want it. Parents refuse to buy the candy because they believe the children do not need it. Many have used this common distinction: need is something we have to have to survive and cannot live without, whereas want is something we would like to have but is not entirely necessary. We need food and water to survive. We may want arts and music, but they are not required for survival. Need and want have intricate relationships and are not mutually exclusive. Need is fundamental and basic; want adds quality and values.

At times, need and want overlap. Would that be an enjoyment if you have your favorite foods and drinks in a nice environment with beautiful music in the background? An elderly woman who lives alone could have her basic nutritional needs met through the Meals on Wheels program, but she wants to maintain healthy human connections, so she attends activities and eats her meals in the elderly center. Human service providers deal with human needs that are often more complex than basic physiological needs. Maslow (1943) proposed the hierarchy of human needs that range from the basic physiological needs to safety and security, love, esteem, and self actualization. Human needs are complicated and interwoven with an individual’s unique quality and the social environments. It is, therefore, both the target population’s and human service provider’s responsibilities to identify and articulate what the needs are and how they are to be met.

Yuen and Terao (2003) explain the definitions of needs discussed by Mayer (1985) and Bradshaw (1997). Needs can be defined as four basic types: normative, felt, expressed, and comparative. These needs are not mutually exclusive. Human service providers may want to describe all of them to provide a better account of the needs for the target population.

“Normative need refers to conditions that are below the established social standards” (Yuen and Terao, pp. 12-13). Distribution of resources such as school lunch or after school activity funding could be based on the number of students who are living in households below the national or local poverty line. Health disparity statistics or prevalence of a specific disease in a particular population also serves as an indicator for needs deviating from the norm. The neighborhood’s more than average pedestrian-related traffic accidents point to the need for attention to traffic and pedestrian safety in the neighborhood.

“Felt need refers to the wants based on the individual’s standards” (Yuen and Terao, p. 13). Bradshaw (1997) equated it with want. It is a matter of personal or collective preferences and choices. These needs are, however, meaningful and distinctive to the people who make the selection. For example, a frail elderly woman prefers to remain in her own home and receive home help services instead of moving to a nursing home. In a severe budget cut year, the school PTA supports the elimination of the school football team to keep the library open, because they believe the library is more vital to students’ learning.

“Expressed need refers to attempts by the individuals to fulfill their needs” (Yuen and Terao, p. 13). Bradshaw (1997) equated it with the economic concept of demand. The out of control youth gang problems in a neighborhood have severely affected every aspect of life in a community. Residents brought the issue to the attention of the city leaders through the mass media and a letter writing campaign. Several town hall meetings were organized to document complaints and solicit inputs. A community organizer also conducted a community survey and published a report on his findings. A documented felt need would become an expressed need that is also being referred to as a documented need. Community needs assessment or town hall meeting reports document expressed needs. U.S. Census reports provide a detailed description of a given community and a wealth of information of the documented needs. A simple way to establish expressed need for a human service agency is to use its waiting list. By putting their names on the waiting list, people express their need for such service and, obviously, the supply is less than the demand.

“Comparative need refers to the situation that an individual’s condition is relatively worse off or less desirable than that of other people” (Yuen and Terao, p. 13). Children who live in drug and gang-infested neighborhoods are more likely to be involved in the criminal justice system when they grow up, reflecting that they are more at risk than children from average neighborhoods. Families without health insurance coverage have more emergency room visits and longer hospital stays than those who have insurance, indicating they are comparatively less healthy and in more dire need.

Service Providers

Organizations that are recipients of the grants and contracts are responsible for the provision of the agreed upon services. These organizations that utilize resources to deliver service programs to meet the needs of the community are the service providers. They include both private and public organizations. Many of them are commonly referred to as education, social, and human service organizations. They include social service agencies, mental health agencies, schools, private nonprofit organizations, local grassroots organizations, as well as government and public service authorities. Increasingly, for profit organizations are represented among human service organizations. Guided by their missions, these service providers have particular areas of concern they want to address through their various programs, resources, and services. For example, Robison (2006) lists some of the major services provided to children and families:

Child care services: licensing, provider training and quality improvement, resource and referral, subsidies

Child support services: paternity establishment, child support enforcement

Child welfare services: child protective services, family based services (family preservation, family reunification, respite care), emergency shelter care, foster care and other out of-home placement, adoption, independent living

Disability services: early identification and intervention, specialized services for people with specific types of disabilities (the blind, the deaf and hearing impaired, developmentally disabled, physically disabled), rehabilitation services, vocational rehabilitation

Education: early childhood education, K-12, special education, adult education and training and literacy programs

Financial assistance: emergency cash assistance, general assistance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), eligibility determinations

Food assistance and nutrition programs: food stamps, food distribution for childcare providers, emergency assistance

Health care coverage: Medicaid, child health insurance, medical assistance, eligibility determinations

Health care services: prevention programs, maternal and child health programs, adolescent health programs, family planning, public health services

Housing assistance: rental subsidies, housing assistance, home energy assistance, weatherization programs, shelter and programs for the homeless

Juvenile corrections: delinquency prevention, in-home services, community programs, residential placement, probation services

Mental health services: prevention, child and adolescent mental health treatment, adult mental health treatment, family focused services

Prevention programs: child abuse prevention, delinquency prevention, substance abuse prevention, teenage pregnancy prevention, parenting education, family support services

Substance abuse services: prevention, child and adolescent treatment, adult treatment, family focused treatment

Welfare-to-work services: job training and assistance, workforce development services, services for employers, support services

Source: (www.ncsl.org/programs/cyf/hspubintro.htm#hsreorganize, pp. 3-4)

These organizations may have multimillion dollar annual budgets; they could also be small operations that only have enough money to hire a part-time staff. Some of them are both granters and grantees of service funding, and some are strictly grantees who receive funding to support their operation and services. No matter what size or type of organizations they are, these organizations have the well being of the target population as their main concern. Lewis, Lewis, Packard, and Souflée (2001) describe the purpose of human service programs:

Human service programs deal with the personal and social development of individuals, families, and communities. Sometimes they enhance this development through the provision of direct services such as education, training, counseling, therapy, or casework. Often they work indirectly through consultation, advocacy, referral, information dissemination, community development, or social action. The ultimate purpose of these programs, regardless of methods used, is to enhance the well being of clients or consumers. (p. 6)

Human service organizations perform various roles in the service delivery system. They are the service brokers that link resources including service funding to meet the needs of the community. They are also the advocates that promote the cause of the community and find ways to achieve community objectives. They are the organizers that gather and mobilize the community to meet identified needs. They are the administrators who manage funding, resources, and service. They are the evaluators who monitor programs, file reports, and identify ways for improvement. They are also, at the frontline, the direct service providers who deliver the service programs and activities.