Sophie Miles - Psychology
May I get help please?
Social Work Education
Vol. 23, No. 4, August 2004, pp. 365–381
Going Beyond Training: Theory and
Practice in Managing Learning
Kate Skinner & Bill Whyte
The establishment of new bodies to replace the Central Council for Training and
Education in Social Work (CCETSW) and to regulate the social work profession
provides the opportunity to establish an improved progressive system of qualifications
and continued professional development in the coming years. With the current pressure
on social work agency budgets it is imperative that precious training resources—staff and
money—are used to make the maximum impact on service delivery. Our involvement
in the provision of a range of training programmes leads us to believe that much of the
staff development and training effort invested by agencies in their staff often seem to
have a limited impact on effectiveness. A change in approach is needed so that learning
is placed at the heart of organisational processes to maximise the benefits of affirmation
and growing professional confidence. This is essential if we are to continue to ‘nurture’
valuable professional staff and ensure that services remain flexible, creative and respon-
sive in meeting ever-rising public expectations.
This paper examines some of the challenges of evidence-based practice and the
demands for routine evaluation and objective-setting. The advantages and disadvantages
of a competence specification approach within the development of service and occu-
pational standards as the basis for professional education are discussed. The paper
argues that strategies for practice learning require the development of learning organisa-
tions and a better academic and agency partnership to support more effective pro-
fessional education and continued professional development.
Keywords: Post-qualifying Social Work; Social Work Training; Deep Learning
Introduction
The integration of all local authority social work services within Scottish social
work departments as a result of the Kilbrandon report (SED, 1964), with its
Correspondence to: Bill Whyte, Criminal Justice Social Work Development Centre for Scotland, University
of Edinburgh, School of Social and Political Studies, 31 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LJ, UK.
Email: [email protected]
ISSN 0261-5479 print/1470-1227 online © 2004 The Board of Social Work Education
DOI: 10.1080/0261547042000244991
366 K. Skinner & B. Whyte
emphasis on social education and social learning approaches to change, made an
organisational leap which set Scotland on a distinctive path in the social work field.
This change has had long lasting effects on practice ideologies and on academic
teaching in Scotland. However serious questions about the capacity of generic
social work training to equip people to operate as social workers within local
authorities in Scotland has been a live issue since the implementation of the Social
Work (Scotland) Act 1968, which provides the legislative framework for these
services.
Since the establishment of Scotland’s Parliament, the Scottish Executive has
published proposals for ‘modernising’ social work (Scottish Office, 1999, Cm 4288)
and legislation to set up a Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC) has been
implemented. The Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act 2001 maps out a future for
social work within a regulated framework, which will require the registration of
practitioners operating from a baseline of service objectives and standards. The
Council’s role is to raise standards across the whole of social care by regulating the
workforce. From October 2001 the SSSC replaced CCETSW as the statutory regu-
lator of professional social work training and post qualifying training and will
manage national training for the sector. Quality Assurance Agency benchmarking
statements have been published highlighting the need for effective ‘joined up’
thinking. National Care Standards on residential provision for older people, people
with mental illness and children will be implemented by the Scottish Commission
for the Regulation of Care beginning in April 2002. National Occupational Standards
for social work roles are also under development by employment representatives
through the national training organisation.
All of these developments provide a map for the direction of social work practice
and management and the basis for a new progressive system of qualifications
to be introduced by 2002/3. The increase in pace of change in the service has
been dramatic in recent years and the demands for professional knowledge, skill
and expertise have never been greater. Policy is now being re-formulated by
the current administration within the context of its social inclusion strategy and
within the framework of ‘best value’ and the imperative of establishing ‘what
works?’.
Sinclair (1998) suggests that, historically, social interventions have not been
subject to the same imperative for rigorous testing that has applied to medical
interventions and that policy has often been based on value positions or on custom
and practice. Despite considerable input of time, effort and resources to alleviate
social problems over many years, many stubbornly persist. This perception has
contributed, at a time of economic restraint, to the demand for public services to
demonstrate that their expenditure is justified by the positive outcomes achieved. To
address the question of ‘what works?’ requires access to sound knowledge and
information about the impact of current policies and practice, an evidence-led
approach to planning provision and an allied training strategy. The requirement for
managers and practitioners to have deep and critical knowledge and expertise in
their field is self-evident.
Social Work Education 367
Evidence-based Practice
The tentative move within social work towards evidence-based practice is highlight-
ing many of the issues facing the profession today. Evidence-based practice is
founded on measurement and evaluation—measurement of work done and aims or
objectives achieved. There is much debate about the ‘how’ and ‘what’ of measure-
ment in social work. Traditional methods used within the natural sciences, for
example counting the number of interventions, measuring the length of interven-
tions, are not wholly useful in a discipline with as many un-quantifiable variables as
there are in social work (Smith, 1995). There are also many cultural objections to
overcome, not least because in social work we have a limited history of getting
research into practice (Nutley et al., 2000, p. 3) and of measuring what we do and
how we do it. Inevitably, then, this shift towards providing evidence needs to take
place incrementally, and possibly experimentally, in the first instance in order to
begin to identify which approaches seem to work for some people some of the time.
A central part of evaluation is that of measurement and assessment against
pre-determined criteria (Utting & Vennard, 2000). For social workers carrying out
individual or group work with service users, this requires setting objectives for their
work with each service user or group of service users. For managers it requires
setting objectives for each managerial task or project. Objectives need to be explicit
and ‘SMART’—specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound—both
input-process objectives and output-outcome objectives (Chapman & Hough, 1998,
para 7.7). How many practitioners and managers routinely set transparent and
measurable objectives like these? Probably few, and some of those who do may be
doing so without the support, knowledge or expectation of their agency.
In areas where service standards have been set either at a local or national level,
the process should be greatly assisted. Work has been done within criminal justice
social work through the publication and enforcement of National Objectives and
Standards in Scotland (SWSI, 1991) and is being replicated in other areas of social
work, such as child care, youth justice, social work with older people and people with
mental illness. In community care local standard-setting exercises have taken place
and performance criteria set. The contribution of inspection to the process of
standard setting is considerable and no doubt will be built on in all the services.
It is important not to overlook the anxieties that might be generated by a
movement towards standard and objective setting. We have experience of running
short courses on evaluating social work practice and have become acutely aware of
the discomfort caused by the introduction of this approach. Deep down many
practitioners and managers seem to have doubts about their own capacity or the
capacity of their agency to deliver a measurably high quality service. Measurement
brings with it the risk that this incapacity will be exposed. There is also the attendant
fear that ‘nothing may work anyway’ so there may be some resistance to declaring
an intention to bring about change in intractable situations. Unfortunately, the
‘nothing works’ label can then become attached to the provision. Equally there is a
risk that political and managerial pressure for evidence of what works ‘reveals an
368 K. Skinner & B. Whyte
over-simplified and over-certain view of what evidence does or might consist of, and
of how it should be interpreted and used’ (Smith, 2000, p. 1). Part of the value of
the exercise then may be in recognising that some things are not readily changeable
and should therefore not be a primary focus for effort and activity. Hopefully this
will be compensated for by the affirmation that can be derived from those objec-
tives—however modest—which have been met for some people, in some circum-
stances.
It will take more than a degree of professional confidence to strike out and be the
first in a workplace to start operating in such a developmental way. Professional
confidence can only come from a belief that what needs to be done is worthwhile
and from knowledge that an effective contribution can be made. This takes us back
to the need for practitioners to be thoroughly steeped in their own discipline. It
simply is not enough to be qualified and then well-versed in agency policy and
practice (Marsh & Triseliotis, 1996). The knowledge-base needs to reach deep into
the core of theory and research in the field of work so that the objectives set call on
what is known about the effectiveness of methods in the area of practice.
A Competence-specification Approach
Hey (1990) suggested that the pressures for change in social work have arisen from
socio-technical developments on a global scale. The behavioural technologies now
increasingly being used are associated more with the fields and disciplines of
education and psychology. However it is not the focus on behavioural change itself
that is new to social work. We detect a gradual and sustained shift in emphasis from
concepts and language of therapeutic or treatment interventions based on psycho-
dynamic theories as the principal means of achieving behaviour change towards
techniques based on learning theories (Andrews & Bonta, 1997; Sheldon, 1994). This
‘social learning’ approach is more compatible with a strategy of ‘social inclusion’ and
social justice, which recognises the influence of structural factors and social context
on individual change, and with the traditional emphasis in social work theory of
working with individuals within their social context (Siporin, 1975). It remains to be
seen how far practitioners’ repertoires can be expected to encompass technologies
which are based on significantly different approaches and styles, albeit requiring
certain common knowledge and skills.
Of particular interest is the extent of knowledge, skill, and competence required
at various stages of professional development to operate within an increasingly
regulated framework of service standards whose emphases are consistent with the
shifts to quality control by way of outputs and outcomes rather than inputs and
process. While increasingly policy makers are concerned only with outcomes, the
most effective and efficient means of achieving these outcomes lie within the
professional domain. A critical understanding of process remains essential and
requires rigour in examining how outcomes are produced, and how knowledge and
theory are applied within the context of the ‘principles’ of benchmarking and best
value. These steps can ensure that service delivery is systematic and results-
Social Work Education 369
orientated, without denying that process and context remain crucial in the evalu-
ation of social programmes (Pawson & Tilley, 1997).
The adoption of output specification through statements of competence has
influenced much of the thinking in social work training in recent years. It has been
adopted in large measure as the model for all levels of training from SCOTVEC
National Certificates through to higher awards. The ‘competence approach’ provides
a model that seeks to establish occupational standards which individuals are ex-
pected to meet in their work. National occupational standards to be developed for
social work will provide statements of competence which attempt to bring together
the skills, knowledge and values necessary to carry out the work. The aim of this
approach is to reduce complex behaviour to a set of single behaviours which are
observable, definable and measurable. The approach attempts to make performance
visible and hence improve the chances of holding people individually accountable,
increasing inter-assessor reliability, and thus making assessments of various kinds
fairer, reducing iniquitous emphasis on personal qualities by concentration quite
properly on work output performance (Joss, 1990).
Despite the increasing reliance on vocational competences, the approach has also
been subject to much criticism particularly in its application to higher levels of work.
The theoretical assumptions of such an approach remain largely untested empirically
and create numerous conceptual and methodological problems (Clark & Arkava,
1979; Marsh & Clark, 1990). Much of the developed analysis of vocational compe-
tencies has concerned employment involving relatively low status work in more
technical kinds of employment (Winter, 1990) and even here problems have been
experienced in applying the approach. However simple and straightforward a
competence may seem it is inextricably entangled with all the other competences
that were rejected as too complex to start with (Hey, 1990).
Whatever its benefits, the competence approach has significant disadvantages,
particularly for professional social work. Joss (1990) argues that it denies the holistic
nature of such human relations work, showing what people must do but not how or
why. As a consequence it fails to provide an explanation of the importance of the
exercise of discretion in social work, thus devaluing the fact that equally competent
performances can arise from quite different actions. It may consequently be viewed
as discouraging creativity and risk-taking, and be over-reliant on quantitative
measures to the exclusion of abstract concepts such as reflective insight, which are
not easily amenable to observation. Similarly this approach can be a limited training
tool since it cannot shed light on the learning process, only on the acquisition of (or
lack of) competence (Joss, 1990).
Clark (1995, p. 564) has argued also that competence alone is inadequate as a
principle of professional formation and that consequently any attempt to build
professional training on it would be misguided. A competence approach relies on
observed worker-activity outcomes as the key test rather than performance in
traditional academic tests of knowledge or skill. While attractive in theory, to
translate this principle adequately into action it is necessary to identify the roles,
tasks and skills that comprise the job and to create valid assessment tests. The
370 K. Skinner & B. Whyte
building of an evidence base is inextricably linked with its utilisation. This has hardly
begun in social work. If this process is to be progressed, assessment criteria for
professional competence would need to be derived from research on effectiveness in
specific circumstances. It remains to be demonstrated that any practical and sensible
assessment system can fairly and rigorously test for professional competence. It is to
be hoped that examples such as the ‘Pathfinder’ initiative (Home Office, 1998) and
‘Getting Best Results’ (Scottish Executive, 1999), in attempting to identify ‘effective-
ness criteria’ based on research evidence, will assist in the accreditation of pro-
grammes of intervention in criminal justice. As a consequence this will assist the
process of ‘accreditation’ and professional training. Such tests are not currently
available and, in any case, may prove difficult to devise and implement.
The Nature of Learning for Professional Practice
Heron (1981) suggests that there are three types of learning needed to link theory
and practice. These are: factual knowledge, practice knowledge and experiential
learning. Learning by reflection has been defined as ‘a process of internally examin-
ing and exploring an issue of concern triggered by an experience, which creates and
clarifies meaning in terms of self and results in a changed conceptual perspective’
(Boyd & Fales, 1983, p. 113).
Service users often learn as they reflect on what they do and this process is
mirrored in the learning by the practitioner. This process occurs when the prac-
titioner reflects on the service user’s learning and achievement and on their own
experience as a change agent. Each social problem is experienced by an individual as
unique, open to many different explanations and cannot be resolved simply by the
application of previously formulated techniques (Trotter, 1999). Social problems are
extraordinarily complex and resistant to intervention. The kind of solution or
constellation of solutions developed to tackle a situation depends on the analysis of
the problem in the first place (or, more subtly), whether the situation is deemed a
problem, or more subtly still, whether it is deemed a problem that should be tackled
(Joss, 1990).
Attempts to apply technical/rational models and concentration on problem solv-
ing methods, as in a competence-based approach, run the risk of neglecting the key
issues of problem identification, naming and framing, which are highly political and
value-laden activities. Practitioners must learn how to frame and reframe situations
in different ways and to engage in a process of questioning, improvisation, invention
and testing strategies in response. There is an art of problem framing, an art of
implementation and an art of improvisation as well as the art of influencing and
motivating (Schon, 1987). Similarly even an appropriate technical ‘solution’ such as
a structured programme of intervention with pre-set aims, measurable objectives
and relevant content must be delivered in a way that matches the learning style of
the individual participant (Trotter, 1999). These are important characteristics of
‘reflective’ and critical practice.
Social Work Education 371
An important requirement for good professional social work provision is an
holistic approach to service delivery both in a theoretical and in a practical and
discretionary way. The ability to apply subtly different responses to the different
needs of different situations, while working to explicit objectives and direction may
itself be a key competence. For this reason Clark (1995) suggests that competence
will not do as a single path to specifying social work knowledge and skill and
that establishing an empirically grounded account of the role of theory in practice
is also required. His typology of knowledge covers observational, contextual,
abstract and theoretical knowledge, of which theoretical knowledge comes ‘top of the
tree’. He suggests that practitioners typically have an amalgam of well-founded
knowledge, personal impressions, practice wisdom and experience. In their work
they must address a series of ‘instances’ in providing services and enter a process of
practical theorising whereby they formulate the purposes appropriate to the
‘instance’. The exercise of professional expertise subsists in the art of practical
theorising.
In this context professional discipline requires ‘deep learning’, a duality of
learning based on a deep understanding of theoretical principles, application of the
rules of evidence, methods of enquiry and performance objectives and standards,
combined with creativity. Deep learning is achieved when formal learning and
personal experience are brought together within a learning environment (Entwhistle
& Ramsden, 1983). The task of introducing evidence-based practice must also
involve getting professionals to stop doing things, where there is evidence of
ineffectiveness as well as promoting new practices based on promising evidence of
effectiveness (Nutley et al., 2000, p. 5). ‘Unlearning’ has been used to describe the
need to cast off previously established ways of doing things in order to be able to
take on board new understandings.
The task for social work education and training is to achieve deep learning within
a dual curriculum involving theoretical knowledge and the practical application of
knowledge and skills in the work situation (Dale, 1994). Research by Marton & Saljo
(1976) and Newble & Entwhistle (1986) shows that students often adopt either a
surface or deep approach to learning. Those using a surface approach concentrate on
remembering facts in order to pass examinations. Those using a deep approach seek
to discover why something is the way it is and search for its meaning.
Lowe & Kerri (1998) attempted to discover whether a reflective learning approach
led to a higher level of deep learning than more conventional didactic methods.
Their experiment with two groups of student nurses demonstrated that there was no
significant difference between the level of learning achieved in the two groups. What
did emerge, however, was that the group of students learning by reflective methods
learned more quickly than those learning by conventional methods. This has clear
implications for those organising learning programmes, in that their design and
delivery needs to embody principles and practice of reflective learning, where
participants have the opportunity to apply their understanding to their own practice.
A further aspect still to be researched is that of retention of deep learning—does the
method of learning influence how much is retained over a period of time?
372 K. Skinner & B. Whyte
The Role of Social Work Education: Post-qualifying Training
The nature and structure of social work training is subject to review in Scotland and
proposals for the future direction are expected shortly. It remains to be seen whether
or not a competence-based approach is continued or a new model adopted.
A major difficulty with the competence approach is in trying to distinguish
between different levels of performance and specialism. It remains to be seen how far
practice requirements can be adequately captured in statements of competence in a
way which is sufficiently unambiguous for qualitatively different standards to be
established (Hey, 1990, p. 10).
In the current framework for social work training, statements of professional
competence often amount to descriptions of professional practice which are not
level-specific. The three-tier structure of current social work qualification attempts to
reflect different levels on a ladder of learning. To some degree the existing model in
Scotland attempts to mirror some aspects of medical training with progression from
general practitioner, to specialism and to a more advanced level required by those
offering specialist assistance to others. At the stage of undertaking a social work
qualifying programme (DipSW), the aims of learning are expressed in terms of six
core or general competence and practice requirements (CCETSW, 1997). Basic skills
in critical assessment, intervention planning and responsiveness to the capacity and
style of the user, and the ability to work ethically under the direction of an
experienced professional are sought. These skills are not role-specific and are
intended to be transferred to many professional social work roles, in children and
family work, community care, youth and criminal justice. Specialist or deep and
detailed knowledge consolidated through experience may well be provided by a
practice teacher, supervisor, or consultant to support the newly qualified worker in
practice.
At the post-qualifying stage (PQSW), practitioners are required to extend their
level of competence beyond that of DipSW level to work more independently and
effectively in complex situations, exercising their powers and responsibilities ethically
as professional social workers, including the use of discretion and the management
of risk (CCETSW, 1997). Specialist knowledge is developed and skills consolidated
through more independent application within a framework of supervision. Specialist
consultancy may be required to assist specific areas of practice and extend knowledge
and skills. Over the past two years a set of occupational standards have been
developed for child care social work at post-qualifying level and a national PQSW
course in criminal justice social work has been developed. This trend towards
service-specific competence is likely to be continued in other areas of provision.
The current Advanced Award (AASW) requires holders to make a significant
contribution to service development and provision by researching, planning, imple-
menting and monitoring strategies for change using a wide repertoire of methods.
The ability to enhance the capabilities of others is central to the Advanced Award
which may relate directly to users or equally to assist those at DipSW or PQSW level
work more effectively by operating as a consultant. The advanced practitioner or
Social Work Education 373
manager must demonstrate evidence of leadership, the ability to work independently
yet accountably and the capacity to assist other professionals to achieve a high level
of performance.
The three current awards with their different levels can be seen to offer a
framework within which individual social workers can progress while maintaining a
degree of general practice training and the development of a specialism. The nature
of the framework suggests that progression takes place over time, and that learning
comes from experience ‘on the job’ supported by academic programmes. The level
of performance, both professional and academic, required at post-qualifying level is
higher than that required at qualifying level and suggests that knowledge and skills
have been both widened and deepened and are applied to more specific specialisms.
This may well correlate to Gardiner’s (1988) concepts of levels of learning, where the
deepest learning ‘requires the ability to learn and to transfer both the content and
the learning to new and different situations’ (p. 102).
Experience in Scotland to date indicates that the response of employers to
post-qualifying awards in social work has been mixed, particularly the Advanced
Award, and few courses have been established. Some agencies have grasped them
enthusiastically as an aid to their own staff and service development strategies, some
have barely recognised their existence. Perhaps even more negatively, we know of
one large Scottish Authority which took a policy decision that resources should not
be invested in post-qualifying initiatives. There is, of course, a range of less polarised
responses in between. The ‘modernising’ agenda may see radical alterations to this
structure. It is important that competences are developed in consultation with
practitioners and professional bodies as well as with employers and where possible
have some empirical basis for their promotion. If those developed are exclusively in
the control of employers, there is a risk that they will do little more than promote
a top-led uncritical and mechanistic practice rarely challenged by front line workers,
when what is needed is accountable professional judgement and expertise based on
evidence where this exists.
Those agencies that have welcomed and built on the post-qualifying framework
have used it to put into place a cadre of specialists or consultants who are more able
to take leadership in their field and act as resources to their staff groups. The
investment of resources in these processes, which might be described as training for
a specialism, has carried with it a clear expectation that practitioners will use their
learning to influence practice, practice outcomes and the generation of new knowl-
edge.
Management Learning in Practice
Our experience of running a short management training programme for criminal
justice managers and an Advanced Award programme/MSc for staff and managers
in criminal justice social work settings may have something to offer here. The
Advanced Award/MSc programme is a two year part-time programme for experi-
374 K. Skinner & B. Whyte
enced practitioners or managers, delivered on a modular …
b y H E AT H E R M C L E O D G R A N T & L E S L I E R . C R U T C H F I E L D
P
H
O
T
O
G
R
A
P
H
S
B
Y
©
M
IC
H
A
E
L
B
E
N
S
O
N
P
H
O
T
O
G
R
A
P
H
Y
IN FEWER THAN TWO DECADES, TEACH FOR AMERICA
has gone from a struggling start-up to a powerful force for educa-
tion reform in the United States. Launched in 1989 by college
senior Wendy Kopp on a shoestring budget in a borrowed office,
the organization now attracts many of the country’s best and
brightest college graduates, who spend two years teaching in
America’s neediest public schools in exchange for a modest salary.
In the last decade alone, Teach for America has more than quin-
tupled in size, growing its budget from $10 million to $70 million
and its number of teachers from 500 to 4,400. And it aims to dou-
ble in size again in the next few years.1
But rapid growth is only part of New York-based Teach for
America’s story. Although its success can be measured by such tan-
gibles as the number of teachers it places or the amount of money
it raises, perhaps the organization’s most significant accomplish-
ment is the movement for education reform it has created. Although
some education leaders are critical of the nonprofit’s teacher-train-
CREATING
HIGH-IM PACT
NONPROFITS
Conventional wisdom says that scaling social innovation starts with strengthening
internal management capabilities. This study of 12 high-impact nonprofits,
however, shows that real social change happens when organizations go outside
their own walls and find creative ways to enlist the help of others.
32 S TA N F O R D S O C I A L I N N O VAT I O N R E V I E W / f a l l 2 0 0 7 www.ssireview.org
{ }
{This photograph of a boy wearing a Share Our Strength cap, and the other photographs that follow, were taken
during the Hinges of Hope Tour in the Rio Grande Valley. The February 2004 tour brought public and private sector
leaders to Texas to visit and learn about these impoverished communities. Share Our Strength, a high-impact
nonprofit that combats childhood hunger in the United States, hosted the tour.}
}
ing program, and how long these teachers stay in the classroom,
using such measures misses the larger, intangible impact the
organization has had. Teach for America has challenged how
many Americans think about teacher credentialing, shaken up
the education establishment, and, most important, created a
committed vanguard of education reformers.
Teach for America has been so effective that it is now the
recruiter of choice on many Ivy League campuses, often out-
competing elite firms like McKinsey & Company.2 Graduates
who went through the program in the 1990s are now launch-
ing charter schools, running for political office, managing foun-
dations, and working as school principals across the country. In
these capacities, they can effect change at the systemic level –
not just child by child or classroom by classroom, but at the
school, district, and state levels.
How has Teach for America accomplished so much in such
a relatively short period of time? And how have other similarly
successful nonprofits had such significant social impact? Our
answers to this second question are the subject of this article
and the focus of our forthcoming book, Forces for Good: The Six
Practices of High-Impact Nonprofits ( Jossey-Bass, October 2007).
We grounded our findings in several years of research on
12 of the most successful nonprofits in recent U.S. history,
including the well-known (Habitat for Humanity), the less well-
known (Self-Help), and the surprising (the Exploratorium).
One nonprofit, Environmental Defense, has helped reduce
acid rain in the northeastern United States and created new solu-
tions to global warming. Another, City Year, has
helped thousands of young people serve their coun-
try and changed how we think about volunteerism.
Collectively, these high-impact nonprofits have
pressed corporations to adopt sustainable business
practices and mobilized citizens to act on such issues
as hunger, education reform, and the environment.
(See p. 36 for names and descriptions of all 12 orga-
nizations.)
What we discovered after closely examining
these 12 high-impact nonprofits came as a bit of a
surprise. We had assumed that there was some-
thing inherent in these organizations that helped
them have great impact – and that their success was directly tied
to their growth or management approach. Instead, we learned
that becoming a high-impact nonprofit is not just about build-
ing a great organization and then expanding it to reach more
people. Rather, high-impact nonprofits work with and through
organizations and individuals outside themselves to create more
impact than they ever could have achieved alone. They build
social movements and fields; they transform business, gov-
ernment, other nonprofits, and individuals; and they change
the world around them.
Myths of Nonprofit Management
We first examined the 12 organizations through the lens of tra-
ditional nonprofit management, studying their leadership, gov-
ernance, strategies, programs, fundraising, and marketing. (See
p. 40 for details on how we selected and studied these nonprofits.)
We thought we would find that their success was due to time-
tested management habits like brilliant marketing, well-tuned
operations, or rigorously developed strategic plans.
But instead what we found flew in the face of conventional
wisdom. Achieving high impact is not just about building a great
organization and then scaling it up site by site, or dollar by dol-
lar. As we got further into our research, we saw that many com-
monly held beliefs about what makes nonprofits successful
were falling by the wayside. In fact, the vast majority of non-
profit literature focuses on issues that, although important,
don’t determine whether an organization has impact, such as:
Myth #1: Perfect Management. Some of the organiza-
tions we studied are not exemplary models of generally accepted
management principles. Although adequate management is
necessary, it is not sufficient for creating significant social impact.
Myth #2: Brand-Name Awareness. A handful of groups
we studied are household names, but a few hardly focus on mar-
keting at all. For some, traditional mass marketing is a critical
part of their impact strategy; for others, it’s unimportant.
34 S TA N F O R D S O C I A L I N N O VAT I O N R E V I E W / f a l l 2 0 0 7 www.ssireview.org
HEATHER MCLEOD GRANT is an adviser to the Center for the
Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship at Duke University’s Fuqua
School of Business and the Center for Social Innovation at Stanford Uni-
versity’s Graduate School of Business.
LESLIE R. CRUTCHFIELD is managing director of the Ashoka Global
Academy and a research grantee of the Aspen Institute’s Nonprofit Sector
and Philanthropy Program. Their book, Forces for Good: The Six
Practices of High-Impact Nonprofits, was a project of the Center for
the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship and will be published by
Jossey-Bass in October 2007.
www.ssireview.org f a l l 2 0 0 7 / S TA N F O R D S O C I A L I N N O VAT I O N R E V I E W 35
Myth #3: A Breakthrough New Idea. Although some
groups come up with radical innovations, others take old ideas
and tweak them until they achieve success.
Myth #4: Textbook Mission Statements. All of these
nonprofits look to compelling missions, visions, and shared
values. But only a few of these groups spend time fine-tuning
their mission statement on paper; most of them are too busy
living it.
Myth #5: High Ratings on Conventional Metrics. When
we looked at traditional measures of nonprofit efficiency, many
of these groups didn’t score well, because they don’t adhere to
misleading metrics such as overhead ratios.
Myth #6: Large Budgets. We discovered that size does-
n’t correlate with impact. Some of these nonprofits have made
a big impact with large budgets; others have achieved similar
impact with much smaller budgets.
As we dismissed the conventional wisdom about what
makes high-impact nonprofits successful, we realized we had
discovered a new way of understanding this sector – and what
enables the best nonprofits to create lasting social change.3
Six Practices of High-Impact Nonprofits
The secret to their success lies in how high-impact nonprofits
mobilize every sector of society – government, business, non-
profits, and the public – to be a force for good. In other words,
greatness has more to do with how nonprofits work outside the
boundaries of their organizations than with how they manage
their own internal operations. The high-impact nonprofits we
studied are satisfied with building a “good enough” organiza-
tion and then focusing their energy externally to catalyze large-
scale change.
To paraphrase Archimedes, “Give me a lever long enough
and I alone can move the world.” These groups use the power
of leverage to create change. In physics, leverage is defined as
the mechanical advantage gained from using a lever. In business,
it means using a proportionately small initial investment to
gain a high return. The concept of leverage captures exactly what
high-impact nonprofits do. Like a man lifting a boulder three
times his weight with a lever and fulcrum, these nonprofits are
able to achieve greater social change than their mere size or struc-
ture would suggest.
After a long process of studying these 12 nonprofits, we
began to see patterns in the ways they work. In the end, six pat-
terns crystallized into the form presented here – the six practices
that high-impact nonprofits use to achieve extraordinary impact:
1. Serve and Advocate: High-impact organizations may
start out providing great programs, but they eventually realize
that they cannot achieve large-scale social change through ser-
vice delivery alone. So they add policy advocacy to acquire
government resources and to change legislation. Other non-
profits start out by doing advocacy and later add grassroots pro-
grams to supercharge their strategy.
Ultimately, all high-impact organizations bridge the divide
between service and advocacy. They become good at both.
And the more they serve and advocate, the more they achieve
impact. A nonprofit’s grassroots work helps inform its policy
advocacy, making legislation more relevant. And advocacy at the
national level can help a nonprofit replicate its model, gain
credibility, and acquire funding for expansion.4
The nonprofit Self-Help, based in Durham, N.C., presents
an excellent example of how combining advocacy with service
can result in greater impact. Self-Help began by giving home
loans to clients – often poor, minority single mothers – who
did not qualify for traditional mortgages. Although its services
helped thousands of low-income families purchase a house,
Self-Help’s work was soon undermined by predatory lenders,
which took advantage of vulnerable borrowers by adding
excessive fees or charging exorbitant mortgage rates, virtually
ensuring that the borrower would default.
Eventually, Self-Help organized a statewide coalition in
North Carolina and lobbied to pass the first anti-predatory lend-
ing law in the country. Later, the organization established the
subsidiary Center for Self-Help to help local nonprofits pass
similar legislation in 22 additional states. Through its direct ser-
vices, Self-Help has given more than $4.5 billion in home
loans to low-income families in the United States. But through
its advocacy efforts, it has created far more value for the coun-
try’s most vulnerable populations by protecting them from
predatory lenders.
In nearly every case we studied, the nonprofit combined
direct service programs and advocacy to enhance its impact
over time. Some groups, like America’s Second Harvest and
Habitat for Humanity, began by providing services, such as
feeding the hungry or housing the poor, and added advocacy
only after a decade or more. Other groups, like the Center on
Budget and Policy Priorities, the Heritage Foundation, and
Environmental Defense, began with advocacy and later added
grassroots programs or services to expand their impact to
the local and state level. Some groups, like City Year and the
National Council of La Raza, did both from the outset, despite
pressure to specialize, and recognized early that advocacy and
service reinforce each other.
2. Make Markets Work: High-impact nonprofits have
learned that tapping into the power of self-interest and the laws
of economics is far more effective than appealing to pure altru-
ism. No longer content to rely on traditional notions of charity,
36 S TA N F O R D S O C I A L I N N O VAT I O N R E V I E W / f a l l 2 0 0 7 www.ssireview.org
TWELVE HIGH-IMPACT NONPROFITS
Organization Revenue How the organization works What the organization has accomplished
Year founded, Fiscal year ’05
headquarters ($ millions)
America’s Second Harvest 543* Distributes donated food and grocery Distributed 2 billion pounds of food each year
1979, Chicago products to grassroots nonprofits; through more than 200 food banks to more
advocates for antihunger policy than 50,000 local nonprofits, feeding 25 million
hungry Americans
Center on Budget and 13 Researches and analyzes state and Protected billions of dollars in federal benefits
Policy Priorities federal budgets and fiscal policies; and allocations to programs for the poor by
1981, Washington, D.C. advocates on behalf of the poor working with 26 state affiliates and 6,000 local
nonprofits; established state and international
budget projects
City Year 42 Builds democracy through citizen Created youth volunteer service corps that
1988, Boston service, leadership, and social operates in 17 U.S. cities and South Africa, with
entrepreneurship; advocates for 8,000 alumni; influenced adoption of AmeriCorps,
national service policy which enlists 70,000 volunteers annually;
helped build fields of youth service and social
entrepreneurship
Environmental Defense 69 Addresses environmental problems Influenced critical environmental policies,
1967, New York with research, advocacy, market tools, including Clean Air Act and Kyoto Protocol;
and corporate partnerships helped companies like McDonald’s, FedEx, and
Wal-Mart Stores become more environmentally
sustainable
The Exploratorium 44 Operates museum of science, art, and Influenced global movement for interactive
1969, San Francisco human perception that is a model for science centers and museums, reaching 20
new forms of education million people through exhibits at 124 partner
museums and a Web site; museum attracts
500,000 visitors each year
Habitat for Humanity 1,000* Seeks to eliminate poverty housing Created 2,100 global affiliates in 100 countries
International and homelessness by building homes, and built 275,000 homes, which now house
1976, Americus, Ga. raising awareness, and advocating 1 million people
for change
The Heritage Foundation 40 Formulates and promotes conservative Crafted policy agenda for the Reagan adminis-
1973, Washington, D.C. policy through research and by tration; helped lead conservative revolution
creating affiliate organizations in Congress in 1990s; now works with 2,500
state affiliates and 200,000 individual members
National Council of 29 Works to improve opportunities for Helped create more than 300 local grassroots
La Raza all Latinos through national network affiliates that are involved in education, health,
1968, Washington, D.C. of affiliated civil rights and advocacy and civil rights for Hispanics; influenced critical
organizations legislation on immigration
Self-Help 75 Fosters economic development in low- Created corporate partnerships that allowed it
1980, Durham, N.C. income communities through lending, to provide more than $4.5 billion in loans to
asset building, research, and advocacy 50,000 small businesses and low-income people;
led national anti-predatory lending campaign
and legal reform in 22 states
Share Our Strength 24 Inspires and leads individuals and Raised $200 million for hunger-relief groups
1984, Washington, D.C. businesses to end childhood hunger through events in 60 cities; involved 1 million
volunteers in the Great American Bake Sale
Teach for America 41 Recruits recent college graduates to Trained 12,000 college graduates to teach
1990, New York spend two years teaching in needy 2.5 million students, creating a vanguard for
schools and to lead education reform education reform; influenced teacher training
and credentialing practices
YouthBuild USA 18 Helps low-income youths learn job and Recruited more than 60,000 youths and 226
1988, Boston leadership skills by building affordable affiliates to help build 15,000 units of housing;
community housing influenced national legislation to create $645
million in federal funding
* Budget includes value of in-kind donations
{ }
or to see business as an enemy,
these nonprofits find ways to
work with markets and help
companies “do good while doing
well.” They influence business
practices, build corporate part-
nerships, and develop earned-
income ventures to achieve social
change on a grander scale.5
Environmental Defense was
one of the first nonprofits to
realize the power of harnessing
market forces for social change.
The New York-based organiza-
tion was founded in the late
1960s by a group of scientists
who lobbied to ban the use of
DDT, and its informal motto for
years was “sue the bastards.”
Over time, however, the non-
profit became known for a dif-
ferent – and initially more radi-
cal – approach: working with corporations to change their
business processes and become more sustainable.
For example, even though other green groups criticized
Environmental Defense for “selling out” at the time, the non-
profit worked with McDonald’s in the 1980s to make the fast-
food giant’s packaging more environmentally sound. Since
then, Environmental Defense has worked with hundreds of
companies – from FedEx to Wal-Mart Stores – often scaling
its innovations to change practices in an entire industry.
Although these partnerships are becoming more common
among environmental groups, Environmental Defense was an
early pioneer in this area.
But Environmental Defense didn’t just set out to change busi-
nesses’ behavior. It went a step further, harnessing market
forces to help solve larger environmental problems. Environ-
mental Defense has been a strong proponent of market-based
systems to control pollution, such as “cap and trade,” which
establishes overall emission limits (on carbon, for example),
and then creates economic incentives for companies to comply
and reduce their emissions. Cap and trade systems helped
reduce acid rain in the northeast United States and have become
an important tool in the effort to fight global warming. In fact,
this approach led to the passage of California’s Global Warm-
ing Solutions Act of 2006, the first statewide legislation of its
kind and a model for more stringent federal emissions controls.
We found three primary ways in which high-impact non-
profits use markets. They help change business behavior on a
large scale, as did Environmental Defense. Self-Help also followed
this path, creating a secondary loan market and expanding its
innovative lending models
through mainstream financial
players such as Wachovia and
Fannie Mae, thereby changing
the industry’s practices and help-
ing large companies reach his-
torically underserved markets.
Nonprofits also leverage
markets by partnering with cor-
porations to garner additional
resources for their cause, as have
America’s Second Harvest, City
Year, and Habitat for Humanity.
All three have established large
corporate partnerships through
which they obtain funding,
media relations, marketing sup-
port, and in-kind donations.
Some nonprofits run their
own small businesses, generat-
ing income that helps fund their
programs. Share Our Strength,
for instance, runs a nonprofit consulting business called Com-
munity Wealth Ventures, whose revenue it redeploys toward
its social mission.
3. Inspire Evangelists: High-impact nonprofits build
strong communities of supporters who help them achieve their
larger goals. They value volunteers, donors, and advisers not only
for their time, money, and guidance, but also for their evange-
lism. To inspire supporters’ commitment, these nonprofits cre-
ate emotional experiences that help connect supporters to the
group’s mission and core values. These experiences convert out-
siders to evangelists, who in turn recruit others in viral marketing
at its finest. High-impact nonprofits then nurture and sustain
these communities of supporters over time, recognizing that
they are not just means, but ends in themselves.6
Habitat for Humanity, located in Americus, Ga., exem-
plifies this ability to create a larger community and inspire
evangelists for its cause. As founder Millard Fuller has said,
he didn’t set out to create an organization so much as a social
movement. From the outset, the nonprofit spread its model
through local church congregations and word of mouth,
building its brand from the grassroots up. That model includes
enlisting supporters in the very core of its work: building
homes for the poor. Participants work alongside the future
residents of the home, and in the process live out their val-
ues while becoming advocates for the housing cause. These
evangelists, in turn, recruit their friends and colleagues,
expanding the circle of supporters outward.
In addition, Habitat for Humanity attracts what we call
www.ssireview.org f a l l 2 0 0 7 / S TA N F O R D S O C I A L I N N O VAT I O N R E V I E W 37
}
38 S TA N F O R D S O C I A L I N N O VAT I O N R E V I E W / f a l l 2 0 0 7 www.ssireview.org
“super-evangelists” like former President Jimmy Carter – peo-
ple who by virtue of their personal accomplishments, famous
names, and vast social networks can help take a nonprofit to the
next level. By serving on the board and as a spokesperson for
the organization, Carter helped propel it from a grassroots
nonprofit to a global force for change.
Not all of the high-impact nonprofits we studied had an orga-
nizational model that makes involving supporters easy. Yet
almost all of them found creative ways to convert core supporters
to evangelists and to mobilize super-evangelists.
4. Nurture Nonprofit Networks: Although most non-
profits pay lip service to collaboration, many of them really see
other groups as competition for scarce resources. But high-
impact organizations help their peers succeed, building networks
of nonprofit allies and devoting remarkable time and energy to
advancing their fields. They freely share wealth, expertise, tal-
ent, and power with other nonprofits not because they are
saints, but because it’s in their self-interest to do so.7
The Heritage Foundation exemplifies this network mind-set.
From its founding, this Washington, D.C.-based organization
defied the traditional notion of a think tank. The foundation
sought not only to cultivate a broad membership base, but
also to infuse conservativism into mainstream thought. To
achieve its goals, Heritage realized that it needed to build a move-
ment, not just an organization. And so the foundation helped
to seed and galvanize a vast network of conservative organi-
zations at the local, state, and national levels.
Today, Heritage’s Resource Bank – a network of state and
local nonprofits – includes more than 2,000 member organi-
zations. The Heritage Foundation helps leaders of these state
and local nonprofits raise money and freely shares its donor list
with like-minded groups. It also offers extensive programs to
train non-Heritage policy analysts on everything from conser-
vative strategies to public speaking skills. And Heritage cultivates
talent – not only for its own organization, but also for other lead-
ing conservative groups – by offering a prestigious internship
program and job-placement service for its young acolytes. The
nonprofit also frequently works in coalitions to promote con-
servative policy and to pass legislation. Rather than seeing
other conservative organizations as competitors, Heritage has
helped build a much larger conservative movement over the last
two decades, serving as a critical connector in this growing
network of like-minded peers.
Other high-impact nonprofits harness the power of net-
works. In some cases, they formalize their networks through
an affiliation structure, such as YouthBuild USA or America’s
Second Harvest. In other cases, they keep their networks less
formal and operate without official brand or funding ties,
such as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities or the
Exploratorium.
Regardless of whether they have formal or informal affiliates,
all of these nonprofits help build their respective fields through
collaboration rather than competition. They share financial
resources and help other nonprofits succeed at fundraising.
They give away their model and proprietary information in an
open-source approach. They cultivate leadership and talent for
their larger network, rather than hoarding the best people. And
they work in coalitions to influence legislation or conduct grass-
roots advocacy campaigns, without worrying too much about
which organization gets the credit. These nonprofits recognize
that they are more powerful together than alone, and that large-
scale social change often requires collaborative, collective action.
5. Master the Art of Adaptation: High-impact non-
profits are exceptionally adaptive, modifying their tactics as
needed to increase their success. They have responded to chang-
ing circumstances with one innovation after another. Along the
way, they’ve made mistakes and have even produced some flops.
But unlike many nonprofits, they have also mastered the abil-
ity to listen, learn, and modify their approach on the basis of exter-
nal cues. Adaptability has allowed them to sustain their impact.8
{
www.ssireview.org f a l l 2 0 0 7 / S TA N F O R D S O C I A L I N N O VAT I O N R E V I E W 39
Too many nonprofits are highly innovative but can’t execute
new ideas. Other nonprofits are so mired in bureaucracy that
they lack creativity. But high-impact nonprofits combine cre-
ativity with disciplined systems for evaluating, executing, and
adapting ideas over time.
Share Our Strength has been exceptionally adaptive. Bill
Shore started the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit by mail-
ing letters to food industry celebrities to raise money for
hunger relief. Although he received a few checks, he found that
professional chefs were much more enthusiastic about donat-
ing their time and talent to a local tasting event. After the suc-
cess of a single event in Denver, Share Our Strength abandoned
its direct mail campaign and launched the Taste of the Nation
series – now a national success in more than 70 cities. It has
raised millions of dollars for hunger relief, and many other non-
profits have copied it.
Over time, Share Our Strength has experimented with a
number of different innovations, from participatory events to
cause-marketing campaigns. Not all of these events have been
successful. One failed experiment was its attempt to extend the
Taste concept into the sports arena, through a program called
“Taste of the Game.” Share Our Strength solicited celebrity ath-
letes to coach young people in a sport and asked parents to buy
tickets to demonstration games – with all proceeds going to
hunger relief. But the passion for antihunger issues wasn’t as
strong among athletes and coaches as it was among the restau-
rant community. After several less successful initiatives cost
the nonprofit time and money, Share Our Strength developed
a more rigorous approach to managing innovation. Today, the
nonprofit’s staff develops business plans and conducts more
research before diving into new programs.
All of the nonprofits in our sample have mastered what we
call the cycle of adaptation, which involves four critical steps. First,
they listen to feedback from their external environments and
seek opportunities for improvement or change. Next, they
innovate and experiment, developing new ideas or improving
upon older programs. Then they evaluate and learn what works
with the innovation, sharing information and best practices
across their networks. They modify their plans and programs
in a process of ongoing learning. It’s a never-ending cycle that
helps these nonprofits increase and sustain their impact.
6. Share Leadership: The leaders of these 12 organizations
all exhibit charisma, but they don’t have oversized egos. They
know that they must share power in order to be stronger forces
for good. They distribute leadership within their organizations
and throughout their external nonprofit networks, empower-
ing others to lead. Leaders of high-impact nonprofits cultivate
a strong second-in-command, build enduring executive teams
with long tenure, and develop large and powerful boards.9
The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) is a great exam-
ple of collective leadership in action. The Washington, D.C.-
based nonprofit was founded in 1968 by a group of Hispanic
leaders, and within its first decade it appointed Raul Yzaguirre
as CEO. Yzaguirre led the nonprofit for more than 30 years of
extraordinary growth. He …
Developing a Progressive Advocacy
Program Within a Human
Services Agency
Linda Plitt Donaldson, PhD
ABSTRACT. This paper brings together knowledge from research and
practice to suggest a set of building blocks on which a progressive advo-
cacy program could be developed within a human services agency. Pro-
gressive advocacy is defined as advocacy motivated primarily by a desire
for social change that addresses underlying structural and power inequi-
ties that includes methods to meaningfully engage agency clients or con-
stituents in all aspects ofthe advocacy process. The paper concludes with
a case study showing the development of an advocacy program within a
nonprofit homeless services agency and discusses the constraints on its
development. Implications for research, education, and practice are also
discussed. doi:10.1300/J147v32n02_03 [Article copies available for a fee from
The Haworth Document Delivery Service: l-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address:
<[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com>
© 2008 by the Haworth Press. All rights reserved.]
KEYWORDS. Advocacy, nonprofit, human services, leadership, em-
powerment, social change
INTRODUCTION
Since the emergence of the charity organization societies in the late
1800s, nonprofit human service agencies have been the cornerstone of
the U.S. response to community needs. The common image of nonprofit
Linda Plitt Donaldson is Assistant Professor, Catholic University of America,
National Catholic School of Social Service, 620 Michigan Avenue, NE, Washington,
DC 20064.
Administration in Social Work, Vol. 32(2) 2008
Available online at http://asw.haworthpress.com
© 2008 by The Haworth Press. Ail rights reserved.
doi:l0.1300/J147v32n02_03 25
26 ADMINISTRA TION ¡N SOCIAL WORK
human service agencies as providers of shelter, food, clothing, and other
forms of treatment for the symptoms of intractable social problems over-
shadows their important history as social change agents. For example, the
poverty movement, battered womens movement, and gay rights move-
ment were enabled by the participation of nonprofit agencies that served
the needs of those groups. This skewed view of nonprofits as purveyors
of charity but not justice may lead important agency stakeholders like do-
nors. Boards, Executive Directors, and staff, to the conclusion that ad-
vocacy practice is neither worthwhile nor appropriate as a core function
for human service agencies.
The purpose of this paper is to stimulate a greater understanding of
the role and purpose of advocacy as a distinct program within a human
service agency and to lay out a framework for developing one. Advo-
cacy is defined as any attempt to influence the decisions of any institu-
tional elite on behalf of a collective interest (Jenkins, 1987, p. 197). The
term progressive advocacy practice refers to advocacy that (1) seeks to
address underlying structural and power inequities as distinct from ad-
vocacy motivated by organizational interest, and (2) applies strategies
that meaningfully engage clients or constituents in all aspects of the ad-
vocacy process.
The paper begins by attempting to deepen the rationale for nonprofit
human service agency advocacy practice by framing it in the context of
a public policy making theory. After framing the context, the paper of-
fers a set of core practice principles and building blocks for developing
a progressive advocacy program within a human services agency fol-
lowed by a case study illustiating the development of an advocacy pro-
gram within a nonprofit multi-service agency serving people who are
homeless. Although the agency does not achieve the ideal progressive
advocacy model, its constraints demonstrate the challenges embedded
in developing such a program. The paper concludes with a discussion of
the implications for social work research, education, and practice.
RATIONALE FOR ADVOCACY PRACTICE
WITHIN A HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY
Because of the front line nature of social work practice in nonprofit
settings, the social work profession has a powerful opportunity to assist
nonprofit human services agencies integrate progressive advocacy func-
tions into their work. The professions ethical obligation (NASW, 1996) to
Linda Plitt Donaldson 27
engage in advocacy practice arises from the fact that the populations
they serve are disproportionately reliant on government-funded social
services. Furthermore, the degree to which these services do not meet
sufficient measures of equity and adequacy have grave consequences
for the quality of life of families and individuals in need. In addition,
given their direct experience with addressing human needs, social ser-
vice agencies have a unique perspective to speak authoritatively about
the root causes of social problems, and they have access to the true ex-
perts on the solutions to social problems, their clients, or as they are re-
ferred to in this paper, their constituents.
Trends in public policy making and social service delivery support
the need for nonprofit human service agencies to leverage the knowl-
edge and expertise of their constituents and staff to advocate for social
justice. The devolutionary trend of public policy making from federal to
state and local governments may make the policy-making process more
accessible to community-based agencies as local decision-makers are
physically located closer to them as compared to federal policy decision-
makers. However, devolving policy making to local governments typi-
cally goes hand-in-hand with budget cuts or block grants which freeze
funding levels and therefore require states and nonprofit agencies to do
more with less during recessions, natural disasters, or other catastrophic
events that may cause an increase in the demand for social services and
support. Furthermore, in an environment of scarce and diminishing re-
sources (exacerbated by the War in Iraq and the reconstruction of the
Gulf Coast), advocates for safety net programs often compete with each
other for funding, and also compete with other interests with greater
power, privilege, and resources. Consequently, social workers must work
even harder to unify and mobilize themselves and their constituents to
advance more equitable systems without being pitted against each other.
Finally, the privatization and commercialization of social services add
greater complexity to the policy advocacy process in two ways. First,
agencies advocating to change policies of the implementing agency
may be challenging peer agencies and thereby straining pre-existing
inter-agency relationships. Second, privatization may add an extra level
of bureaucracy to the policy advocacy process, as advocates may need
to first meet with third-party contractor decision-makers prior to gov-
ernment decision-makers in the process of achieving a desired reform.
Despite these compelling reasons, it is unclear how many human
service agencies actually engage in advocacy activities. In 1998,
only 1.5\% of public charities reported lobbying expenses (Boris &
Krehely, 2002), but lobbying is just one among many types of activities
28 ADMINISTRA TION IN SOCIAL WORK
included in advocacy practice. Advocacy also includes tasks such as,
educating, skill-^building, mobilizing, organizing, researching, analyzing,
letter-writing, protesting, petitioning, awakening power, building relation-
ships, convening, facilitating, etc., and most of these tasks never cross the
line to the legal definition of lobbying or grassroots lobbying (Avner,
2004; Alliance for Justice, 2004), therefore, nonprofit agencies have a lot
of opportunity to advance a social change agenda without engaging in
lobbying. •
Another unresolved question in the literature that examines nonprofit
advocacy is the extent to which agency advocacy behavior is motivated
by self or agency-interest, for example, to protect funding sources, or do
agencies have a broader purpose to their advocacy agenda that includes
addressing structural and power inequities. The answer to these questions
is usually not an either/or, and advocacy can certainly be done to serve
both purposes. However, the answer to these questions might influence
the strategies and tactics agencies use in their advocacy practice, that is,
whether or not the agency engages in progressive advocacy, or advocacy
that is mostly expert-driven and motivated primarily by agency-interest.
The Policy Cycle as Rationale
for Institutionalized Advocacy Practice
Human services advocacy practice has been described as a peripheral
function typically characterized as ad hoc and i n e p t . . . lacking con-
tinuity and coherence (Gibelman & Kraft, 1996, p. 49). Howlett and
Ramesh (2003) present a five-stage model of the policy cycle that includes:
(1) agenda-setting; (2) policy formulation; (3) policy decision-making;
(4) policy implementation; and (5) policy evaluation. Understanding the
tedious and complex nature of these five stages gives insight on why ad
hoc approaches to advocacy simply will not make the systemic changes
necessary for reforrn, and therefore provides some rationale for struc-
turing a human services advocacy program with dedicated staff and
resources.
For example, Kingdon (1995) and Jansson (2003) describe an agenda-
setting process where three streams converge and push a policy idea
through a window of opportunity, placing it on a shortlist for policy
consideration. These streams include:
• a problem stream, where social issues come to the consciousness
of policy makers through agitation by a constituent or constituency
group, or by an event that focuses the nations or a jurisdictions
Linda Plitt Donaldson 29
attention on a social concern. For example, Hurricane Katrina has
focused the attention of the nation on the intersection of race, class,
and poverty in a way that hasnt entered the consciousness of the
dominant culture since the 1960s;
• a political stream, where the sentiment of the general public, or
change in political actors through the election cycles generate a
shift in values and/or priorities that might support a particular pol-
icy position;
• a policy stream, in which policy experts generate a series of feasi-
ble options to address a recognized public problem.
In an effort to facilitate the flow of complementary issues and policy
options down their respective streams, Kingdon (1995) describes the
policy entrepreneur (p. 179) who is an important actor, or set of actors
working together, to put an issue into the public consciousness, often
through a media strategy, to shape or bend public opinion toward their
view of the social problem and potential solutions. In addition, policy
entrepreneurs should also be working with policy actors at think tanks,
universities, government administrations, and within their own coali-
tions to develop one or more policy solutions that are technically feasi-
ble and that anticipate and respond to constraints that may be raised by
policy decision-makers. Consequently, a policy entrepreneurs job is to
facilitate the development of: problems into public issues; policy ideas
into feasible policy solutions; and a fractured political climate into one
that is disposed to ones policy position. All of these simultaneous ef-
forts require an enormous amount of relationship-building with many
and varied actors within and on the fringes of the public making policy
process to get an issue on the short list of policy decision-makers.
Furthermore, after getting the issue on the short list for consideration,
the policy entrepreneurs work continues in the political stream. For ex-
ample, in the case of legislation, the policy entrepreneur must continue
to work the various in and out-flows in the legislative process to ensure
that support for the billgrows, that House and Senate committees schedule
hearings for and votes on the bill, that it gets reported out of committee, and
gets scheduled for a floor debate. While the bill is moving through the
legislative branch, the policy entrepreneur needs to ensure that it will
not get vetoed when and if it gets to the President or the Governor. Be-
fore and once a bill is passed and signed, the policy entrepreneur must
work with the administrative branch and the bill supporters to ensure
that regulations are properly written, implemented, and enforced while
monitoring unintended and potentially damaging consequences. Even if
30 ADMINISTRA TION IN SOCIAL WORK
the law is implemented successfully, policy entrepreneurs and their al-
lies must continue to ensure that programs created from the law are
given proper funding and support each year.
These policy cycle activities do not even include the important tasks of
constituent organizing or reflection activities that are integral to progres-
sive advocacy practice. Therefore, this greater understanding of whats
involved in policy change may give evidence to the need for agencies to
invest in full-time staff and resources to support advocacy practice. If
such agency activities are continued as an add-on responsibility of Ex-
ecutive Directors or Development Directors advocacy will continue to
result in ad hoc, reactive approaches which often serve to maintain ex-
isting systems that perpetuate human suffering.
CORE PRACTICE PRINCIPLES
FOR DEVELOPING AN AD VOCACY PROGRAM
No single framework exists for institutionalizing a progressive advo-
cacy program within a human services agency. Developing such a pro-
gram depends on a variety of internal and external factors, including:
the organizations lifecycle stage; the values and philosophies of agency
stakeholders (board, staff, volunteer, community, constituents); organi-
zational structure; agency mission; and the agencys external political
and economic contexts. Therefore, different strategies will be required
for moving an agency along the continuum from social service to pro-
gressive advocacy practice based on those factors. For example, the de-
velopmental issues described by Stevens (2001) in her seven-stage
nonprofit hfecycle model is a useful tool for managers and capacity-
builders to consider, in relation to other contextual factors, when integrat-
ing and deepening building blocks for a progressive advocacy program.
Similarly, different models of integrating social service and social change
functions will also emerge. For example, social service agencies may
wish to partner with a grassroots community organizing project to en-
gage and mobilize their constituents rather than build internal capacity
for organizing. However, some universal core practice principles for de-
veloping a progressive advocacy program are:
• Start Where the Agency Is: In direct social work practice, clinicians
stress the principle of starting where the client is (Hepworth,
Rooney, & Larsen, 2002, p. 49), based on research showing that
Linda Plitt Donaldson 31
client readiness for change is an important consideration in the
helping process. This same principle holds true in efforts to engage
organizations in change, particularly when introducing programs
that seek social change which may challenge stakeholder percep-
tions of the mission and puipose of human service agencies and
expose real or perceived vulnerabilities to funders.
A starting point for many human service agencies consider-
ing advocacy as a core function is one of providing direct services
only, such as emergency services or mental health services. To be-
gin moving further along the continuum toward a social service
agency with fully-integrated progressive advocacy program, one
must do a thorough assessment of the organizations readiness for
change and develop a strategy according to a particular change
model. Appendix lists some characteristics of an ideal human ser-
vices agency with a fully integrated progressive advocacy program.
However, the view of what is ideal is subjective and that ideal end-
point is part of the agency assessment process.
Leverage Knowledge and Expertise of Service Program Staff: Good
advocacy is grounded in agency service and constituent experi-
ences. Therefore, it is incumbent on the advocacy staff to ensure
that their advocacy is being done in support of and in coordination
with the service programs by communicating regularly with ser-
vice staff through meetings or e-mail to share information and to
engage them in advocacy activities.
Leverage the Knowledge and Expertise of Constituents: The great-
est social change resource of any human service agency is its
constituents. Most agency constituents know more about social prob-
lems than people with formal education but no experience living
with those issues. In addition, agency constituents also have ideas
for solutions that are grounded in real community and life experi-
ence and therefore have more meaning and practical application.
Work in Coalitions: In addition to being a building block for devel-
oping an advocacy program, working in coalitions is an important
principle to consider when developing an advocacy program. Join-
ing a coalition is often a first step to agency engagement in advo-
cacy. Agency leadership beginning to explore integrating advocacy
as a core function often think of attending a monthly coalition meet-
ing as a low-investment toward learning the policy issues.
Only Practice Advocacy in Agencys A rea of Expertise: As agencies
become known for their advocacy work and policy positions, they
may be asked to speak about areas that are related to but beyond
32 ADMINISTRATION IN SOCIAL WORK
their areas of expertise. In such cases, agencies should resist the
temptation to give visibility to their agency by responding affir-
matively to such requests. It is more important to be authentic and
true to your area of competence and share opportunities for visibil-
ity with complementary agencies.
These core principles form the foundation for the building blocks
that comprise a progressive advocacy program within a human services
agency. These building blocks are discussed in the next section.
BUILDING BLOCKS FOR DEVELOPING
AN ADVOCACY PROGRAM
WITHIN A HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY
The following framework describes the building blocks for a pro-
gressive advocacy program within a human service agency. The build-
ing blocks do not have to be put down in the order in which they are
depicted in Figure 1. Consequently, they are not assigned numbers to
help convey the idea that they can be swapped out and rearranged based
on an agencys individual context. For example, the building blocks, as
depicted, might convey that agency leadership that is supportive of pro-
gressive advocacy is the foundation for a strong advocacy program. In
fact, the literature shows that agency leadership is an important predictor
of nonprofit advocacy practice. However, some agencies may find that
meaningful opportunities to reflect on the structural causes that bring
people in for services form the early foundation for an agencys pro-
gressive advocacy practice.
Moreover, the building blocks should not infer that functions should
be done internal to the agency. For example, an agency may want to bring
in a consultant to facilitate reflections with staff and volunteers or part-
ner with a grassroots community organizing group to engage constitu-
ents in social change activities. What are important are the functions,
not whether they are done internal to agency or in partnership with an
external agency. Finally, Figure 1 shows the building blocks in 3-D
to convey the idea that there are degrees of depth or solidity to each
block. For example, an agency whose constituent involvement includes
a single seat on the Board and one opportunity per year to give input on
agency priorities might reflect a thin or fairly hollow building block, as
compared to an agency with a fully developed community organizing
program.
Linda Pütt Donaldson 33
FIGURE 1. Building Blocks* for Developing a Progressive Advocacy Program
in a Human Services Agency
Regular Opportunities for Reflection
* Institutionalized Practices for Meaningful Constituent
Involvement
Active and Meaningful Participation in Coalitions
Full-Time Staff Devoted to Advocacy
Diversified Funding Portfolio
Agency Leadership Fully Supportive of Progressive ,
Alvocacy Activities
*A core practice principle in developing a progressive
advocacy program is to meet the agency where it is.
Therefore:
• Building blocks can be developed in any order,
simultaneously, and to varying degrees;
• In reality, building blocks are always evolving
and getting stronger, deeper, and more solid over
time;
• Building blocks do not have to exist internal to
the agency, e.g., agencies may partner with an
organizing project to actively and meaningfully
engage constituents in social change rather than
have a CO program internal to the agency.
34 ADMINISTRATION IN SOCIAL WORK
Description of Building Blocks
• Advocacy Leadership Fully Supportive of Progressive Advocacy
Activities: Leadership is a critical factor for transforming nonprofit
social service agencies into agents of social change (OMBWatch,
2002; Cohen, 2001; Donaldson, 2004). Gibelman and Kraft (1996)
stated that leadership, vision, and commitment on the part of the
social welfare managers, etc are critical ingredients for building
the necessary foundation for effective advocacy (p. 57). Salamon
(1995) suggested that another factor influencing agency advocacy
behavior is leadership that seeks to return agencies to their advo-
cacy roots (p. 15). Saidel and Harlan (1998) found that leadership
was a key factor influencing the advocacy activities of an organi-
zation, and De Vita et al. (2004) identiñed leadership as the link
between an organizations capacity and its policy activities.
• Leadership, whether it is the Board of Directors, the Executive Di-
rector, and/or the senior management team, needs to believe in the
importance of advocacy, partly because it is so difficult to see its
effects in the short term. Support from agency leadership can be
demonstrated by having advocacy functions written into the mis-
sion statement, vision statement, and goals ofthe agency, structur-
ing them with dedicated staff, and having a Board public policy to
enhance and support the advocacy functions of the agency.
• Diversified Funding Portfolio: As local governments continue to
try to reduce costs through privatization and contracting out social
service functions, human service agencies are becoming more reliant
on government funding. The literature is divided on whether or not
government funding impedes or enhances advocacy. Some research
shows that government funding enhances advocacy (Donaldson,
2004; Kramer, 1994, 1985; Salamon, 1995; OMBWatch, 2002;
McCarthy & Castelli, 1997; Sosin, 1986; Gronbjerg, 1993). Other
scholars find that government funding curbs agency advocacy be-
havior (Smith & Lipsky, 1993; Wolch, 1990; Alexander, Nank, &
Stivers, 1999; OConnell, 1994; Wong, 1993; Reinelt, 1994; Hudson,
1998a; Epstein, 1981). A critique of these studies is that none teases
out the motivation for the advocacy, that is, whether it is motivated
by self-interest (organizational survival) or to create a more inclusive
and just society (progressive advocacy). Either way, multiple fund-
ing sources contribute to greater agency autonomy.
• Full-Time Staff Devoted to Advocacy: The activities associated
with the policy cycle and constituency organizing offer a strong
Linda Plitt Donaldson 35
rationale for agencies to dedicate full-time staff to such activities.
As mentioned above, most human service agency advocacy activi-
ties are done as an add-on and often unwritten functions of a
pre-existing staff position, for example, the Executive Director, a
Program Officer, or Resource Developer. When an agencys only
advocacy activities are embedded within another position, those
activities tend to be ad hoc and unsystematic, and can be demoraliz-
ing and overwhelming to the staff person doing them. An agency
can be stuck in this phase for many years as it educates board mem-
bers about the importance of advocacy, and fundraises for an advo-
cacy position. Some agencies may even feel sufficiently satisfied at
this level of advocacy activity. However, to move agency advocacy
practice beyond an ad hoc stage, agencies must hire at least one
full-time person experienced in advocacy and social change practice
and may be more, depending on various factors including the size of
the agency, the variety of service programs offered, and the viability
of issue coalitions, and other internal and external conditions. Until
the philanthropic community embraces their role in funding advocacy
and other social change actiyities, agencies will most likely need to
fund progressive advocacy practice through their general operat-
ing budget. Activities complementary to progressive advocacy that
may be more palatable to grant makers are those associated with
civic engagement, leadership development, and community devel-
opment.
Active and Meaningful Participation in Coalitions: Human service
agencies and their constituents are competing with special interests
with much greater financial resources and therefore easier access to
policy decision-makers. Human service agencies can demonstrate
power by building coalitions, which can be a terrific means for col-
lective strategizing and advocacy practice. Coalitions have the benefit
of pooling the resources of its members to lessen the burden on any
one; they provide cover from potential retribution by the advocacy
target, and also filter the avalanche of information received through
the growing mass of media sources. Numerous studies detail the
importance of coalitions for advocacy (Kaufman, 2001; Libby &
Austin, 2002; Mizrahi & Rosenthal, 2001 ; Nelson, 1994; Roberts-
DeGennaro, 1997; Tefft, 1987). Mizrahi and Rosenthal (2001) iden-
tified four key success factors for coalitions: competent leadership,
commitment, contribution, and conditions. Consequently, partici-
pation in coalitions should support the flourishing of these fo.ur
characteristics.
36 ADMINISTRA TION IN SOCIAL WORK
• Institutionalized Practices for Meaningful Constituent Involvement:
More research is needed to assess the degree to which even agen-
cies that value advocacy as a core function engage its constituents
in those efforts. One typology of advocacy strategies (Donaldson,
2004) categorizes them as elite, mass, or empowerment. Elite strate-
gies are those in which agency staff visit elected officials, partici-
pate in policy working groups, and represent agency at coalitions.
Mass strategies involve things like petitioning, protesting, rallying,
letter-writing, and civil disobedience. Empowerment strategies in-
clude skill-building and educating agency constituents; engaging
them in building agency advocacy agenda; providing transportation
for advocacy activities, and so on. In this study of 43 human service
agencies, even agencies that engaged in advocacy seldom used
empowerment strategies in their practice. The choice of elite over
empowerment strategies may be rooted in a variety of pragmatic
considerations. Use of all strategies is important, but meaningful
constituent engagement is a crucial component of progressive ad-
vocacy practice.
• Regular Opportunities for Reflection: Reflective practice is a term
used by multiple disciplines to describe a process where practitioners
meet together regularly to critically examine the theories, values,
norms, and current contexts underlying their practice and how they
inform the practice models and techniques they use. Although
more research is needed which examines the role of reflection in
transforming agency cultures from social service to social change,
regular opportunities for staff, volunteers, and constituents to re-
flect together on the structural inequities and -isms at the root of
human needs may raise consciousness about the need for institu-
tionalized progressive advocacy practice at the agency.
MOVING FROM SOCIAL SERVICE TO SOCIAL JUSTICE:
A CASE STUDY
The road toward building on social service to affect social change is
different for every agency depending on a variety of internal and exter-
nal factors. This case study of how an agency developed an advocacy
program does not end with an agency that meets the ideal, but one that
reached its peak advocacy capacity in terms of its internal and external
constraints and is still evolving today. Despite the constraints, the agency
Linda Plitt Donaldson 37
grew from one with an ad hoc advocacy program to one with an institu-
tionalized program that included constituent involvement.
Agency Context and Birth of Advocacy Program
In 1993, Hope for the Homeless (HH)^ was a 23-year-old community-
based homeless services agency located in an eastern urban center with
a population of roughly 500,000 people. Between 1970 and 1993, the
agencys services expanded to address a range of needs for people who
were homeless, including substance abuse treatment, housing, medical
and dental services, socialization programs for the elderly, and services
for people with mental illness. By 1993, the agency operated more than
20 programs, employed more than 100 full-time staff, benefited from
thousands of volunteers, and was supported by a multi-million dollar
budget from diverse sources. In 1993, more than 80\% of its budget was
supported through private sources, including individual donations, church
contributions, and private foundations.
In 1978, …
4
Homelessness in Norfolk, Virginia
India Williams
Walden University
Hunm-4003
Professor Vermillion
August 14, 2021
Homelessness in Norfolk, Virginia
The problem of homelessness in United America has continued to worsen ethical issues in the nation. Norfolk community is one with homeless populations in the city being uncountable. The previous homelessness report in the United States shows that the Norfolk community had more than 2000 homeless people. This included a population of person who lives in shelters, motels, and streets without a roof on their head (Erickson & Wilhelm, 2017). I believe this number to be untrue because of the cases that are not being reported. The homeless people in this community comprises families, single individuals, and veterans who have low access to decent homes. The core cause of homelessness in Norfolk is unemployment, poor access to high-quality education on healthy living, and high cost of living. People living in cars, sleeping on a friends couch, or in a tent are going unreported because they do in fact have a place to lay their head.
In the Norfolk community, some human services programs have been developed to ensure the motivation and needs of the homeless population. Adults services are one program that reports incidents of suspected adult abuse at family levels. Childrens Services offers needs and motivation for youth at risk with their families and supports them for stability through a state pool of funds in the City of Norfolk. According to Martineau et al. (2019), community links and resources ensure the homeless are connected to the local government resources within the Norfolk community and its exterior. Armed forces veterans who become disabled and homeless are eligible for human services of real estate tax relief in Norfolk district to ensure homelessness among veterans is reduced and catered to. Family services are the most famous human service in the Norfolk community, with the ability to support, protect, and prevent actions that can increase homelessness.
To provide a compelling needs assessment, it will be paramount to understand the nature of needs that Norfolk homeless people express. Norfolk community of homelessness has different types of conditions. Normative conditions are related to the norms the people copy within their daily living. To ensure adequate assessment of normative needs, assessing housing stability, employment nature, and nutritional knowledge will be paramount. A report of human service professionals in 2018 showed that the Norfolk community requires basic needs such as clothing, better foods, and resources. The homeless people in this community experience challenges meeting their basic needs making them go to different cities to look for food and better life (Moroney & Martin, 2017). Nonetheless, due to insufficient qualifications, they end up in the streets as life hardens in the city.
To ensure adequate data collection, I will employ questionnaires for interviews of the people on the streets and those in the rural areas. This will be effective as I will have adequate time to ask relevant questions that can motivate the understanding of the persons needs and the persons prerequisites. Using questionnaires to collect data of homeless persons in Norfolk will elicit quantitative analysis of the findings (Havlik et al, 2017). This is because of the need to calculate the percentage of the homeless population and the nature of needs within the Norfolk community. The answers collected from the questionnaires developed will enhance understanding of the cause of homelessness to the interviewed person and be generalized to the larger population for the studys conclusion. This will help evaluate the paramount human services programs that will need to be developed to control and combat the increase in homelessness within the Norfolk community.
The motivations and norms of homelessness in the Norfolk community are conceived in the poor infrastructure development. Norfolk community lacks adequate schooling in some areas that can enhance peoples knowledge and power to understand healthy living needs. Where a person attends school depends on the area in which they live or lack thereof. Besides, lack of sources of employment is another motivation for homelessness. The lack of these facilities makes individuals in the Norfolk community have challenges in having a good life. As expressed and perceived, people in Norfolk community have poor housing indicating their living standards are below the poverty level. Relatives needs like inadequate clothing and the inability to get basic needs like food are perceived and expressed in the Norfolk community, indicating poverty. This leads to increased homelessness in Virginia.
A logical model can be used to ensure some evaluation strategies are achieved.
Logic Model
Inputs
Outputs
Outcomes
· Time
· Money
· Equipment
· Homeless persons
· Strategies for permanent housing
· The homeless person identified with the Norfolk community
· Resources put into practice
· Programs for developing permanent housing
· Stable accommodation developed
· Increased self-reliance for housing
· Decreased need for housing assist within Norfolk community.
The mission of the evaluation program will be to provide solutions to homelessness in Norfolk community through the development and construction of affordable houses for all individuals at lower costs. This will ensure all people in the streets and models will have the ability to own a home within five years. The programs goal is to provide all persons with the ability to access good decent houses at an affordable price in the Norfolk community. The purpose of the program is to reduce the number and rate of homelessness in Norfolk community and ensure Virginia has no street families anymore. This program will address social changes through its practical application in the Norfolk community. The inputs will provide an essential foundation to support social changes like time and money will provide educative programs to the Norfolk community on the importance of healthy living (Hawes, Flynn, Tedeschi & Morris, 2019). Other equipment will support social change by ensuring housing projects are developed within the community to provide accessible and affordable houses to the people. This will ensure some social issues related to homelessness are controlled. Therefore, the implementation of the program will provide better housing and reduce the social problem of homelessness in the Norfolk community.
References
Erickson, J., & Wilhelm, C. (2017). The Extent of Homelessness in America. In Housing The Homeless (pp. 125-143). Routledge
Havlik, S. A., Rowley, P., Puckett, J., Wilson, G., & Neason, E. (2017). “Do whatever you can to try to support that kid”: School counselors’ experiences addressing student homelessness. Professional School Counseling, 21(1), 1096-2409.https://doi.org/10.5330\%2F1096-2409-21.1.47
Hawes, S. M., Flynn, E., Tedeschi, P., & Morris, K. N. (2019). Humane Communities: Social change through policies promoting collective welfare. Journal of Urban Affairs, 1-13.https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2019.1680244
Kettner, P. M., Moroney, R. M., & Martin, L. L. (2017). Designing and managing programs: An effectiveness-based approach (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Martineau, S. J., Cornes, M., Manthorpe, J., Ornelas, B., & Fuller, J. (2019). Safeguarding, homelessness and rough sleeping: an analysis of safeguarding adults reviews.https://doi.org/10.18742/pub01-006
THIS WEEK’S WORK IS TWO DISCUSSIONS.
Week 6: Social Change and Professional Development
The characteristics of program design and evaluation are intended to provide some level of recommended change or action as a result of the systematic investigation into a program’s effectiveness. Evaluation can provide answers to questions about a program that may be useful in adjusting a program to become more effective. Because evaluation results in insight about the effectiveness of a program for a specific population, evaluation can be used to implement social change or action. Evaluation findings may assist stakeholders (those who hold an interest) or decision makers in go/no-go decisions about specific program modifications or initiate the continuation or demise of the entire program. Today, social policy and public administrative movement are closely associated with social program outcomes and effective evaluations.
This week, you present your design for a program addressing the needs of the homeless population in your community and analyze how your program may effect social change. You also evaluate your potential to impact areas of human services delivery and assess the benefits of participating in professional human services organizations.
Objectives
By the end of this week, you should be able to:
· Analyze how human services program design and evaluation influence social change
· Evaluate personal impact on areas of human services delivery
· Analyze how professional organizations contribute to professional development
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Kettner, P. M., Moroney, R. M., & Martin, L. L. (2017). Designing and managing programs: An effectiveness-based approach (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
· Review Chapter 6, “Selecting the Appropriate Intervention Strategy”
Donaldson, L. P. (2008). Developing a progressive advocacy program within a human services agency. Administration in Social Work, 32(2), 25–48.
Grant, H. M., & Crutchfield, L. R. (2007). Creating high-impact nonprofits. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 5(4), 32–41.
Skinner, K., & Whyte, B. (2004). Going beyond training: Theory and practice in managing learning. Social Work Education, 23(4), 365–381.
Council for Standards in Human Service Education. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.cshse.org/
Center for Credentialing & Education. (n.d.). Human services—Board certified practitioner. Retrieved November 22, 2011, from http://www.cce-global.org /HSBCP
Optional Resource
Simon, S. R., Webster, J. A., & Horn, K. (2007). A critical call for connecting students and professional associations. Social Work with Groups, 30(4), 5–19.
Retrieved from the Walden Library using the SocINDEX with Full Text database.
THIS IS DUE WEDNESDAY 8/18/21 BY 10 PM
Discussion 1: Social Change
There is a variety of elements that human services professionals should consider when they are developing and evaluating human services programs. Some of these elements include conducting a needs assessment, developing a problem statement and hypothesis, and determining goals and objectives for the program. Additionally, human services professionals can evaluate how programs can or did elicit social change as they develop and evaluate programs.
In this Discussion, you will present your Final Project to your colleagues. You will explore how your program might influence social change in a community in which it was implemented. You will also consider how your program could be evaluated in terms of its goals and objectives as well as its ability to elicit a desired social change.
To prepare for this Discussion:
· Review Chapter 6 in your course text, focusing on how the particular design of a program evaluation influences social change.
· Review the article “Developing a Progressive Advocacy Program Within a Human Services Agency,” focusing on how this program created social change. Think about those concepts you could use in your own project.
· Review the article “Creating High-Impact Nonprofits.” Consider what suggestions you could use in creating social change.
· Review the design of the human services program you developed for your Final Project.
· Consider what kinds of social change your program could elicit in a particular community.
· Reflect on the type of evaluation that would be effective if your program were to be implemented in a community.
With these thoughts in mind:
By Day 3
Post a summary of the program design you developed for your Final Project. Then, explain how your program might influence social change in the community you selected. Be specific and provide examples. Finally, discuss how the effectiveness of your program might be evaluated with attention to social change.
Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.
THIS IS DUE SATURDAY 08/21/21 BY 10 PM
Discussion 2: Social Interest and Professional Development
The work involved in program evaluation requires a good deal of discipline and focus from the evaluator because of the standards, competencies, and codes of ethics required by the human services profession. Although evaluation is not specifically a profession, since evaluators are not licensed or certified, those who engage in the process of evaluation are professionals with extensive training and knowledge related to the various roles, responsibilities, and concerns of human services. Many human services program evaluators are themselves certified human services professionals and belong to various human services professional organizations. The existence of such certifications and involvement lend credibility and strength to the human services profession as a whole.
In this Discussion, you explore the various areas of human services delivery and identify areas of particular interest to you. You consider your possible future career as a human services professional and the impact you could have on the field of human services. You also explore the merits of professional human services organizations and entities for certification.
To prepare for this Discussion:
· Review the article “A Critical Call for Connecting Students and Professional Associations.” Think about how becoming more involved in professional associations could be beneficial to your own future as a human services professional.
· Review the article “Going Beyond Training: Theory and Practice in Managing Learning.” Reflect on how you can continually be learning and growing in your field of work.
· Explore the Council for Standards in Human Service Education website listed in this week’s Learning Resources. Consider the importance of having a credential for achieving your goals as a human services professional.
· Explore the Center for Credentialing & Education website listed in this week’s Learning Resources. Consider the different types of human service credentialing available, the responsibilities of each position, and how working for such credentials could improve your ability to be an effective human services professional.
· Reflect on what you have studied and considered throughout this course. Focus on the various areas of human services and identify the areas in which you can see yourself working.
With these thoughts in mind:
By Day 4
Post a brief description of one area of human services delivery in which you are especially interested and why you are interested in that area. Then, explain how you might impact this area in the future as a human services professional. Finally, explain how affiliation with a professional organization and/or becoming a HS-BCP might contribute to the impact you hope to make. Be specific and provide examples.
Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.
CATEGORIES
Economics
Nursing
Applied Sciences
Psychology
Science
Management
Computer Science
Human Resource Management
Accounting
Information Systems
English
Anatomy
Operations Management
Sociology
Literature
Education
Business & Finance
Marketing
Engineering
Statistics
Biology
Political Science
Reading
History
Financial markets
Philosophy
Mathematics
Law
Criminal
Architecture and Design
Government
Social Science
World history
Chemistry
Humanities
Business Finance
Writing
Programming
Telecommunications Engineering
Geography
Physics
Spanish
ach
e. Embedded Entrepreneurship
f. Three Social Entrepreneurship Models
g. Social-Founder Identity
h. Micros-enterprise Development
Outcomes
Subset 2. Indigenous Entrepreneurship Approaches (Outside of Canada)
a. Indigenous Australian Entrepreneurs Exami
Calculus
(people influence of
others) processes that you perceived occurs in this specific Institution Select one of the forms of stratification highlighted (focus on inter the intersectionalities
of these three) to reflect and analyze the potential ways these (
American history
Pharmacology
Ancient history
. Also
Numerical analysis
Environmental science
Electrical Engineering
Precalculus
Physiology
Civil Engineering
Electronic Engineering
ness Horizons
Algebra
Geology
Physical chemistry
nt
When considering both O
lassrooms
Civil
Probability
ions
Identify a specific consumer product that you or your family have used for quite some time. This might be a branded smartphone (if you have used several versions over the years)
or the court to consider in its deliberations. Locard’s exchange principle argues that during the commission of a crime
Chemical Engineering
Ecology
aragraphs (meaning 25 sentences or more). Your assignment may be more than 5 paragraphs but not less.
INSTRUCTIONS:
To access the FNU Online Library for journals and articles you can go the FNU library link here:
https://www.fnu.edu/library/
In order to
n that draws upon the theoretical reading to explain and contextualize the design choices. Be sure to directly quote or paraphrase the reading
ce to the vaccine. Your campaign must educate and inform the audience on the benefits but also create for safe and open dialogue. A key metric of your campaign will be the direct increase in numbers.
Key outcomes: The approach that you take must be clear
Mechanical Engineering
Organic chemistry
Geometry
nment
Topic
You will need to pick one topic for your project (5 pts)
Literature search
You will need to perform a literature search for your topic
Geophysics
you been involved with a company doing a redesign of business processes
Communication on Customer Relations. Discuss how two-way communication on social media channels impacts businesses both positively and negatively. Provide any personal examples from your experience
od pressure and hypertension via a community-wide intervention that targets the problem across the lifespan (i.e. includes all ages).
Develop a community-wide intervention to reduce elevated blood pressure and hypertension in the State of Alabama that in
in body of the report
Conclusions
References (8 References Minimum)
*** Words count = 2000 words.
*** In-Text Citations and References using Harvard style.
*** In Task section I’ve chose (Economic issues in overseas contracting)"
Electromagnetism
w or quality improvement; it was just all part of good nursing care. The goal for quality improvement is to monitor patient outcomes using statistics for comparison to standards of care for different diseases
e a 1 to 2 slide Microsoft PowerPoint presentation on the different models of case management. Include speaker notes... .....Describe three different models of case management.
visual representations of information. They can include numbers
SSAY
ame workbook for all 3 milestones. You do not need to download a new copy for Milestones 2 or 3. When you submit Milestone 3
pages):
Provide a description of an existing intervention in Canada
making the appropriate buying decisions in an ethical and professional manner.
Topic: Purchasing and Technology
You read about blockchain ledger technology. Now do some additional research out on the Internet and share your URL with the rest of the class
be aware of which features their competitors are opting to include so the product development teams can design similar or enhanced features to attract more of the market. The more unique
low (The Top Health Industry Trends to Watch in 2015) to assist you with this discussion.
https://youtu.be/fRym_jyuBc0
Next year the $2.8 trillion U.S. healthcare industry will finally begin to look and feel more like the rest of the business wo
evidence-based primary care curriculum. Throughout your nurse practitioner program
Vignette
Understanding Gender Fluidity
Providing Inclusive Quality Care
Affirming Clinical Encounters
Conclusion
References
Nurse Practitioner Knowledge
Mechanics
and word limit is unit as a guide only.
The assessment may be re-attempted on two further occasions (maximum three attempts in total). All assessments must be resubmitted 3 days within receiving your unsatisfactory grade. You must clearly indicate “Re-su
Trigonometry
Article writing
Other
5. June 29
After the components sending to the manufacturing house
1. In 1972 the Furman v. Georgia case resulted in a decision that would put action into motion. Furman was originally sentenced to death because of a murder he committed in Georgia but the court debated whether or not this was a violation of his 8th amend
One of the first conflicts that would need to be investigated would be whether the human service professional followed the responsibility to client ethical standard. While developing a relationship with client it is important to clarify that if danger or
Ethical behavior is a critical topic in the workplace because the impact of it can make or break a business
No matter which type of health care organization
With a direct sale
During the pandemic
Computers are being used to monitor the spread of outbreaks in different areas of the world and with this record
3. Furman v. Georgia is a U.S Supreme Court case that resolves around the Eighth Amendments ban on cruel and unsual punishment in death penalty cases. The Furman v. Georgia case was based on Furman being convicted of murder in Georgia. Furman was caught i
One major ethical conflict that may arise in my investigation is the Responsibility to Client in both Standard 3 and Standard 4 of the Ethical Standards for Human Service Professionals (2015). Making sure we do not disclose information without consent ev
4. Identify two examples of real world problems that you have observed in your personal
Summary & Evaluation: Reference & 188. Academic Search Ultimate
Ethics
We can mention at least one example of how the violation of ethical standards can be prevented. Many organizations promote ethical self-regulation by creating moral codes to help direct their business activities
*DDB is used for the first three years
For example
The inbound logistics for William Instrument refer to purchase components from various electronic firms. During the purchase process William need to consider the quality and price of the components. In this case
4. A U.S. Supreme Court case known as Furman v. Georgia (1972) is a landmark case that involved Eighth Amendment’s ban of unusual and cruel punishment in death penalty cases (Furman v. Georgia (1972)
With covid coming into place
In my opinion
with
Not necessarily all home buyers are the same! When you choose to work with we buy ugly houses Baltimore & nationwide USA
The ability to view ourselves from an unbiased perspective allows us to critically assess our personal strengths and weaknesses. This is an important step in the process of finding the right resources for our personal learning style. Ego and pride can be
· By Day 1 of this week
While you must form your answers to the questions below from our assigned reading material
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (2013)
5 The family dynamic is awkward at first since the most outgoing and straight forward person in the family in Linda
Urien
The most important benefit of my statistical analysis would be the accuracy with which I interpret the data. The greatest obstacle
From a similar but larger point of view
4 In order to get the entire family to come back for another session I would suggest coming in on a day the restaurant is not open
When seeking to identify a patient’s health condition
After viewing the you tube videos on prayer
Your paper must be at least two pages in length (not counting the title and reference pages)
The word assimilate is negative to me. I believe everyone should learn about a country that they are going to live in. It doesnt mean that they have to believe that everything in America is better than where they came from. It means that they care enough
Data collection
Single Subject Chris is a social worker in a geriatric case management program located in a midsize Northeastern town. She has an MSW and is part of a team of case managers that likes to continuously improve on its practice. The team is currently using an
I would start off with Linda on repeating her options for the child and going over what she is feeling with each option. I would want to find out what she is afraid of. I would avoid asking her any “why” questions because I want her to be in the here an
Summarize the advantages and disadvantages of using an Internet site as means of collecting data for psychological research (Comp 2.1) 25.0\% Summarization of the advantages and disadvantages of using an Internet site as means of collecting data for psych
Identify the type of research used in a chosen study
Compose a 1
Optics
effect relationship becomes more difficult—as the researcher cannot enact total control of another person even in an experimental environment. Social workers serve clients in highly complex real-world environments. Clients often implement recommended inte
I think knowing more about you will allow you to be able to choose the right resources
Be 4 pages in length
soft MB-920 dumps review and documentation and high-quality listing pdf MB-920 braindumps also recommended and approved by Microsoft experts. The practical test
g
One thing you will need to do in college is learn how to find and use references. References support your ideas. College-level work must be supported by research. You are expected to do that for this paper. You will research
Elaborate on any potential confounds or ethical concerns while participating in the psychological study 20.0\% Elaboration on any potential confounds or ethical concerns while participating in the psychological study is missing. Elaboration on any potenti
3 The first thing I would do in the family’s first session is develop a genogram of the family to get an idea of all the individuals who play a major role in Linda’s life. After establishing where each member is in relation to the family
A Health in All Policies approach
Note: The requirements outlined below correspond to the grading criteria in the scoring guide. At a minimum
Chen
Read Connecting Communities and Complexity: A Case Study in Creating the Conditions for Transformational Change
Read Reflections on Cultural Humility
Read A Basic Guide to ABCD Community Organizing
Use the bolded black section and sub-section titles below to organize your paper. For each section
Losinski forwarded the article on a priority basis to Mary Scott
Losinksi wanted details on use of the ED at CGH. He asked the administrative resident