Making the Case for Domestic Violence Prevention Through the Lens of Cost-Benefit
A Manual for Domestic Violence Prevention Practitioners
(and the State and Local Policy-Makers They Present to)
Appendix D: Cross and Multi-Sector Collaboration Evaluation Tool
This appendix and the tool contained herein is included to enhance the discussion contained in Chapter Three of this Manual, in the subsection, “The Value Of A Collaborative Model.” Refer to that section of Chapter Three for some preliminary thinking related to this Tool.
Think also of the collaborative projects you have engaged in, or will engage in, whose goal is to work together to help prevent domestic violence. The group you have worked with or will work with can self-evaluate its effectiveness using the tool below.
Also, recall the cost-benefit analyses procedure found in Chapter Eight of this Manual, the “Worksheet: Making the Case for Your Prevention Program.” You will see this Worksheet referred to in the “Evaluation” section of the Tool below.
The following is adapted from a series of policy and program evaluation monographs written for the Policy and Community Studies Model Review Project, which studied models of implementation of community-based social policy and change and means of evaluating their success. (Browne-Miller, A., and Marcus, M., “Cross-Sector Collaboration as Key in Informal Policy and Program Planning,” Policy and Community Studies Model Review Project: Metaphora Inst.: Phoenix, Arizona, 2002.)
When working to generate positive outcomes in the prevention of domestic violence, the engagement of the whole community, or as much of it as can contribute its effective engagement, is of the greatest benefit. Clearly, when it comes to preventing domestic violence, the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Moreover, when the collaboration reaches across sectors, there is an even greater increase in potential of the prevention effort. And, once all sectors seeking to help prevent domestic violence learn the techniques and value of collaborating, they can enhance their efforts.
Self-reporting, and self-evaluation of cross-sector collaboration (CSC) teams collaborating to prevent domestic violence can indicate a great deal about the success of the collaboration, both in its work together (collaboration process), and in its ability to reach its goals (collaboration outcome).
The following Cross and Multi-Sector Collaboration Evaluation Tool was developed to allow members of CSC teams to self-report on, and self-review, their effectiveness. Each member of the CSC team is asked to rate each of these factors on a scale of zero to five, with five being the highest rating, The total of each team member’s responses is averaged across all team members’ responses for a team self-rating score. Teams review their overall scores together, as well as score breakdowns, and do so regularly, using this feedback mechanism as means of enhancing their effectiveness. Many teams add questions to this list: Note that the section regarding partnership is a long one, as this is key to CSC effectiveness.
Cross and Multi-Sector Collaboration Evaluation Tool
GOAL/S
Is the primary goal (or are the main goals) of this cross-sector collaboration (CSC) clear?
Are the steps to realizing this goal (or these goals) clear?
IMPLEMENTATION
Do all participants in this CSC know the steps to realizing this goal (these goals)?
Do all know their own roles in implementing these steps?
Are the resources required to conduct this implementation available on all participants’ parts?
Is there a clear effort to conduct and enhance the community networking required to successfully implement this project?
Does this CSC team evaluate its supporting networking efforts?
If so, how?
PARTNERSHIP
Is this CSC team a working partnership?
Are the commitments of the team members clear?
Is there sufficient commitment to pursue this CSC?
Is there a positive attitude toward pursuing this CSC by the CSC team members?
Are there incentives for these team members to stay involved?
Are the communication processes clear?
Are the meetings and or communications regular?
Is there clear leadership?
Is there joint control of the team’s direction and planning?
Do team members feel satisfied with the tasks and roles they have taken or been assigned?
Is there a time frame for projects being planned
Is the time frame clear to all involved
Are there steps along the way which are also given time frames?
COMMUNITY PERCEPTIONS
Does the community know of this team’s CSC?
Does the community look positively upon this team’s CSC?
Is there support for this CSC within and among the community/ies affected?
TEAM-SELF EVALUATION
Is there an evaluative/feedback process in place?
What evaluation outcome measures are in place?
Is the information this process yields used?
Is this partnership a lasting one?
Is the work of this partnership sustainable?
What measures are taken to ensure sustainability? (also refer to question #29 below)
EVALUATION
Are there ways of measuring the effectiveness of projects this team undertakes?
What are these ways?
Are the outcomes – the outcomes of the work toward realizing the goals of this CSC -- clearly operationalized (made clearly and logically measurable)?
What indicates that these measures actually reveal the effectiveness of the work of this CSC?
Can these ways of measuring be subjected to the sort of cost-benefit analyses found in the CBA worksheet contained in this Manual?
Can these ways of measuring be conducted both in the near term and in the long term, and if so, will they continue to register similar levels of effectiveness?
RESOURCE-SHARING
Do the CSC team members each commit to resource-sharing and know each other’s commitment/s?
Does resource-sharing assist the team in implementing its plans?
Are there efforts to acquire resources from the surrounding and affected communities?
Are these efforts effective?