|
Similar to traditional program design, community-based program design often utilizes a range of tools and models which are meant to enhance the efficacy and outcomes of the program’s design. The difference between traditional design and community-based design, when using these tools, is in the dynamics of the relationship between the designers, the participants, and the community as a whole. It evolved from the [[Charity Organization Society]] (COS) and the [[Settlement movement|settlement house movements]]. Formally, community-based program development has been professionalized by such disciplines as [[urban studies and planning]] and [[social work]].
One advantage is a learning experience between a consumer and a social services provider.<ref name="Advantage" /> One disadvantage is a limited availability of resources.<ref name="Disadvantage" /> The models that can be used for it are the [[Social ecological model|social-ecological model]], which provides a framework for program design,<ref name="Advantage" /> the [[logic model]], which is a graphical depiction of logical relationships between the resources, activities, outputs and outcomes of a program,<ref name="LM" /> the [[social action model]], whose objectives are to recognize the change around a community in order to preserve or improve standards, understand the social action process/model is a conceptualization of how directed change takes place, and understand how the social action model can be implemented as a successful community problem solving tool,<ref name="SAM" /> and [[Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)|program evaluation]], which involves the ongoing systematic assessment of community-based programs.<ref name="EVAUL" />
== History ==
=== Challenges ===
Some challenges of community-based program design are the limited availability of resources, propensity for high levels of staff turnover, the reliance upon unpaid volunteers, participant retention, and the evaluation of a dynamic task environment.<ref name="Disadvantage">{{Cite journal|last=O'Neil|first=Margaret E.|last2=Fragala-Pinkham|first2=Maria|last3=Ideishi|first3=Roger I.|last4=Ideishi|first4=Siobhan K.|date=2012-05-01|title=Community-based programs for children and youth: our experiences in design, implementation, and evaluation|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22483374|journal=Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics|volume=32|issue=2|pages=111–119|doi=10.3109/01942638.2012.668089|issn=1541-3144|pmid=22483374}}</ref> For the same reasons that sustainability is an advantage of this approach, utilizing limited available resources is a challenge. Based on [[free market]] principals and resource scarcity, programs often operate below [[pareto efficiency]].<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://cup.columbia.edu/book/economics-for-social-workers/9780231116879|title=Economics for social workers : the application of economic theory to social policy and the human services|last=Lewis|first=Michael Anthony|last2=Karl|first2=Widerquist|date=2002|publisher=Columbia University Press|isbn=9780231116862|oclc=47805132}}</ref> Limited resources result in high levels of staff turnover and reliance upon unpaid volunteers.
== Program design tools ==
=== Socio-ecological model ===
One model for program design is the [[Ecosystem model|socio-ecological model]]. This model enables an understanding of the factors that can infulence a community. It demonstrates five levels of influence, which are the individual/intrapersonal, the interpersonal, the organizational/institutional, the community, and the policy.<ref name="healthyteen">{{cite web|author1=Healthy Teen Network|title=Increasing Our Impact by Using a Social-Ecological Approach|url=http://www.healthyteennetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/TipSheet_IncreasingOurImpactUsingSocial-EcologicalApproach.pdf|accessdate=10 May 2017|date=March 2015}}</ref> It demonstrates five levels of influence, which are the individual/intrapersonal, the interpersonal, the organizational/institutional, the community, and the policy. <ref name="healthyteen" />
=== Logic model ===
Another common tool of program design that can be employed is the [[logic model]]. Logic models are a graphical depiction of the logical relationships between the resources, activities, outputs and outcomes of a program.<ref name="LM">{{Cite journal|url=https://www.cals.uidaho.edu/edcomm/pdf/CIS/CIS1097.pdf|title=The Logic Model for Program Planning and Evaluation|last=McCawley|first=Paul F.|date=n.d.|publisher=University of Idaho Extension|accessdate=24 February 2014}}</ref> The underlying purpose of constructing a logic model is to assess the "if-then" (causal) relationships between the elements of a program. Community-based program designers can employ logic models to ensure that program inputs (available community resources) will support the activities of the community-based program, and that the outputs (resulting from the activities) will lead to the program's desired outcomes.
=== Social action model ===
For community-based programs that seek to address macro-issues, the [[social action model]] may be utilized. The objectives of the social action model are to recognize the change around us in order to preserve or improve standards, understand the social action process/model is a conceptualization of how directed change takes place; and understand how the social action model can be implemented as a successful community problem solving tool.<ref name="SAM">{{Cite book|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/800460168|title=The practice of social work : a comprehensive worktext.|last=Zastrow|first=Charles|date=January 27, 2009|publisher=Brooks/Cole Publishing Company|isbn=9780495599708|oclc=800460168|page=284}}</ref>
=== Evaluation ===
An emerging and growing practice of program design is [[Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)|program evaluation]]. Evaluation involves the ongoing systematic assessment of community-based programs. Program designers often choose to incorporate evaluation into design in order to check program processes, determine impact, build a base of support, and/or justify replication/expansion.<ref name="EVAUL">{{Cite web|url=https://www2.aap.org/commpeds/htpcp/EvalGuide2.pdf|title=Evaluating your community-based program|date=2013|publisher=American Academy of Pediatrics|accessdate=May 9, 2017}}</ref>
== See also ==
|
