A survey was administered to SMART members in late 2009 by an independent evaluator. SMART has obtained the survey results and an ad hoc committee was established to review the findings and offer recommendations. This post includes the comments/recommendations of committee members. To see specific comments click on the comments link below. You can download the full survey results report on our website under the form tabs click : https://sites.google.com/site/utahcountycoalition/forms
9 comments:
CASEY CHRISTOPHERSON SAID:
1.Coalition is made up of slightly higher percentage of men vs. women
2.Pretty much zero cultural diversity reported on survey.
3.Appear to need to bring youth on board and those who can represent cultural differences in the community.
4.I think page 17 addresses important information regarding coalition.
5.Some worry about the coalition becoming too big and worry about the time we take to make decisions/decide on the direction we are going.
6.Others think that two or three members dominate the direction of the meetings.
7.I think page 48 is critical information we need to talk about.
8.One person seems to not feel heard, doesn't feel a part of the coalition, doesn't feel like they are valued or even agree with the direction of the coalition (same person?)
RICHARD NANCE SAID:
1.Improve cultural competence - invite Jackson Unga, works at BYU, Paul can help recruit.
KYE NORDFELT SAID:
I.Improve diversity of coalition
•Predominately male and our leadership lacks diversity (multiple comments)
•Lack Youth representation (multiple comments)
•Lack racial and other cultural diversity – other religious organizations (multiple comments)
II.Meeting management improvements
•Committee decision making – Moving from idea to action more quickly. What techniques can we use? How can our organization be better structured to examine a variety of issues and approve multiple decisions more quickly (properly working work group structure?) (Low scores in multiple questions Score around 3)
•Help coalition members stay on time and on topic – utilize toastmasters skills of a time keeper and topic monitor with bell. (multiple comments)
•Allow all opinions be expressed – simple as formally voting on decisions through public or secret ballot. Disagreements can surface and be resolved.
•Sources of training – Toastmasters, CADCA
•Need improvement following up on members following through with commitments – need to review commitments during meeting from agenda (Score 2.2)
•Need to better delegate responsibilities (Score 3.6)
III.Organizational Structure
•Need to improve committee structure of SMART – assignments effectively delegated and committees report to the community board
•Need to improve the way the coalition accesses members knowledge, expertise, and skills (Score 3.4)
•Sharing information with agency – need to improve connection between members and connection to resources at the agencies they work
IV.Communications
•Communication between meetings – would members like updated on what is going on between meetings. Could tweet updates on meetings and decisions. (2 comments on this)
•Communicating our strategic plan to members needs work – could use our existing video, print poster for meeting with plan, what else? (Score 30% said they were not aware of the plan)
V.Improve training for coalition members
•Periodic training for new members on basics (Coalition strategic plan and progression).
•Need to improve orientation process – especially bringing new coalition members up to speed on where the coalition is currently in the SPF process and where they are in strategy implementation. How to update?
•Clearer Action Plan and Roles of each task force/work group. (1) train members how to action plan, (2) create a binder for the chair to use at the coalition meeting with this information – provided to members, and (3) could place roles and responsibilities on website, not sure members check this between meetings. (multiple comments on this)
•Training coalition leaders needs improvement. Need to better orient and train new leaders on their roles and responsibilities and prep upcoming leaders for leadership positions (Score 3.4)
•Need training on the Strategic Prevention Framework (SPF) process (Score 3.4)
VI.Recruitment
•Recruit Wasatch Mental Health, Utah County Sheriff’s Office, United Way
•Capping membership – need to figure the right quantity/quality and how to best organize them into our organization so we can better make decisions. SMART by-laws says we will not exceed 25 people. We currently have 30 active members and 20 or so members who rarely attend.
RICHARD NANCE SAID (PART 1):
Utah County SPF Coalition Member Survey Analysis and Recommendations
1. Type of Organization: Fairly well balanced, but obviously light on business and manufacturing. Perhaps ask elected officials on the board for recommendations from business and manufacturing sectors through Chamber of Commerce?
2. How long: Coalition hasn’t been in existence that long, so the fact that about 60% have been involved for more than one year or more is good.
3. Gender: Sounds like a treatment population. Obviously more female representation is needed, especially since women between 30 and 50 years of age make most of the healthcare decisions for their families.
4. Age: About what I would expect.
5. Race/Ethnicity: Not reflective of Utah County – need more Hispanic/Latino and at least one Asian/Pacific Islander member(s).
6. Involvement: Indicates that members’ participation is of value to them.
7. Why not involved: Reasonable responses. The question should have been worded differently for the prior question, and involvement would have been higher for new members.
8. How Many Meetings: Looks like over half have attended over 80% of meetings – again, if you parse out new members, the percentage is probably higher. Still indicates value of participation.
9. Part of Job: only 3 of 21 agree and the majority state not a part of job. Indicates high value of participation, intrinsic reward, and high value of work product.
10. a. use of knowledge 90% positive, b. benefits of participation 90% positive. I’d like to know why one person disagrees and what we could do to balance this out.
11. Share information: Only one disagrees. Would be useful to know why and what we could do to facilitate information sharing. Maybe just simple encouragement at each meeting to remind members to share.
12. Personal experience: Very good response except for one dissatisfied. I wonder if this is the same member? I wonder if this member still participates and how often? I wonder what type of organization this person belongs to?
13. Comments about participation: This is my observation too. SPF has spent a long time in data gathering and planning, but implementation seems to be slow to develop. Clearer direction and deadlines for milestones should come from leadership. If the horse is dead, don’t keep taking its pulse!
14. Familiarity: Looks like most are confident in their knowledge of what the Coalition does.
15. Orientation of New Members: This obviously needs some work. UCDSA has a new employee orientation process and new Community Advisory Board orientation using a powerpoint presentation. SPF could adapt this approach easily. A job for the committee that could take two meetings to complete.
16. a. participation of segments of the population: need more youth. We could involve the Governing Youth Council. How about college student interns? Need more cultural diversity: the County as a whole needs more cultural diversity in its population!
17. Who should be included: Commissioner Anderson could recruit some mayors for us from the COG board. All suggestions are good and not difficult to recruit.
18. Other membership comments:
Presentation/Review of orientation packet in an upcoming meeting is a good idea. Easy to put on the agenda. No cap on participants that I can tell, so let’s include more representation. Involve current membership in recruiting new members. Everyone in the county has had an experience with someone in their family or social circle suffering from effects of drug abuse.
19. PR – we need more coverage in the media and through various internet outlets. A job for Lance
20. Interaction: This question deserves an opportunity to comment. I’m guessing from previous questions that productivity is the issue.
RICHARD NANCE (PART 2)
21. Comments: Some of these are repeats. I’m not sure about need for publicity about the coalition. Meetings will always be dominated by a few outspoken members, but we can have the leadership ask others by name to offer their thoughts.
22. Delegation of duties could improve. Sustainability in doubt (I’m sure this is funding related).
23. Effective structure and meaningful work for members.
24. G&O – no issues.
25. Some concern about progress and impact.
26. Participation in G&O good.
27. Indicates some misunderstanding of SPF requirements.
28. Decision tracking – not sure what process is but agree it’s effective(?!?) Question needs more clarification. (I’m not sure I know what the question means.)
29. One thinks it’s too rushed, one too labored. Suspicions of backroom process.
30. n/a
31. We need to make better use of members and recognize them for their contributions.
32. Meetings are too brief (or too many agenda items for time allowed). Members need orientation to the process the coalition uses to get it’s work done. Too much talk, not enough action. (We are just now getting into action – outline the SPF process from the grant).
33. No issues w/ conflict management.
34. Maybe solicit input via email for those who keep quiet during meetings.
35. Back to 15 above.
36. n/a
37. Majority respect the coalition leadership’s abilities and conduct.
38. Same for collaboration.
39. Coalition leadership is like herding cats. Assigning one UCDSA staff member to each task group or subcommittee will be helpful.
40. Orientation of new members again. Overview (review) of the SPF process is probably worth doing at a future meeting.
41. ¼ of group don’t think we address cultural factors adequately.
42. Close to half think we haven’t addressed income and educational level adequately in our work.
43. Half the group doesn’t think they’ve had enough training on the SPF process (see 15 above again).
44. ”It would be wise to devote at least one monthly meeting to the process to insure everyone has sufficient understanding.”
45. Complaints about requirements of the SPF grant on what we can and can’t do. Blame it on the feds.
46. ¼ of respondents aren’t aware of the strategic plan. Education (44) orientation(15).
47. 16 free-form responses is quite remarkable from a group of people who have limited time to commit to the Coalition.
48. Need more diversity of membership and organizational representation.
49. 14 suggestions like 47. We need to spend more time reviewing these on our conference call.
50. Just about everyone thinks they have something useful to bring to the table.
51. Just about everyone thinks they are receiving something of personal value for their participation.
1. No representation from media, City Government or adults without kids.
2. 55% of SMART members have been on coalition for > 1 yr.
4. No members answering the survey were <21 or older than 70.
5. Only 4.5% are members of color.
6. 18% or our members do not feel very involved. 82% are moderatly to very involved.
7. 3 of 4 only involved a little due to being new to the coalition (perhaps newbee's need assignments)
1 of 4 have schedule conflicts.
8. Just over 50% of members make 85% of meetings. How can we get more people to attend meetings regularly?
10 & 12. 1 of 22 people believes that the cost of being on the coalition outweighs the benefits of being on it. That person is also dissatisfied with their coalition experience.
11. 77% find info from coalition that gets shared outside of coalition.
13. Coalition moves too slowly. We are too polite (leadership?) at times.
14. 23% of members feel too unfamiliar w/ coalition members to comment on this question. Retreats are important!!!
15. 19% feel coalition training is not effective.
16. We need more youth and racially diverse members.
17. Coalition members believe we need more city leaders
Provo Police
minorities
school district representatives
sheriff's department
dentists
UVU personnel
18. Improve training of new members.
Meetings are overwhelmed w/ opinions.
19. 32% feel we do not effectively promote our goals, activities and accomplishemtns to the community.
20. 9% believe that the coalition does not interact in and open, honest and productive manner.
21. Comments on coalition communication; dominated by 2 people (leaders?)
; transition from communication to action is slow.
22. 68% of members are unclear about sustainability after SPF grant is gone.
23 & 24. Members are well satisfied w/ doing meaningful work and the coalitions goals and objectives. One person is not familiar w/ goals and objectives. (What happened to the disgruntled person in questions 10, 12, 20?)
25. SMART has made good progress, has good networking, postitive community impact and clear vision. (What happened to the disgruntled person in questions 10, 12, 20?)
more to come
don
1. No representation from media, City Government or adults without kids.
2. 55% of SMART members have been on coalition for > 1 yr.
4. No members answering the survey were <21 or older than 70.
5. Only 4.5% are members of color.
6. 18% or our members do not feel very involved. 82% are moderatly to very involved.
7. 3 of 4 only involved a little due to being new to the coalition (perhaps newbee's need assignments)
1 of 4 have schedule conflicts.
8. Just over 50% of members make 85% of meetings. How can we get more people to attend meetings regularly?
10 & 12. 1 of 22 people believes that the cost of being on the coalition outweighs the benefits of being on it. That person is also dissatisfied with their coalition experience.
11. 77% find info from coalition that gets shared outside of coalition.
13. Coalition moves too slowly. We are too polite (leadership?) at times.
14. 23% of members feel too unfamiliar w/ coalition members to comment on this question. Retreats are important!!!
15. 19% feel coalition training is not effective.
16. We need more youth and racially diverse members.
17. Coalition members believe we need more city leaders
Provo Police
minorities
school district representatives
sheriff's department
dentists
UVU personnel
18. Improve training of new members.
Meetings are overwhelmed w/ opinions.
19. 32% feel we do not effectively promote our goals, activities and accomplishemtns to the community.
20. 9% believe that the coalition does not interact in and open, honest and productive manner.
21. Comments on coalition communication; dominated by 2 people (leaders?)
; transition from communication to action is slow.
22. 68% of members are unclear about sustainability after SPF grant is gone.
23 & 24. Members are well satisfied w/ doing meaningful work and the coalitions goals and objectives. One person is not familiar w/ goals and objectives. (What happened to the disgruntled person in questions 10, 12, 20?)
25. SMART has made good progress, has good networking, postitive community impact and clear vision. (What happened to the disgruntled person in questions 10, 12, 20?)
26. 10% are neutral about their participation in coalition, what can we do to get more people involved?
27. "More reporting back, perhaps midmonth to see if our help is needed." (leaders take note to call and envolve members)
28. 36% of members have concern about or don't know of our process for tracking decisions. 27% have concern about or are neutral about how effective our decision making process.
29. Decision making. "I'm not sure how the work is getting done - are there meetinds seperate from our monthly meetings? If so others need to know."
31. 44% are neutral or believe the coalition uses the abilities of all its members.
31% are neutral or feel they're not recognized for their contributions.
32. 31 to 38% of members are not clear on coalition goals and objective, or disagree w/ goals and objectives or are not familiar with them.
Not enough time, too much discussion.
No complaints of personality clashes.
Over half of members don't understand how a coalition should function or understand the SPF process. (Is this a function of being a new member?)
33. We handle conflict well.
34. Discussion dominated by a few individuals.
35. 29% question effectiveness of leadership training.
36. One person feels leaders do not engage entire coalition to discuss and build consensus about key decisions.
37. One person feels we do not have collaborative leadership.
39. Not enough diversity in leadership. All are males, two in the same profession.
40. SPF process not well understood.
41. 10% do not feel cultural factors considered in our SPF process.
42. 14% believe we have no considered cultural aspects or sexual orientation.
43. 23% believe they haven't received enough SPF training.
44. 48% feel we could be better supported by the division.
45. 10% feel they haven't been able to contribute to the SPF process. 10% believe we haven't been engaged in it. 10% feel we have been hindered by the SPF planning process.
In explanation, we need to review the SPF process.
46. 28% not aware of the State of Utah's strategic prevention plan.
Plan needs some airtime w/ coalition.
47. Most important achievments.
"Solid leadership, goals/obj, working in conjuction with legislatures to change and or implement laws, solid group of core memebers, retention of members, solid plans."
"Bills by Daw"
"Quality research collect during the Needs Assessment process. The development of a 3-5 yr strategic plan outling our strategies moving forward. Rep Daw, SMART memebers intorducing legislation. Partnering w/ IHC and LDS Family Services to promotoe Clean out the Cabinet..." Signed; Kye Nordfelt.
48. What needs most improvement: opportunities for everyone to give their opinions (repeating theme).
Stable funding.
"...reach out to diverse groups...train new members like those that have been here since the begining."
"The speed w/ which we respond to opportunities."
"...getting our name out there..."
49. What would facilitate the improvements needed in #4 "Continued recruiting efforts."
"Periodic training for new members."
"Stronger guidelines and stricter follow up on assignments."
"Give time to members to expain why they are part of the coalition. Giving a chance to "soap box" may eleviate "soap boxing" during meetings.
"Better attendance, longer meetings."
"Newsletter so we can check up on what's going on." (blog)
"Rededication to the cause." (resign commitments yearly?)
Not sure how to use #50 and #51.
Don
26. 10% are neutral about their participation in coalition, what can we do to get more people involved?
27. "More reporting back, perhaps midmonth to see if our help is needed." (leaders take note to call and envolve members)
28. 36% of members have concern about or don't know of our process for tracking decisions. 27% have concern about or are neutral about how effective our decision making process.
29. Decision making. "I'm not sure how the work is getting done - are there meetinds seperate from our monthly meetings? If so others need to know."
31. 44% are neutral or believe the coalition uses the abilities of all its members.
31% are neutral or feel they're not recognized for their contributions.
32. 31 to 38% of members are not clear on coalition goals and objective, or disagree w/ goals and objectives or are not familiar with them.
Not enough time, too much discussion.
No complaints of personality clashes.
Over half of members don't understand how a coalition should function or understand the SPF process. (Is this a function of being a new member?)
33. We handle conflict well.
34. Discussion dominated by a few individuals.
35. 29% question effectiveness of leadership training.
36. One person feels leaders do not engage entire coalition to discuss and build consensus about key decisions.
37. One person feels we do not have collaborative leadership.
39. Not enough diversity in leadership. All are males, two in the same profession.
40. SPF process not well understood.
41. 10% do not feel cultural factors considered in our SPF process.
42. 14% believe we have no considered cultural aspects or sexual orientation.
43. 23% believe they haven't received enough SPF training.
44. 48% feel we could be better supported by the division.
45. 10% feel they haven't been able to contribute to the SPF process. 10% believe we haven't been engaged in it. 10% feel we have been hindered by the SPF planning process.
In explanation, we need to review the SPF process.
46. 28% not aware of the State of Utah's strategic prevention plan.
Plan needs some airtime w/ coalition.
47. Most important achievments.
"Solid leadership, goals/obj, working in conjuction with legislatures to change and or implement laws, solid group of core memebers, retention of members, solid plans."
"Bills by Daw"
"Quality research collect during the Needs Assessment process. The development of a 3-5 yr strategic plan outling our strategies moving forward. Rep Daw, SMART memebers intorducing legislation. Partnering w/ IHC and LDS Family Services to promotoe Clean out the Cabinet..." Signed; Kye Nordfelt.
48. What needs most improvement: opportunities for everyone to give their opinions (repeating theme).
Stable funding.
"...reach out to diverse groups...train new members like those that have been here since the begining."
"The speed w/ which we respond to opportunities."
"...getting our name out there..."
49. What would facilitate the improvements needed in #4 "Continued recruiting efforts."
"Periodic training for new members."
"Stronger guidelines and stricter follow up on assignments."
"Give time to members to expain why they are part of the coalition. Giving a chance to "soap box" may eleviate "soap boxing" during meetings.
"Better attendance, longer meetings."
"Newsletter so we can check up on what's going on." (blog)
"Rededication to the cause." (resign commitments yearly?)
Not sure how to use #50 and #51.
Don
Post a Comment