CADRA Project - Program Evaluation Final Report 2015
-
Upload
brandie-green -
Category
Documents
-
view
528 -
download
2
Transcript of CADRA Project - Program Evaluation Final Report 2015
Running Head: PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 1
A Program Evaluation of the Community Advanced Data and Research Analysis Project at the
UNLV School of Environmental and Public Affairs
By
Michael Bernardo, Brandie Green, Amber Konold, and Kathryn Weavil
PUA 729
Submitted to the School of Environmental and Public Affairs
University of Nevada Las Vegas
In Partial Fulfillment for the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Public Administration
Faculty Approval:
_______________________________ Jaewon Lim, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, School of Environmental and Public Affairs
_______________________________ Christopher Stream, Ph.D.
Director, School of Environmental and Public Affairs
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Literature Review............................................................................................................................ 5
Purpose .......................................................................................................................................... 16
Methods......................................................................................................................................... 17
Evaluation Methodology ............................................................................................................... 18
Programs Studied .......................................................................................................................... 20
Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 65
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 69
References ..................................................................................................................................... 72
Appendix A – Quantitative Survey Information ........................................................................... 73
Appendix B – Qualitative Interview Matrix ................................................................................197
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 3
Executive Summary
The Community Advanced Data and Research Analysis Project (CADRA) is project that
houses an interdisciplinary research team located at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The
vision of CADRA, as defined by its stakeholders, is to create positive community outcomes by
encouraging and engaging nonprofit organizations, as well as student and professional
researchers, to develop and evolve their data management practices. CADRA offers three
program options including Nonprofit Audits, Program Development and Grant Writing, and
Community Data Mining. The purpose of this program evaluation will be to evaluate the
Community Advanced Data and Research Analysis (CADRA) Project, with a specific
assessment of their access and obtainability to data in the Las Vegas community.
A convergent parallel mixed methods design was used, where qualitative and quantitative
data were collected concurrently, analyzed separately, and then merged. The quantitative data
was used to assess whether nonprofits, higher education institution faculty, or public sector
employees had ease and access in obtaining data. A survey was administered to any nonprofit
organization, higher-education faculty member, and public sector employee, from which the data
was collected. The qualitative semi-structured interviews were simultaneously conducted in
order to create a benchmark analysis of existing community data centers, in an effort to explore
existing program methodology and best practices.
The program evaluation yielded various significant findings that may help CADRA
improve its process and efficiency. Results of both the survey and benchmark analysis indicated
that the three primary focuses of CADRA should be on: social networking amongst the primary
stakeholder groups, implementation as the local data clearinghouse for Nevada, as well as,
establishment of a long-term funding resource. It is our hope that CADRA members take this
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 4 alpha analysis and use it to better shape this program throughout its maturation to fit the needs of
its users. We strongly recommend a beta analysis is conducted as well in the future, to better
address the evolving needs of this program.
Introduction
The Community Advanced Data and Research Analysis Project, or CADRA, is a newly
implemented program designed to oversee the development of the Clark County Data Hub, as
well as expand the existing MyResearcher data sets created by Applied Analysis. Currently the
lab is located in the School of Environmental and Public Affairs facility on the UNLV campus
and its maturation will be overseen by volunteer members of the CADRA team, who are also
partnering with the Nonprofit, Community, and Leadership Initiative (NCLI). The researchers
are tasked with completing a Community Needs Assessment for the United Way of Southern
Nevada (UWSN) every two years, as well as to collect data for Applied Analysis to incorporate
in their MyResearcher database. The program will also create grant-writing initiatives and
workshops for nonprofit organizations in the area, with the hopes of improving their ability to
secure funding. That, along with a focus on data management, is intended to optimize positive
outcomes for the community.
With the growing emphasis on data collection, the vision of CADRA is to create a nexus
of information that connects, faculty and student researchers, with community partners as well as
non-profit organizations to create positive outcomes for the Las Vegas community. However,
due to the program’s infancy, and ever evolving structural design, a community needs
assessment to gage awareness and expectations was vital to the success of this project. The aim
of this paper is to provide an overview of the growing data centric nature of community
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 5 nonprofit organizations, and demonstrate, through tangible data collection and interpretation,
whether or a not the need for CADRA and its services is perceived or actual.
Literature Review
Introduction In order to gain a better understanding of the role data plays in nonprofit organizations,
faculty research and the community, a review of all current literature was necessary. The
following literature review provides an overview of relevant academic publications that, in part,
addresses the program evaluation and data collection and utilization relationship.
Summary
In Using Social Network Analysis to Enhance Nonprofit Organizational Research
Capacity: A Case Study, by Johnson, Jennifer A., Julie A. Honnold, and F. Paul Stevens, the
authors speaks on the potential benefits of collaboration between a nonprofit agency and its
immediate neighbor organizations. A local funding agency in Virginia commissioned a study to
look at the ways in which social network analysis (SNA) can enhance the data resources
available to nonprofits for funding and grant requests. SNA is a visually descriptive
methodology used in social science that maps and measures connectivity. The centralized data is
then used as a metric. The article presents a case study of a network of 52 nonprofit
organizations to illustrate the how the social network analysis works and whether or not it is a
viable option for organizations to utilize. The ultimate goal is to produce tangible data collection
to increase the strength and merit of grant requests that are growing more specific with their
application criteria, and often times rely heavily on data outputs.
The research objectives for this study were “to explore the viability of SNA in terms of
research questions specific to nonprofit organizations and to conduct a pretest of a networking
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 6 initiative just launched by the funding agency intended to facilitate inter-organizational
connections among local nonprofits in a specified geographical region.” (Johnson et. al, 494).
Ultimately, the article concludes that, “Participation in networks enhances an NPO’s
innovation in services and acquisition of can improve organizational performance (Galaskiewicz
et al., 2006), can sustain and strength collaborative relationships (Guo & Acar, 2005), and
increases the organization’s chances of survival (Hager et al., 2004),” (Johnson et. al, 509). In
other words, there is increased access to funding and increased productivity and outputs when
organizations and nonprofits collaborate and share information.
An article which addresses that question of whether or not nonprofit organizations have a
need for better data management practices and if they are successfully utilizing current research
and incorporating findings is The Research Practices and Needs of Non-Profit Organizations in
an Urban Center by Randy Stoker. This study included 80 nonprofit organizations in Toledo,
Ohio each of whom completed a survey focused on their data needs and practices, (Stoeker,
101). The following table taken from the paper, illustrates the level of analysis at which the non-
profit organizations collect data.
The survey found that nonprofits collect data on a wide variety of topics, but do not use much of
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 7 the data that they collect, and do not collect useful data for other groups, particularly
neighborhood organizations. The contention is that without being efficient in not only the
collection, but the utilization of data, small to medium sized nonprofit organizations fall prey to
larger groups who can impose performance standards or measures.
Two central questions of the study were: How much research capacity do nonprofit
organizations have? How much do they need? One key finding of this study showed that
“Toledo nonprofits have piles and piles of data. Seventy-one of the 80 organizations store data
more than three years. On average, 61% of the data is saved in paper files, likely creating both
space and data recovery issues for many nonprofits,” (Stoeker, 104). The following table
illustrates the categories on which non-profit organizations collect and report data.
The article suggests four potential areas of improvement, which are, providing better
research methods training for nonprofit staff and volunteers, educating funders on the importance
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 8 of supporting nonprofit research and data management capacity, providing better stock databases
for nonprofits to easily use, and engaging higher education students and faculty in nonprofit
research data collection and management, (Stoeker, 113).
Community-Based Program Research: Context, Program Readiness, and Evaluation
Usefulness, by Jay A. Mancini, Lydia I. Marek, Richard A. W. Byrne, Angela J. Huebner, deals
with the relationship between individuals who manage and oversee operations of nonprofit
organizations with program evaluators. The overarching theme is if you improve the
evaluator/organization partnership and make it more harmonious, the overall outcome of the
organization improves. This can be done through a series of quality control questions that both
parties can utilize to make sure that the communication is clear and that the projected outcomes
remain the same. One aspect of this paper is identifying whether or not a program is “ready” for
evaluation. There are three key questions that are posed, what are the contextual influences on
program development and evaluation research efforts? Is the program ready for evaluation? And
does the evaluation research “work” for the program?” (Mancini et. al, 11).
The article further outlines detailed questions for each subsection that should be asked
about and discussed throughout the evaluation journey, (Mancini et. al, 12). Including, is what
we know about the community informed by data collected by some agency or organization, or is
it based on anecdotes? How do we describe the community? Who are the programs serving? And
Over the past several years how has this community changed, if at all? Over the next several
years are particular changes expected? The article then poses the final questions that should be
asked by evaluators which are; Is the program fully active and, if so, for how long? Are desired
program results specific and clear enough so that they can be assessed? Are program activities
consistent with the program purpose and its desired results? What is the program intervention?
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 9 Which dimensions of what occurs in the program are related to particular changes that are
anticipated? Is the understanding of the intervention clear and does it seem that results from the
intervention can be observed? And can the program be evaluated and its merit supported or not
supported?
The main focus of Challenging Institutional Barriers to Community-Based Research, by
Randy Stoeker, is recognizing and developing methods to break through various barriers of
community-based research. Specifically, the article targets a case involving community/campus
collaboration and utilizing students as primary researchers. The final conclusion of the research
is, “The main way to equalize partnership power between higher education institutions and
communities is to equalize the information power of the two. That does not mean that power is
not fundamentally material, rooted in resource inequalities. But the primary form of campus–
community partnerships revolves around information processes, and provides the first open door
to equality and justice.” (Stoeker, 54). In other words, there has to be a positive flow of
information for collaboration success. The following chart illustrates the power flow and
organization of community/college partnerships with their defined roles.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 10
Assessing the Effectiveness of Capacity-Building Initiatives: Seven Issues for the Field by
Kennard T. Wing, outlines two of the most recent trends in philanthropy and nonprofit
organizations which include an increased emphasis on “measurable outcomes and greater
investment in capacity building or organizational effectiveness,” (Stoeker, 154). This leads the
authors to try and figure out how exactly can you measure capacity building? The answer lies in
seven questions that must be addressed upon assessment for the future of measuring
organizational capacity building. These seven questions according to the article are, How can an
abstract concept be concretely measured? The author suggests with properly and specifically
defined terms and matrices. How can we measure performance improvement when we cannot
measure performance? The article advises to measure a particular outcome and whether it is
improving or declining across the organization. Against whose goals should be measure
improvement? Stoeker suggests the goals which the participants set for themselves because
realistically they are much more likely to follow through on them. What can be done about
unrealistic timetables for both capacity building and its relationships to program evaluators?
Stoeker states that the organization must have realistic expectations for the long run in order to
not compromise the integrity of the institution. Short-term goals must not be met at the
expensive of long-term gain. How can we document how soft people relate to hard systems?
Stoeker claims “It is better to do a poor job evaluating a good intervention than a great job
evaluating a pathetic one,” (Stoeker, 155). Should be measure participants’ behavior change or
clients’ internal learning? Stoeker suggest that “The evaluator seeks measurable external
changes. The consultant, on the other hand, particularly when working with senior executives,
often tends to focus on the clients’ internal learning. The consultant believes that, unless the
client internalizes the learning, any external change will be temporary and, in the case of
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 11 behavior, possibly phony. Thus, external change without an “Aha!” is empty. The evaluator
believes that insight alone has no cash value: Actions speak louder than words,” (Stoeker, 156).
In other words, change is difficult and if the participants don’t internalize the changes and make
them into habits, all previous instruction will be wasted as behavioral patterns will resort back to
the status quo. And finally, How can researchers design a study when consultants keep
changing what they are working on? The article states that, “Foundation and nonprofit
executives need to be aware that there are real limits to evaluation. It would be foolish to limit
interventions to what can be effectively evaluated. Instead, we have to keep those limitations in
mind when Capacity-Building Initiatives using evaluation results concerning a capacity-building
intervention that is operating, in part, beyond those limits,” (Stoeker, 157).
In Nonprofits, Funders, and Evaluation Accountability in Action by Joanne G. Carmen,
the article addresses what grant funders are seeking when they ask for performance and
evaluation data, and whether or not those nonprofit organizations are able to comply with that
request. The article ran tests on a series of six hypotheses and found that contrary to popular
opinion, there is a widespread move towards evaluation and performance measurement data only
in organizations that claim Federal or United Way funding, (Carmen, 3). They did this by
surveying nonprofit organizations including one on one interview with 31 employees and 10
funding sources in New York State. Those seeking grants at the state and local level were not, in
general, required to submit outcome data. The following six hypotheses that were tested were as
follows, (Carmen, 3):
Hypothesis 1: Nonprofits that receive a higher percentage of funding from federal government
sources are more likely to comply with external monitoring requirements.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 12
Hypothesis 2: Nonprofits that receive a higher percentage of funding from state and local
government sources are more likely to comply with external monitoring requirements.
Hypothesis 3: Nonprofits that receive a higher percentage of funding from the United Way are
more likely to engage in descriptive reporting activities.
Hypothesis 4: Nonprofits that receive a higher percentage of funding from foundations are more
likely to engage in descriptive reporting activities.
Hypothesis 5: Nonprofits that receive a higher percentage of funding from the United Way are
more likely to engage in evaluation and performance measurement activities.
Hypothesis 6: Nonprofits that receive a higher percentage of funding from the federal
government are more likely to engage in evaluation and performance measurement activities.
The results of the testing showed that for Federal Funding, “The regression models
indicated that federal funding was a significant predictor for the extent to which nonprofit
organizations comply with external monitoring requirements (β=.370) and conducting evaluation
and performance measurement (β=.219). These findings were consistent with the hypotheses
(Hypotheses 1 and 6). For state and local funding, “The regression models indicated that state
and local government funding was a significant predictor of external monitoring (β=. 281) as
expected (Hypothesis 2),” (Carmen, 8).
Financing and Evaluating Nonprofits: Mapping the Knowledge Base of Nonprofit
Management in the Human Services by Sara L. Schwartz and Michael J. Austin, focuses on the
knowledge base that nonprofit organizations rely on in terms of their ability to map their
financial base. Because of varied political and economic climates, these organization have had
to diversify funding sources and also provide detailed accounts of budgeting due to increased
emphasis on accountability. This paper is inherently a literature review in it of itself that
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 13 browses all of the current literature where five apparent themes were discovered. The different
types of “themes” that the researchers isolated were, Financing and Evaluating Nonprofits,
which includes articles “considering the financial management of nonprofits, sources of revenue,
social enterprise, accountability requirements, program evaluation, and management information
systems,” (Schwartz et. al, 6). Leading and Managing Nonprofits includes articles addressing
“nonprofit history, organizational theory, leadership, management, nonprofit governance,
communications and marketing, and managing external relations that include inter-organizational
relationships as well as relations with external environments such as the law, public policy,
professional associations, and the community at large,” (Schwartz et. al, 7). Managing Human
Resources which include a employee’s happiness, education and trading programs, employee
management, volunteer efforts and promoting diversity, (Schwartz et. al, 7). Managing Different
Types of Nonprofits to which articles that research and classify nonprofit organization are
included, as well as articles that explore “domestic nonprofit service sectors, membership
associations, community development nonprofits and citizen political nonprofits,” (Schwartz et.
al, 7). And the final theme, Managing NGOs Worldwide, whose papers includes topics such as
the management of non-governmental organizations internationally, the management of human
resources as well as different types of non-governmental organizations, (Schwartz et. al, 7).
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 14
Because United Way’s approach to program outcome measurement is one of the most
widely used systems throughout the nonprofit sector, Measuring Outcomes of United Way–
Funded Programs: Expectations and Reality by Michael Hendricks, Margaret C. Plantz,
Kathleen J. Pritchard, wanted to examine whether or not the expectations of its effectiveness
measure up to the reality. Some of the distinguishing characteristics of the United Way approach
include, a focus on outcomes, a quantitative measure of outcomes. Consistent, systematic
measurement. The main objective being program improvement, working from logical model.
Also United Way’s approach includes programs that are required to identify their own outcomes,
a long time horizon for implementation, and analysis done by in in house staff. The following
table illustrates the base information for those organizations utilizing the United Way approach,
as well as the Bivariate Correlation to funding.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 15
There was a wide array of experiences with United Way, including both negative and
positive. The article secedes there are certain factors that are out of the organizations control,
which can have an impact on the success of the United Way’s methodology. This includes the
commitment of agency leadership and the inherent difficulty of the measured outcomes,
(Hendricks et. al, 27).
These articles demonstration a trend towards the centralization and utilization of data and
the effect that has on an organization’s ability to apply for and be awarded federal funding.
There is a real correlation between how efficient an organization is with managing its data and
the ability of that nonprofit to receive funding as well as deliver on expected outcomes,
(Hendricks et. al, 35).
Findings Overall, the studies whose findings were particularly relevant to the program evaluation
of CADRA were Assessing the Effectiveness of Capacity-Building Initiatives: Seven Issues for
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 16 the Field by Kennard T. Wing, and Nonprofits, Funders, and Evaluation Accountability in Action
by Joanne G. Carmen. The first article deals specifically with the current demand for data
inclusion in grant funding requirements, and outlines seven questions that act as guidelines for
organizations to handle capacity building and data management. The second article shows an
actual statistical correlation with expected data outcomes and federal or state funding. In both of
these cases, the evidence is clear that understanding and growing data management and
collection is a vital component of expanding organizations, demonstrating a real need for
projects such as CADRA.
Purpose
Statement of Problem
In light of the research reviewed on community based research centers, institutional
barriers to community research, and the research practices of nonprofit organizations, there is no
current research conducted to evaluate the need for a community driven data center in the Las
Vegas community.
The purpose of this program evaluation will be to evaluate the Community Advanced
Data and Research Analysis (CADRA) Project, with a specific assessment of their access and
obtainability to data in the Las Vegas community.
A convergent parallel mixed methods design was used, and is a type of design in which
qualitative and quantitative data were collected concurrently, analyzed separately, and then
merged. In this study, quantitative data was used to assess whether nonprofits, higher education
institution faculty, or public sector employees had ease and access in obtaining data.
Furthermore, did they perceive a need for assistance in analysis and do they desire to contribute
to further community collaboration. The quantitative data was collected via written survey
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 17 questionnaires from any nonprofit organization, any higher-education faculty member, and any
public sector employee. The qualitative semi-structured interviews were simultaneously
conducted by performing a benchmark analysis of existing community data centers in an effort to
explore existing program methodology and best practices.
The reason for collecting both quantitative and qualitative data is to achieve triangulation
and a greater data context. As Creswell and Clark (2011) state, triangulation refers to a
traditional view where quantitative and qualitative research is combined, in order to be mutually
corroborated for a greater validity (p. 62). By collecting quantitative data that evaluates
constituents’ perceptions of access and obtainability, and subsequently collecting qualitative data
that provides input regarding feasibility, research can more effectively add context to the data
when interpreted concurrently.
Research Questions
1. Does CADRA provide increased access and attainability to data driven decision-making
within the Las Vegas community?
2. Does the increased access appropriately target the three stakeholder groups?
Methods
Participants
Participants for the quantitative portion of the program evaluation were selected
randomly with no limitation to survey response. Three target population groups were identified
upon the foundation of the CADRA evaluation project, and were as follows: higher education
graduate students and faculty, nonprofit organizations, and public sector employees.
A standardized email was sent to all of the various participant groups via methods as
outlined below detailing the survey information and soliciting their participation. To be
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 18 considered for inclusion into the study, participants were to have been in one of the above target
population groups. There were no exclusion factors for this survey research.
The benchmark analysis had seven pre-determined community data collection programs
identified that were similar in scope to CADRA. The programs were selected in an effort to
compile a comprehensive analysis of best practices and current trends. The Alpha Group, with
help from Capstone Director Dr. Jaewon Lim, identified the following well-established data labs
in which to contact:
1. University of Washington DataLab,
2. UC Berkeley D-Lab,
3. Princeton University Data & Statistical Services (DSS) Lab,
4. University of Tennessee Census State Data Center,
5. Ball State University CBER Data Center,
6. Penn State Social Capital Index,
7. Minnesota Population Center
Evaluation Methodology
In order to identify the need for a centralized data repository to determine if CADRA will
be able to provide increased access and attainability to data driven decision making within the
Las Vegas community, a mixed methods research approach was used. The evaluation team
chose to conduct a (qualitative) benchmark study to identify data collection programs similar in
scope to CADRA with the desire to identify best practices and make recommendations for
CADRA’s future direction. The team also elected to create and distribute a (quantitative) survey
in order to identify particular data needs among the study’s three target populations (institutions
of higher learning, nonprofit organizations, and public agencies).
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 19 Benchmark Analysis (Qualitative)
The purpose of the benchmark analysis was to query well-known and established
programs via qualitative interviews to see which methods and best practices they employ which
may help CADRA become even more successful through implementation.
An effort began in April of 2015 to reach out and establish an internal point of contact
with each data lab to help facilitate an interview with the program director. This effort began by
reaching out to each program’s generic mailbox on two separate occasions; only 3 of the 7
(42.8%), were responsive. These three labs include Princeton University Data & Statistical
Services (DSS) Lab, the University of Tennessee Census State Data Center, and the University
of Washington DataLab. The Alpha Group was able to go on and interview each of these labs,
with the exception of the University of Washington DataLab which was initially responsive and
then removed from the list after subsequent attempts to coordinate an interview were ignored. An
example of the email dialogue can be found in Appendix X – Benchmark Information.
In an attempt to prompt a response from the four (4) unresponsive data labs, their
websites were reviewed, and the introduction email was written to the program director with the
Data Lab in the CC field. This approach was greeted with a response from the UC Berkeley D-
Lab and the University of Minnesota Population Center (MPC), which each later set aside the
time for an interview.
Despite numerous attempts to contact both Ball State University’s CBER Data Center
and Penn State’s Social Capital Index, the programs were unresponsive and therefore removed
from the list.
The figure below depicts the program, contact, if they were responsive/unresponsive, and
if the Alpha Group was able to interview them to be part of this benchmark study.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 20
In total, four (4) data labs chose to participate in this study and were interviewed. The
Alpha Group extends our sincerest Thanks to Dr. Jon Stiles, Dr. Catherine Fitch, Ms. Melissa
Stefanini, and Mr. Bobray Bordelon for taking the time to help make this study possible.
The following sections will provide additional information into the programs chosen for
insertion into this study, descriptive analysis of the questions asked including commonalities,
disparities, and findings, and recommendations and lessons learned. This information may be
helpful to future program evaluators as CADRA evolves from its infancy to an established
program.
Programs Studied
The aforementioned data labs were all selected for their relevancy to CADRA’s mission,
as well as their prestige within the research community. In addition to the qualitative interviews,
Alpha Group reviewed each lab’s website for relevant information to include in this baseline
study to make it as complete as possible. The following is a summary of the data collected:
The University of Washington (UW) DataLab
According to their website, the University of Washington’s DataLab is a:
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 21
“…nexus for research on Data Science and Analytics at the UW iSchool.
We study large-scale, heterogeneous human data in an effort to
understand why individuals, consumers, and societies behave the way
they do. Our goal is to use data for the social good, in an ethical manner
that can inform policy and impact lives for the better. As the focal point
for industry partnerships related to “big data” and business analytics,
the DataLab also provides infrastructure and support for student training
and engagement in projects that involve the analysis of large datasets.”1
This program was thought to very closely coincide with CADRA’s goal of providing
descriptive analysis and trends of socioeconomic data to the community to enhance data literacy.
Unfortunately, the UW DataLab was not available for an interview, however, in review of their
website, the UW DataLab is a multi-disciplinary team with a common purpose; data science for
social good. Their research uses “Big Data” to better understand the behavior of individuals and
society. Some core areas in which the UW DataLab is currently focused includes: societal and
economic problems in developing countries, crisis informatics, and economic and social
processes that drive scholarly communication. In societal and economic problems in developing
countries, UW students have the opportunity to spend time in the field to better understand the
cultures that supply the data in which they are studying. For crisis informatics, UW DataLab is
analyzing how information spreads over social media during disasters, including what indicators
people pay attention to, and the credibility of the information available to develop better disaster
response mechanisms. The DataLab is also trying to address the thousands of scholarly
1UW Information School, Retrieved July 31, 2015, from https://datalab.ischool.uw.edu/about
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 22 publications being created every day and the major modern challenge of information overload.
The academically diverse students play an essential role in research from planning through
publication, while the faculty members share their research and work with collaborators at other
Universities, Companies, and Governments all over the world.
The University of California (UC) Berkeley D-Lab
According to their website, the UC Berkeley D-lab:
“…helps Berkeley faculty, staff, and graduate students move forward
with world-class research in data intensive social science. We think of
data as an expansive category, one that is constantly changing as the
research frontier moves. We offer a venue for methodological exchange
from all corners of campus and across its bounds.
D-Lab provides cross-disciplinary resources for in-depth consulting and
advising, access to staff support, and training and provisioning for
software and other infrastructure needs. Networking with other Berkeley
centers and facilities and with our departments and schools, we offer our
services to researchers across the disciplines and underwrite the breadth
of excellence of Berkeley’s graduate programs and faculty research. D-
Lab builds networks through which Berkeley researchers can connect
with users of social science data in the off-campus world.”2
2University of California D-Lab, Retrieved July 31, 2015, from http://dlab.berkeley.edu/about-d-lab
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 23
The program at UC Berkeley provides services, support, and a location for research
design and experimentation in social science data. UC Berkeley’s D-Lab was not available for
interview, but upon detailed review of their website, Alpha Group was able to find relevant
information for inclusion to this study. D-Lab targets its services at UC Berkeley social science
researchers, which consist of, graduate students, staff, and faculty, and their online resources are
available to the public. Initial funding investments in D-Lab came from the Vice Chancellor for
Research, the Provost, the Dean of Social Science and the Deans of social science faculties
across Berkeley. D-Lab reports to the Vice Chancellor for Research and is overseen by a
governing board. There are several workshops available for graduate students who need data for
the writing of their thesis or dissertation, and D-Lab can provide consulting services for the
writing of grant-funded research on a paid or recharge basis.
Princeton University Data & Statistical Services (DSS) Lab
Princeton University’s DSS Lab has been around for over 50 years and is housed within
the Firestone Library. DSS provides statistical and software assistance in quantitative analysis of
electronic data as part of independent research projects, such as junior papers, senior theses, term
papers, dissertations, and scholarly articles. The lab is available to all currently enrolled or
employed members of Princeton University and focuses on social science data, statistics,
science, and humanities. Since the lab is housed in the library, there is support for researchers
with locating appropriate data, preparing restricted data plans, determining methodologies, and
getting ready to use statistical packages. DSS has informal partnerships with GIS (another part of
the library system), Library's Systems Department (they manage and maintain the many servers),
Office of Population Research Data Archive (largely informational in terms of acquisitions), and
the Center for Health & Well Being Data Archive (non-restricted data). The program is funded
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 24 by a regular line in the library budget (staff, software, collections, etc…). The lab does not assist
with grant writing, and because Princeton is a private university, its resources are restricted to its
own researchers, therefore no work is done to support the nonprofit community. DSS is staffed
by three full-time librarians; two full-time statistical consultants; 1/2 FTE support staff member;
and 40 hours of Graduate Assistant support per week. The lab does not normally advertise or
market as they are very heavily used and part of numerous classes, so campus awareness is high.
University of Tennessee Census State Data Center
According to their website, the University of Tennessee Census State Data Center (SDC)
is a:
“…State/Census Bureau cooperative program with a mission of
providing efficient access to US Census data and products, providing
training and technical assistance to data users, and providing feedback
to the Census Bureau on data usability, as well as state and local
government data needs and operational issues. The State Data Center
disseminates Census and other data to the public through a network of
over 1,800 state and local agencies, libraries, universities, chambers of
commerce, and others. The State Data Centers are the official source of
demographic, economic, and social statistics, and redistricting data
produced by the Census Bureau.”3
The SDC program started in 1978 and the Center for Business and Economic Research
(CBER) at UT, Knoxville, has been the lead agency since 1980. Ms. Melissa Stefanini described
3University of Tennessee Census State Data Center, Retrieved July 31, 2015, from http://tndata.utk.edu/
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 25 their main audience as data users of all kinds. The services provided are to the Census, to
affiliates, and to data users across the state. The SDC provides:
• Technical assistance on Census data analysis and mapping,
• Efficient access to Census Bureau data and data products, including timely data
summaries, research, and statistical reports,
• User-training workshops and conferences on all aspects of demographic data to a
broad range of users,
• A State Data Center website (http://tndata.utk.edu),
• An E-newsletter
• Service as the primary contact for data users who require demographic or economic
data for Tennessee, its counties, cities, tracts, blocks and zip code areas.
• Service as the official Federal-State Population Estimates Cooperative representative
to the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Division to include data gathering,
estimates review and dissemination.
The SDC is a partnership between the state of Tennessee (TN) and the US Census
Bureau. It is funded through the TN Department of Finance & Administration. Methods of
raising awareness include annual data users’ conference as well as other workshops across the
state to help get data users be more efficient and more aware of what the Census is working on
and what data is available. They are currently in a large social media push and have a Twitter,
Facebook, and LinkedIn account, SDC website, E-newsletter, and large distribution lists for
email blasts. They also utilize press releases when something exciting is released by the Census
with a description of why it is important and what happened in the state.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 26 Ball State University Center for Business and Economic (CBER) Data Center
Ball State University’s CBER Data Center was unresponsive, however, according to their
website, the CBER Data Center’s mission is to: “…offer simple, visual, easily accessible
economic web tools for economic developers, community leaders, grant writers, policymakers,
and the general public.”4
The CBER Data Center conducts relevant and timely public policy research on a wide
range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. It is an economic policy and forecasting
research center which covers topics including public finance, regional economics,
manufacturing, transportation, and energy sector studies.
Penn State Social Capital Index
The Penn State Social Capital Index, also known as the Northeast Regional Center for
Rural Development (NERCRD), was also unresponsive. Their website however had a plethora of
data on the Center’s mission, vision, organization, goals, and strategies, which the team felt was
sufficient for inclusion into this study. According to their website, the NERCRD is:
“…dedicated to providing research-based information that helps create
regional prosperity through entrepreneurial and cluster-based
innovation, while assuring balanced uses of natural resources in livable
communities in the northeastern United States.”5
The Northeast Center is one of four Regional Rural Development Centers established in
the early 1970s at Cornell University, and later moved to Penn State in 1985. Although
NERCRD’s mission focuses on enhancing the capacity of Land Grant Universities to foster 4Ball State University Center for Business and Economic Data Center, Retrieved July 31, 2015, from http://cms.bsu.edu/academics/centersandinstitutes/bbr/datacenter 5 Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences, Retrieved July 31, 2015, from http://aese.psu.edu/nercrd/about
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 27 regional prosperity and rural development, and is dissimilar to CADRA’s, it was chosen because
of its success and prestige in the data community. The Center’s belief is that small towns and
rural places are becoming increasingly more complex and multi-dimensional in the context of
today’s global society. NERCRD’s major core funding comes from the National Institute of
Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and the region's land-grant universities. Additionally, other federal
and state agencies, private foundations, and public interests contribute funding in support of
various special programs on case-by-case basis. NERCRD is governed by a Board of Directors
and a Regional Technical Advisory Committee which have set several goals for the program:
• Goal 1: Improving Economic Competitiveness, Diversity and Adaptability of Small
and/or Rural Communities
• Goal 2: Facilitating Development of Policies that Enhance the Well-being of Rural
People and Small Towns
• Goal 3: Increasing Community Capacity to Deal with Change
• Goal 4: Increasing Social viability through Enhancing the Self-reliance of Families
and Communities
• Goal 5: Linking Natural Resource Industries, Including Agriculture, with Community
and Environmental Resources
The Center raises awareness through: assistance of Northeast states in responding to
development needs; workshop facilitation and conference participation on current rural
developmental issues, grant support activities, network coordination among rural development
partners, and production and distribution of research and educational materials through
newsletters, annual reports, its web page, and other publications. Its staff consists of a program
director, four administrative staffers, two postdoctoral scholars, and five graduate assistants.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 28 Minnesota Population Center (MPC)
The Minnesota Population Center (MPC) was established in March 2000 by founding
collaborators from four colleges. The MPC focuses on Social Sciences and Health Data with an
internal audience of the University community (i.e. students and faculty) in mind. Infrastructure
projects are federally funded and have an advisory board, with additional University funding
available from the Office of the VP for Research for University funded staff. The major external
stakeholder for the MPC is the US Census Bureau's National Statistical Office. The MPC
provides support to through seven shared cores and all MPC members are eligible to use the
services of these cores. Cores also offer fee-based services for non-members. According to the
MPC website, each core’s function is as follows:
“The Administrative Core maximizes the productivity of MPC
researchers by reducing administrative burdens and handling day-to-day
operations of the Center.
The Information Technology Core maintains computing hardware and
software for data analysis and provides software development services
for data creation, management and dissemination.
The Data Access Core manages and disseminates our own data
collections and provides MPC researchers with access to demographic
data from other centers and archives.
The Data Services Core provides data processing, coding, and cleaning
services for MPC-based research projects, and provides a variety of
demographic data services to external clients worldwide.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 29
The Spatial Analysis Core provides research support for spatial data
creation and analysis for MPC-based research projects and provides GIS
training for MPC members.
The Dissemination and Outreach Core provides user support for MPC-
produced data products, maximizing the accessibility of MPC data not
only for academic researchers but also for students, policy makers,
journalists and the general public.
The Data Integration Core specializes in harmonization processes and
metadata creation, so that variables from multiple datasets may be
readily subject to comparisons across time and space.”6
The Center is staffed by six full-time University funded employees, and numerous
research staff working on infrastructure awards and funded by grants. At the time of the
interview with Dr. Fitch, there were 168 total research staffers in the MPC of which 75 are non-
students (i.e. research staff, software developers, etc...). To raise awareness, Academic
researchers exhibit at special events for professional societies, they sponsor University hosted
publicized events and data workshops, and most importantly, scholarly articles get cited using
MPC data. The MPC offers program development grant writing support for affiliated research,
and assisted with the writing of nearly 30 grants in 2014. At this time however, they do not
currently work with the local nonprofit community.
6University of Minnesota, Retrieved July 31, 2015, from https://www.pop.umn.edu/about
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 30 Survey (Quantitative)
The evaluation team created an online survey using Qualtrics software. Survey content
and structure was developed by Alpha Group in conjunction with input from CADRA program
staff members. The information provided by the CADRA program helped Alpha Group develop
the survey questions which were then submitted to CADRA, specifically John Wagner and Lola
Brooks, for approval. Alpha Group received suggested changes to the survey questions and
formatting, and the survey was edited accordingly. Upon completion of all components of the
survey, it was distributed to the three target populations and the survey collection period began.
A link to the survey was disseminated to UNLV research faculty, nonprofit community
agencies identified by UNLV’s Nonprofit, Community, and Leadership Initiative (NCLI), and
government agencies via email. Group members also created an introductory letter briefly
describing the scope of the CADRA program along with survey instructions to explain the
purpose of the survey and the need for respondents. The evaluation group collected survey
responses from June 22, 2015 through July 22, 2015. Alpha Group received 232 total survey
responses during the collection period.
The survey consisted of 27 questions, 22 core questions and 5 demographic questions.
The survey questions were designed to identify to which of the three target groups the responded
belonged, specific needs reported regarding data collection and analysis, satisfaction with
existing data collection and research tools, frequency of grant writing and desire for services
offered through the CADRA program.
Demographic questions collected information on the respondents’ age, race, sex, level of
education, and employment status. The respondents’ answer regarding which type of agency
they worked for determined the following sequence of questions with which they would be
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 31 presented. For example, if a respondent reported being employed by a nonprofit institution, they
would see a subgroup of questions geared specifically toward the data collection and analysis
needs of nonprofit agencies.
The survey was promoted through an email announcement containing an electronic link
to the survey along with instructions regarding the time commitment required, the purpose of the
survey, and all potential respondents were provided with a contact from the evaluation team
during the survey period. The contact (Amber Konold) received several emails containing
feedback from respondents, most noting that the survey did not provide a comprehensive list of
terminal degrees which made choosing a level of education difficult for respondents.
Survey responses were collected through Qualtrics, which resulted in viable data for
analysis. The total number of respondents was 232, subgroup totals were: 153 (66%) from
higher education institutions, 44 (19%) from nonprofit organizations other than higher education
institutions, 23 (10%) from government agencies, 10 (4%) employed in the private sector, 1 (0%)
retired, and 1 (0%) reported “other please specify” and noted that they were employed by the
school district.
Findings
Qualitative Findings
For this study Alpha Group developed eleven (11) questions to ask during the qualitative
interviews that would provide the most benefit in the evaluation of CADRA. Some of these
questions such as Question #6 – Do you work with the nonprofit community? Proved to result in
a common theme among the four programs interviewed; No, they do not. Below are each of the
questions asked with a narrative:
1. How long has the program been in operation?
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 32
Each of the programs is at least 15 years old with these exception of the UC Berkeley D-
Lab which opened its doors in 2013. This was expected as the team chose these programs
for being well established and prestigious. That doesn’t happen overnight as it takes time
to establish a reputation of data integrity and is usually a result of years of data being
cited. Princeton’s DSS Lab was the oldest at over 50 years old.
2. What is your focus area? Who is your main audience?
Each of the programs had different foci and although some may cross paths, there didn’t
seem to be much, if any, duplication of effort. UC Berkeley’s D-lab focuses on training,
consulting, community building, computing infrastructure, and data. It also transmits this
information to the Census Bureau. Princeton is internally focused on social science data
and statistics. The University of Tennessee’s State Data Center is focused on census data
and its reporting. Penn State’s NERCRD is focused on rural development and educating
individuals in rural areas to create a shared vision for future sustainable communities; and
the Minnesota Population Center is focused on social sciences, health, and data. As with
UC Berkeley and the University of Tennessee, the MPC is also partnered with the Census
Bureau.
3. Who are your internal and external stakeholders?
Most of the programs had a common answer and identified internal stakeholders as
research faculty, students, and staff. The external stakeholders vary greatly based upon
grant-funded research, and the current external stakeholders during the time of the
interviews may not be the same stakeholders years down the road. As mentioned above,
three of the programs cited the US Census Bureau.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 33 4. How is the program funded?
The funding structure of each lab is in some way supplemented by long-term guaranteed
funding such as by the University they belong to, or as a result of a strategic partnership
with the federal government. The UC Berkeley D-Lab receives support from the Deans of
the professional schools and academic departments. Princeton’s DSS Lab is part of the
regular library operations budget. The University of Tennessee is funded by the TN
Department of Finance & Administration. Penn State’s NERCRD’s major core funding
comes from the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and the region's land-
grant universities; and MPC’s projects are mostly funded by federal grants, however,
some University of Minnesota funding comes from the Office of the Vice President for
Research.
5. Do you provide assistance in the writing of grants?
This question received a mixed response. UC Berkeley’s D-Lab provides training and
workshops on the writing of grants towards specific funding sources such as the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), however, they do
not actually write or apply for the grants. Princeton and the University of Tennessee do
not offer any assistance in grant writing. Penn State’s NERCRD advertises that it does,
however, they were unavailable for interview for further information as to how many per
year, and if that is a core mission area. The MPC is heavily involved with the assistance
of writing program development grants for affiliated research and claimed to have written
over thirty (30) in 2014, however, they could not answer as to how many were actually
funded to quantify a success percentage.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 34 6. Do you work with the nonprofit community?
Not one of the Data Labs claimed to have worked with the nonprofit community during
the interviews, nor is it advertised as a core business process on any of their websites.
7. What is your program structure? How many staffers? Are they Salaried? Volunteers?
Graduate Assistants?
Each Data Lab varies in its size, with the smallest being Princeton’s DSS Lab with three
full time librarians, two full time statistical consultants, 1/2 full time support staff
member, and a cumulative 40 hours of work put in by graduate assistants each week. The
MPC has the largest structure with 168 research staff currently employed by grants, and
6-7 full time university funded employees. Taken from their website, Penn State’s
NERCRD’s staff consists of one program director, four administrative staffers, two
postdoctoral scholars, and five graduate assistants. The UC Berkeley D-Lab’s staff
consists of a faculty director (part-time), executive director (full-time), academic
coordinator (part-time), data archivist (part-time), IT specialist (full-time), and applied
software/tool developers (2 x part-time). They also employ graduate student and staff as
consultants (approximately 15-20 per semester, 3-5 hours/week), workshop presenters
(15-20 per semester), and GSR operational staff (usually 5-7 half-time). All are paid.
8. What methods are used to raise awareness of your program?
Since the major internal audience of many of these labs are the students, faculty, and
staff, the University is commonly used for communication and raising awareness such as
via email blasts, newsletters, and bulletins. Several labs said to have held workshops and
consultations for the students and faculty to become more literate with their programs.
There was also a common trend of updating their website and social media sites to try
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 35
and reach the next generation of researchers, and participation in professional
conferences.
9. How would you assess the data literacy in your community?
The response to data literacy varied depending on the university and the focus of the
program. Some interpreted the community as the University and students, others
interpreted it as the surrounding geographic area. In a future study, I would refine this
question to be less ambiguous. There wasn’t a right or wrong answer, however, the
response is going to be subjective based upon the opinions of the individuals interviewed.
10. What advice or lessons learned would you give to a University beginning implementation of
a Community Assessment and Data Analysis lab?
Discussed in the Lessons Learned section below.
11. How do you measure data needs and type of data needed?
The data labs interviewed detailed several methods to measure the data types and needs.
In some cases it could be as easy as seeing what grants were received and querying the
professional research staff, while others log requests for data that come in through their
systems. The students and faculty can be worked with directly as subject matter experts
of specific fields to learn what is out there, what is popular, and what is possible.
Quantitative Findings
The following section includes graphs and visual representations from the quantitative
data derived from the survey results from the three main target groups beginning with the
demographic questions for each group, followed by results from the core questions for each.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 36 Demographics
1. Higher Education Institution
Gender Answered: 153 Skipped: 0
The majority of survey respondents from higher education institutions were male
(50.33%, 77), with 74 females (48.37%) responding to the survey and two individuals (1.31%)
who preferred not to answer.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 37
What is your age? Answered: 153 Skipped: 0
The majority of respondents from higher education institutions (27.63%, 42) indicated
that they were between 40-49 years of age. The second largest percentage of respondents
(23.68%, 36) reported age between 50-59 years. The smallest recorded age group was 21-29
years (3.29%), and there were no respondents under 20 years of age.
What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Answered: 152 Skipped: 1
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 38 The majority of respondents (82.89%, 126) indicated they had completed a doctoral degree,
while the remaining 17.11%, (26 respondents), indicated that they had completed an
undergraduate degree or higher.
What is your race? Answered: 153 Skipped: 0
The majority of respondents (83.55%, 127) indicated that they identified as White (non-
Hispanic), respondents who identified as Asian made up the second largest group (6.58%, 10).
Those who responded “other race (please specify)” provided the following specifications:
• West Indian-Jamaican • Mixed • American Indian • Adopted with Native American mother, also adopted.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 39
2. Nonprofit Organizations
Gender Answered: 44 Skipped: 0
The majority of survey respondents from nonprofit organizations were female (72.09%),
with 31 females responding to the survey and 12 males responding to the survey.
What is your age?
Answered: 44 Skipped: 0
The majority of respondents from nonprofit organizations were split down the middle
between ages 40-49 (29.55%, 13) and ages 50-59 (29.55%, 13). The second largest percentage
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 40 of respondents (15.91%, 7) indicated that they were over 60 years of age. The smallest recorded
age group was 21-29 years (11.36%, 5), and there were no respondents under 20 years of age.
What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Answered: 44 Skipped: 0
The majority of respondents (45.45%, 20) indicated they had completed a master’s
degree, while the second largest group (27.27%, 12) reported having a bachelor’s degree. In
total, 97.73% indicated having attended college, with the remaining 2.27%, (1), indicating that
they were high school graduates with no college.
What is your race? Answered: 44 Skipped: 0
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 41
The majority of respondents (81.82%, 36) indicated that they identified as White (non-
Hispanic), respondents who identified as Hispanic or Latino made up the second largest group
(11.36%, 5). The third largest group was split down the middle with respondents identifying as
Black or African American (4.55%, 2) and Asian (4.55%, 2). The respondent who indicated
“other race (please specify)” provided the following specification: White/Native American.
3. Public Sector Employees
While the total number of respondents from this subgroup is not large enough from which
to draw any definitive conclusions, Alpha Group thought it would be of interest to the CADRA
Program to include the resulting information from the public sector response to the survey
questions.
Gender Answered: 23 Skipped: 0
The majority of survey respondents from the public sector were female (73.91%), with 17
females responding to the survey and 6 males responding to the survey.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 42
What is your age? Answered: 23 Skipped: 0
The majority of respondents from the public sector were split down the middle between
ages 30-39 (39.19%, 9) and ages 40-49 (39.15%, 9). The second largest percentage of
respondents (13.04%, 3) indicated that they were over 60 years of age. The smallest recorded
age group was 50-59 years (8.70%, 2), and there were no respondents 29 years of age or
younger.
What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Answered: 23 Skipped: 0
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 43 Overall, 14 respondents (60.87%) indicated they had completed a master’s degree, while 5
respondents (21.74%) reported having a bachelor’s degree. In total, all 23 respondents (100%)
indicated having attained some level of college degree.
What is your race? Answered: 23 Skipped: 0
Overall, the majority of respondents (60.87%, 14) indicated that they identified as White
(non-Hispanic), respondents who identified as Hispanic or Latino made up the second largest
group (17.39%, 4). The third largest group was split down the middle with respondents
identifying as Asian (8.70%, 2) and with respondents who would prefer not to answer (8.70%,
2). One respondent (4.35%) indicated that they identified as Black or African-American.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 44 Core Questions
1. Higher Education Institutions
Do you or your organization collect community data?
Answered: 149 Skipped: 4
The majority of respondents (51.68%, 77) indicated that they or their organization does
collect data, while 48.32%, 72 respondents replied no to the question. When asked what type of
data they collected, an open ended comment section revealed the following responses:
• Economic performance data for state and local regions • Public health-related data • Socioeconomic data • Survey data • Demographic data • K-12 education data (spending, demographics, student performance, etc.) • Program evaluation data and assessment standards • Census data and historical records
When asked what the collected data is utilized for, in an open-ended comment section we
received the following responses:
• Unspecified research • Program development, intervention • Program evaluation • Performance improvement • Journal and report writing
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 45
• testing hypotheses, building models and validating theories (if not capable of falsifying yet)
• Don’t know Does your organization share data
with the broader community? Answered: 58 Skipped: 95
When asked if the collected data is shared with the community, the majority of
respondents (58.62%, 34) relied that yes, data is shared. 25.86% of respondents, (15), said no,
they do not share data with the community, and 15.52% of respondents, (9), were unsure.
Do you or your organization analyze data
using statistical tools? Answered: 57 Skipped: 96
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 46
In regard to whether respondents or their organizations use statistical tools to analyze
data, the vast majority of responses (75.44%, 43) indicated that they do use statistical tools,
whereas the remaining 24.56% was split down the middle with respondents claiming that either
they do not use statistical tools (12.28%, 7), or they are unsure (12.28%, 7).
Are there any gaps or deficiencies in your data collection and/or analysis methods that you would like to see improved upon?
Answered: 53 Skipped: 100
When asked if they have any deficiencies in their data collection and/or analysis methods
that they would like to see improved upon, the majority (60.38%, 32) said yes, while 39.62%,
(21), responded that they were happy with their data collection and/or analysis methods.
Respondents who indicated yes offered the following explanations:
• Need to have data warehouse for local regions
• Sometimes school district will not share data
• Data collection lacks comprehensive detail
• Need for analytical tools and expert support (especially for statistics)
• We have no plan for who is collecting data for which purpose and how to apply metadata to it to make it discoverable.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 47
Collection/analysis seems random
• We need to learn how to do principle component analysis
• High quality data is sometimes difficult to collect
• We are beginning to explore systems mapping and are looking for tools to help with that
• We could use training on analysis, planning phase of assessment
Does your organization currently collaborate for community data collection and
analysis with other nonprofit or community organizations? Answered: 53 Skipped: 100
The majority (51.85%, 28) of respondents from higher education institutions indicated
that they do collaborate with other nonprofit or community organizations for data collection.
While 33.33%, (18), indicated that they do not collaborate, 14.81%, (8), indicated that they do
not currently collaborate but are interested in future collaboration.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 48
Satisfaction with Data Collection Answered: 115 Skipped: 38
While most of the respondents from higher education institutions (67.24%, 58) reported
that they strongly agree that data collection is important to their organization, only 8.77%, (5),
said that they strongly agree that they are satisfied with their organization’s data practices.
Most of the responses (43.86%, 25) indicate that respondents report that they only agree that
they are satisfied with their organization’s data practices.
Would you or your organization be interested in outside assistance with data collection and analysis?
Answered: 119 Skipped: 34
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 49
Though responses were closely split, the majority of respondents (52.94%, 63) indicated
that they would be interested in outside assistance with data collection and analysis whereas
47.06%, or 56, of respondents indicated that they would not be interested in assistance.
Would you or your organization benefit from a center that provides a single repository for data across several focus areas within the community?
Answered: 120 Skipped: 33
Most respondents from higher education institutions (66.67%, 80) agree that their
organization would benefit from a single repository for community data.
Would you or your organization be willing to contribute a small amount of funds to create and maintain a central data repository?
Answered: 120 Skipped: 33
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 50
It is interesting to note that although 66.67%, (80), of respondents indicated their
organizations would benefit from a single community data repository, only 3.33%, or 4
respondents reported that they would be willing to pay a small amount of funding for the creation
and maintenance per the graph below.
Are you or your organization familiar with the data collection and analysis services offered by the Community Advanced Data & Research Analysis (CADRA) Lab of UNLV?
Answered: 121 Skipped: 32
Though previously 66.67%, (80), of respondents claimed their organizations would
benefit from a single repository for community data, only 14.05%, (17), of responses from higher
education institutions indicate that they are familiar with the services offered by the CADRA Lab
of UNLV.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 51
2. Nonprofit Organizations
Do you or your organization collect community data?
Answered: 42 Skipped: 2
The majority of respondents (69.05%, 29) indicated that they or their organization does
collect data, while 30.95%, (13), responded no to the question. When asked what type of data
they collected, an open ended comment section revealed the following responses:
• Socioeconomic data • Student specific data • Heath & Education data • Program satisfaction • Regional demographic information • Program usage data • Quantitative data
When asked what the collected data is utilized for, in an open-ended comment section we
received the following responses:
• Recruitment • Program impact analysis • Program planning & improvement • Grant writing and reporting • Grant applications • Benchmarking • Program evaluation • Fundraising
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 52
• Strategic Planning • Analysis of community impact
Does your organization share data
with the broader community? Answered: 25 Skipped: 19
When asked if the collected data is shared with the community, the majority of
respondents from nonprofit organizations (64.00%, 16) relied that yes, data is shared. 28.00%,
(7), of respondents said no, they do not share data with the community, and 8%, (2), of
respondents were unsure.
Do you or your organization analyze data using statistical tools?
Answered: 25 Skipped: 19
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 53
In regard to whether respondents or their organizations use statistical tools to analyze
data, the vast majority of responses (44.00%, 11) indicated that they do use statistical tools,
whereas the remaining respondents are split, reporting that 28%, (7) respondents, do not use
statistical tools and 28%, (7) respondents, are unsure.
Are there any gaps or deficiencies in your data collection and/or analysis methods that you would like to see improved upon?
Answered: 24 Skipped: 20
When asked if they have any deficiencies in their data collection and/or analysis methods
that they would like to see improved upon, the majority (79.17%, 19) said yes, while 20.83%,
(5), responded that they were happy with their data collection and/or analysis methods.
Respondents who indicated yes offered the following explanations: • Data hygiene & communication between multiple databases
• Need better data collection tools
• The use of statistical tools for measuring outcomes
• Data is not always up-to-date
• Lack of training – we are not using our data or data systems to the fullest
• Up-to-date comparative demographic information would be valuable as would survey support
• Capability to query blind data for meaningful statistics
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 54
Does your organization currently collaborate for community data collection and analysis
with other nonprofit or community organizations? Answered: 25 Skipped: 19
The majority (44.00%, 11) of respondents from nonprofit organizations indicated that
they do collaborate with other nonprofit or community organizations for data collection. While
32.00%, 8 respondents indicated that they do not collaborate, 24.00% (6 respondents), indicated
that they do not currently collaborate but are interested in future collaboration.
Satisfaction with Data Collection Answered: 25 Skipped: 19
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 55
While most of the respondents from nonprofit organizations (76.00%, 19) reported that
they strongly agree that data collection is important to their organization, only 4%, (1
respondent), said that they strongly agree that they are satisfied with their organization’s data
practices. Most of the responses (40.00%, 10) indicate that respondents report that they only
agree that they are satisfied with their organization’s data practices.
Would you or your organization be interested in outside assistance with data
collection and analysis? Answered: 38 Skipped: 6
The majority of respondents (71.05%, 27) indicated that they would be interested in
outside assistance with data collection and analysis whereas 28.95% or 11 respondents indicated
that they would not be interested in assistance.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 56
Would you or your organization benefit from a center that provides a single repository for data across several focus areas within the community?
Answered: 37 Skipped: 7
Most respondents from nonprofit organizations (86.49%, 32) agree that their organization
would benefit from a single repository for community data. Only 13.51%, or 5, respondents
indicated that they would not benefit from a repository.
Would you or your organization be willing to contribute a small amount of funds to create and maintain a central data repository?
Answered: 38 Skipped: 6
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 57 It is interesting to note that although 86.49% of respondents previously indicated their
organizations would benefit from a single community data repository, only 10.53%, (4), reported
that they would be willing to pay a small amount of funding for the creation and maintenance per
the graph below. The majority of respondents (65.79%, 25) indicated that they were unsure if
they or their organizations would be willing to pay a small amount to create and maintain a
repository.
Are you or your organization familiar with the data collection and analysis services offered by the Community Advanced Data & Research Analysis (CADRA) Lab of UNLV?
Answered: 38 Skipped: 6
Though previously 86.49% of respondents claimed their organizations would benefit
from a single repository for community data, only 18.42%, or 7 responses from nonprofit
organizations indicate that they are familiar with the services offered by the CADRA Lab of
UNLV.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 58
3. Public Sector Employees
Do you or your organization collect community data?
Answered: 23 Skipped: 0
Overall the majority of respondents (78.26%, 18) indicated that they or their organization
does collect data, while 5 respondents (21.74%) reported no to the question. When asked what
type of data they collected, an open ended comment section revealed the following responses:
• Socioeconomic data • Education-specific data • Heath & Injury data • Qualitative and Quantitative level data • Community demographic data • Student achievement data • Statistical data • Consumer demographics • Demographic data (all types)
When asked what the collected data is utilized for, in an open-ended comment section we
received the following responses:
• To inform policy development • For budgeting, expenses, resource allocation • To develop and evaluate programs • To identify needs of students/families attending CCSD at-risk schools • Grant applications
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 59
• To determine fair allocation of resources • Statewide case management system • Track program participants • To develop funding formula for family resource centers • Strategic decision making
Does your organization share data
with the broader community? Answered: 16 Skipped: 7
When asked if the collected data is shared with the community, the majority of
respondents from the public sector (81.25%, 13) relied that yes, data is shared. Two respondents
(12.50%) said no, they do not share data with the community, and one respondent (6.25%) were
unsure.
Do you or your organization analyze data using statistical tools?
Answered: 15 Skipped: 8
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 60
In regard to whether respondents or their organizations use statistical tools to analyze
data, the vast majority of responses (73.33%, 11) indicated that they do use statistical tools,
whereas 3 respondents (20.00%) do not use statistical tools and 1 respondent (6.67%) was
unsure.
Are there any gaps or deficiencies in your data collection and/or analysis methods that you would like to see improved upon?
Answered: 13 Skipped: 10
When asked if they have any deficiencies in their data collection and/or analysis methods
that they would like to see improved upon, the majority of respondents (84.62%, 11) said yes,
while 3 (15.38%) responded that they were happy with their data collection and/or analysis
methods.
Respondents who indicated yes offered the following explanations: • More collection/analysis on the value of services offered
• Need more complete data
• Need data sharing agreements
• Usually data is out-of-date
• Need to collect cleaner data, improve data governance of collected data
• Improve storage of data through data warehousing
• Need increased access to outside data
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 61
Does your organization currently collaborate for community data collection and
analysis with other nonprofit or community organizations? Answered: 16 Skipped: 7
The majority (75.00%, 12) of respondents from the public sector indicated that they do
collaborate with other nonprofit or community organizations for data collection. The remainder
of respondents were divided with 2 (12.50%) indicating that they do not collaborate, and 2
(12.50%) indicating that they do not currently collaborate but are interested in future
collaboration.
Satisfaction with Data Collection Answered: 23 Skipped: 0
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 62
While most of the respondents from the public sector (62.50%, 16) reported that they
strongly agree that data collection is important to their organization, only 1 respondent (6.25%)
said that they strongly agree that they are satisfied with their organization’s data practices.
Most of the responses (50.00%, 8) indicate that respondents report that they only agree that they
are satisfied with their organization’s data practices.
Would you or your organization be interested in outside assistance with data collection and analysis?
Answered: 20 Skipped: 3
The majority of respondents (70.00%, 14) indicated that they would be interested in
outside assistance with data collection and analysis whereas 6 respondents (30.00%) indicated
that they would not be interested in assistance.
Would you or your organization benefit from a center that provides a single repository for data across several focus areas within the community?
Answered: 20 Skipped: 3
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 63
Most respondents from the public sector (90.00%, 18) agree that their organization would
benefit from a single repository for community data. Only 2 respondents (10.00%) indicated that
they would not benefit from a repository.
Would you or your organization be willing to contribute a small amount of funds to create and maintain a central data repository?
Answered: 20 Skipped: 3
It is interesting to note that although 90.00% of respondents indicated their organizations
would benefit from a single community data repository, only 1 respondent (5.00%) reported that
they would be willing to pay a small amount of funding for the creation and maintenance per the
graph below. The majority of respondents (70.00%, 14) indicated that they were unsure if they
or their organizations would be willing to pay a small amount to create and maintain a
repository.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 64 Are you or your organization familiar with the data collection and analysis services offered
by the Community Advanced Data & Research Analysis (CADRA) Lab of UNLV? Answered: 19 Skipped: 4
Though previously 90.00% of respondents claimed their organizations would benefit
from a single repository for community data, only 2 responses from the public sector (10.53%)
indicate that they are familiar with the services offered by the CADRA Lab of UNLV.
Limitations
As with any type of survey research, there are limitations to be identified. First and
foremost, the collected data is based on self-reports, of which the accuracy and completeness
cannot be verified. Secondly, the data only represents a limited population of higher education
professionals, non-profit experts, and public sector employees.
In addition, it should be noted that there was an extremely small sample size for the
public sector employee population subgroup from which inferences cannot be reliably drawn.
Alpha Group felt it necessary to report the findings for this subgroup, however, in order to
provide as much data as possible from which the CADRA Project team can make inferences and
decisions based on projected data trends. Further limitations include the CADRA Project’s
unique scope of work. While the qualitative benchmark study provided much informative data,
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 65 it is worth noting that the CADRA Project’s scope and direction is different in various ways from
each of the benchmark programs studied. It will therefore fall under the CADRA Project team’s
discretion as to what input feedback from the benchmark programs are put into action throughout
the lifespan of the CADRA Project.
Recommendations
The systematic program evaluation yielded several significant findings that may help
CADRA improve its process and efficiency. Results of both the survey and benchmark analysis
indicated that the three primary focuses of CADRA should be on: social networking amongst the
primary stakeholder groups, implementation as the local data clearinghouse for Nevada, as well
as, establishment of a long-term funding resource. The following recommendations will be
provided in a timeline of three different groupings offered in short-range (1-3 years), medium-
range (3-5 years), and long-range (greater than 5 years) recommendations. This is done in an
effort to provide the most depth and breath to our advices.
Short-Range Recommendations
As results from both the survey data and benchmark analysis directly indicate,
collaboration will be the most significant thing that CADRA could do in the coming one to two
years. Predictably, the qualitative survey results for higher education institutions indicated that
over half of the respondents were either currently collaborating or were interested in
collaborating for greater community data collection and analysis. These results should
undoubtedly guide the CADRA Project into building partnerships within the different UNLV
Schools and Departments where CADRA could eventually become the central hub within UNLV
for researchers to monitor their necessary socioeconomic data. This is an imperative action, as
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 66 one of the program options and benefits first identified by the CADRA Project team is
community data mining.
Initially, the CADRA Project should focus their efforts on relationship building and
advocating for faculty research support by demonstrating the advantages and potential for
monitoring community data levels. This is especially beneficial as UNLV seeks to achieve Tier 1
research status. The CADRA Project should focus on the student and faculty researchers at
UNLV and use their tangible products as an advertisement that will ultimately raise awareness of
CADRA and can later market to the nonprofit community. Furthermore, through increased
scholarly published articles and citations, CADRA’s reputation will grow thereby increasing its
overall awareness.
To support this, Dr. Jon Stile of the UC Berkeley D-Lab offered the following
recommendation during his qualitative interview:
“Build partnerships with faculty and listen to their needs. Rely on graduate students
heavily – they are more in tune with needs and frustrations, they are eager to help other
graduate students, they bring lots of energy, and they have networks you can use for
offering and building services around. Don’t reinvent wheels – collaborate with campus
partners. Build in feedback and evaluation mechanisms while building your program.
Create buzz, but try not to over-promise. Accept failures, learn, cut your losses and move
on.” (Qualitative Interview, July 09, 2015)
As a second recommendation, the CADRA Project should focus on fostering a place
where nonprofit organizations, public sector departments, and higher education researchers can
network for the greater good of data obtainability. As the qualitative survey results indicated,
there is both a need and desire in the Las Vegas community amongst all three of the targeted
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 67 survey groups for an increased collaboration for community data collection, while all of the
groups similarly noted that they had gaps or deficiencies in their data collection or analysis
methods. Ultimately, the CADRA Project has the ability to be a nexus point where professionals
of various levels seeking various objectives can come together for the greater good of research,
data accessibility, and data analysis. Moreover, a particularly useful benefit of the CADRA
Project lab that must be advocated for will be program development and grant writing benefits,
an articulated community need.
Although marketable to the nonprofit organizations and community stakeholder groups, it
is imperative that the CADRA Project connects with faculty to communicate their ability to
develop programs that have real world employability and applicability for UNLV students. The
CADRA Project should consider hosting data workshops for the various colleges and
departments throughout the University to inquire about their support for the lab with the funding
of graduate assistants. Furthermore, it may provide faculty with potential practicum concepts for
upcoming advanced studies graduate students.
To support this, Mr. Bobray Bordelon from Princeton offered the following
recommendation during his qualitative interview:
“Focus on your actual university not the trends out there. Don't jump on
bandwagons without seeing what is really needed. Have subject experts that understand
the actual fields they represent (economics, politics, sociology, etc.). Don't expect one
person to know all data content and multiple statistical packages. Take advantage of
graduate students’ knowledge. Attend the biennial summer workshop at ICPSR on
managing a social science data service.” (Qualitative Interview, June 17, 2015)
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 68 Medium-Range Recommendations
It is highly recommended that this program evaluation be reviewed and recompleted in
three to five years in an effort to try and incorporate the initial baseline data that will be gathered
in the coming years. By using this initial evaluation as a baseline, a subsequent “Beta Group”,
could further refine this study to focus on specific topic areas that the CADRA Project team
could improve upon once they are more established.
Additionally, it is recommended that in three to five years, as CADRA grows and its
mission develops, so should the organizational chain of command. It is imperative that within
any organization, a good leadership be established and clearly articulated to the communities for
which it serves. In this case, CADRA’s service opportunities are considerable and vast, and
therefore must ensure that they appropriately account for all of the stakeholders for which they
assist.
Long-Range Recommendations
First and foremost, a permanent funding source must be secured for the CADRA Project
lab. This is an essential component to any long-term, successful organization and will ensure that
CADRA is able to provide its marketed resources. It was consistently seen throughout the
quantitative results by the various nonprofit organizations and higher-education professionals
that there was a disinterest in contributing self-funding to support or maintain a central data
repository. Therefore, until the CADRA Project can establish its legacy, a more stable funding
source must be obtained. In addition, it was constantly noted in the qualitative findings that
programs were on a strict full-cost recovery basis while receiving aid from their University, or
the programs had an established funding agreement with the federal government. This allowed
these established national programs to support a minimum amount of staff annually to ensure
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 69 continuity of operations, and established goals. Therefore, securing a guaranteed funding source
will ultimately allow the CADRA Project to ensure that the program staff is available to provide
the promoted services and necessary training to the various students, faculty and outside
organizations.
And finally to support this, Dr. Catherine Fitch of the Minnesota Population Center
offered the following recommendation during her qualitative interview:
“Pay attention to mission. Pay what is necessary for quality employees. Trickle-
up good ideas. Take energy and successes and build off of them” (Qualitative Interview,
June 30, 2015).
Conclusion
This program evaluation has attempted to gain an initial understanding of the data
research collection and analysis practices of the Las Vegas community, while assessing the
current needs of local nonprofit organizations, higher education institution faculty, and public
sector employees. The evaluation team has found that although nonprofit organizations, higher
education faculty, and public sector employees collect voluminous amounts of data on a wide
variety of topics, survey results from these groups indicate a definite need for assistance in data
collection, as well as support in advanced data analysis.
Furthermore, it was evident from the survey results that nonprofit organizations have a
difficult time identifying their own data collection and research needs. Even more apparent from
the survey data was the desire from all responder groups to collaborate within the community for
research data management. Removing barriers to data collection will further assist nonprofit
organizations by increasing their efficiency in data management, thereby, augmenting their grant
applications, evaluation practices, and program planning.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 70
After a careful and systemic initial program evaluation by the Alpha Group, it was
suggested that the CADRA Project introduce several key recommendations in the coming years
that will effectively ensure the program’s long-term success and mission achievement. It was
suggested there be a focus on increased community collaboration and engagement with higher
education faculty and students in research data collection and management, particularly by
utilizing the CADRA Project lab as a nexus for UNLV researchers, nonprofit organizations, and
public sector employees. There is a clear indication that the nonprofit sector specifically has a
need of data analysis resources that higher education institutions can ultimately provide. The
focus should be on building partnerships in the form of service learning where the movement can
truly begin at the forefront of community based research and data analysis. Moreover, a follow-
up evaluation should be completed in three to five years in order to re-evaluate progress and
effectively benchmark out future goals. Finally, the CADRA Project lab should begin to secure a
long-term funding source. As the CADRA Project lab begins to produce sound results in terms of
data collection and management assistance to the community, there will only be enough
volunteers to go around and the lab will require additional revenue to remain adequately staffed.
Although graduate assistants and student researchers will prove to be a valuable asset, the
CADRA Project’s lack of steady financial resources may be an indicator of long-term weakness.
Therefore, a permanent plan of action should be established and should highlight the depth-and
breadth of the services provided by the lab.
Notably, this program evaluation sought to focus on the initial assessment of the CADRA
Project’s start-up, by asking whether CADRA is capable of providing increased access and
obtainability to data within the Las Vegas community. Furthermore, we systematically evaluated
whether they appropriately target the access to the three stakeholder groups, and can definitively
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 71 report that the CADRA Project appropriately targets all three-stakeholder groups and is capable
of providing the necessary access and obtainability to community data within the Las Vegas
area. We found that all stakeholder groups have challenges in collecting, managing and
analyzing research data, and conceivably require training in advanced research and capacity
building, a need that can be fulfilled by CADRA Project. As Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the
World Wide Consortium and Open Data Institute once said, “Data is a precious thing and will
last longer than the systems themselves” (Tim Berners-Lee, n.d.).
Acknowledgements
Alpha Group would like to sincerely acknowledge and thank everyone at the CADRA
Project who has been involved with this evaluation over the course of the last several months.
Special thanks to John Wagner and Lola Brooks for providing information on the history and
background of the CADRA Project as well as for guidance throughout the data collection
process. We appreciate the input and feedback you have provided throughout this evaluation
process.
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 72
References
Carman, J. G. "Nonprofits, Funders, and Evaluation: Accountability in Action." The American
Review of Public Administration: 374-90.
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hendricks, M., Plantz, M.C., & Pritchard, K.J. "Measuring Outcomes Of United Way-funded
Programs: Expectations And Reality." New Directions for Evaluation: 13-35.
Johnson, J. A., Honnold J.A., and Stevens, P.F., "Using Social Network Analysis to Enhance
Nonprofit Organizational Research Capacity: A Case Study." Journal of Community
Practice 18 (2010): 493-512.
Mancini, J. A., Marek, L.I., Byrne, R. A. W., & Huebner, A.J., "Community-Based Program
Research." Journal of Community Practice (2004): 7-21.
Schwartz, S. L., and Austin, M.J., "Financing and Evaluating Nonprofits: Mapping the
Knowledge Base of Nonprofit Management in the Human Services." Mack Center on
Non-Profit Management, in the Human Services.
Stoecker, R. "Challenging Institutional Barriers To Community-based Research." Action
Research: 49-67.
Stoeker, R. "The Research Practices and Needs of Non-Profit Organizations in an Urban Center."
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare XXXIV.4 (2007): 97-119.
Tim Berners-Lee. (n.d.). BrainyQuote.com. Retrieved August 11, 2015, from BrainyQuote.com
Web site: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/timberners373116.htm
Wing, K.T., "Assessing the Effectiveness of Capacity-Building Initiatives: Seven Issues for the
Field." Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly (2004):
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 73
Appendix A – Quantitative Survey Information
Community Data Needs Survey
Q1 You are being asked to participate in a survey that was designed for a student project on
advanced program evaluation. The following 5-minute survey examines the socioeconomic data
needs in Southern Nevada. Your responses to this survey are both completely voluntary and
anonymous. If you have any questions, please email them to [email protected] or Dr.
Jaewon Lim at [email protected].
Q2 What is your gender?
Male (1)
Female (2)
Other (please specify): (3) ____________________
I prefer not to answer (4)
Q3 Which category below includes your age?
Younger than 20 years (1)
21-29 (2)
30-39 (3)
40-49 (4)
50-59 (5)
60 or older (6)
Q4 What is your race?
White (Non-Hispanic) (1)
Black or African-American (2)
Asian (3)
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (4)
Hispanic or Latino (5)
Other race (please specify): (7) ____________________
I prefer not to answer (8)
Q7 Which of the following categories describes the level of education you have attained?
Less than high school (1)
High school graduate (2)
Some college but no degree (3)
Associates degree (4)
Bachelors degree (5)
Masters degree (6)
Doctoral degree (7)
Q5 Which of the following categories best describes your current status?
Employed by government (1)
Employed by private sector (5)
Employed by university or higher education institution (6)
Employed by non-profit organization (other than university or higher education institution) (7)
Currently unemployed (8)
Retired (9)
Graduate Student (10)
Other (please specify): (4) ____________________
Q18 Does your organization have current 501(c)(3) status?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Q11 Roughly how many full-time employees work for your organization?
1-10 (1)
11-50 (2)
51-200 (3)
201-500 (4)
500+ (5)
Q17 How much money, in U.S. dollars, does your organization raise annually?
Q8 Do you or your organization collect community data?
Yes (1)
No (2)
If No Is Selected, Then Skip To End of Block
Q19 Please identify what type of data is collected:
Q20 What do you or your organization use collected data for?
Q21 Does your organization share data with the broader community?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Unsure (3)
Q22 Do you or your organization analyze data using statistical tools?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Unsure (3)
Q23 Does your organization utilize data to improve programming?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Unsure (3)
Q29 Are there any gaps or deficiencies in your data collection and/or analysis methods that you
would like to see improved upon?
Yes (explain): (1) ____________________
No (2)
Q16 Does your organization currently collaborate for community data collection and analysis
with other non-profit or community organizations?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Not currently, but interested in collaboration (3)
Q27 Please tell us how much you agree with the following statements.
Strongly Disagree (1)
Disagree (2) Neutral (3) Agree (4) Strongly Agree (5)
Data collection is important to
my organization.
(1)
I am satisfied with my
organization's data
practices. (2)
Q12 Have you or your organization ever applied for an external grant?
Yes (1)
No (2)
If No Is Selected, Then Skip To End of Block
Q14 How many grants have you or your organization written in the last two years?
0 (1)
1-2 (2)
3-5 (3)
5-10 (4)
10+ (5)
Q15 How many grants have you or your organization had awarded in the last two years?
0 (1)
1-2 (2)
3-5 (3)
5-10 (4)
10+ (5)
Q13 What resources do you use for your grant writing?
We have dedicated employee(s) (1)
We have employee(s) with collateral duties (2)
We hire a third party (3)
Other (please specify): (4) ____________________
Q25 If you or your organization use data to conduct research, which data collection methods are
used?
Official Documents (1)
Observations (2)
Surveys (3)
Experimental (4)
Multi-methods Approach (5)
Other (please specify): (6) ____________________
I/We do not use data to conduct research (7)
If I/We do not use data to con... Is Selected, Then Skip To End of Block
Q26 On what topics do you or your program (or department) collect data for research?
Q9 Would you or your organization be interested in outside assistance with data collection and
analysis?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Q30 Would you or your organization benefit from a center that provides a single repository for
data across several focus areas within the community?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Q32 Would you or your organization be willing to contribute a small amount of funds to create
and maintain a central data repository?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Unsure (3)
Q10 Are you or your organization familiar with the data collection and analysis services offered
by the Community Advanced Data & Research Analysis (CADRA) Lab of UNLV?
Yes (1)
No (2)
1. What is your gender?
Results with no FiltersLast Modified: 08/10/2015
1 Male 97 42%
2 Female 132 57%
3 Other (please specify): 0 0%
4 I prefer not to answer 2 1%
Total 231
Min Value 1
Max Value 4
Mean 1.60
Variance 0.29
Standard Deviation 0.54
Total Responses 231
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
2. Which category below includes your age?
1 Younger than 20 years 0 0%
2 21-29 10 4%
3 30-39 54 23%
4 40-49 68 29%
5 50-59 53 23%
6 60 or older 46 20%
Total 231
Min Value 2
Max Value 6
Mean 4.31
Variance 1.34
Standard Deviation 1.16
Total Responses 231
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
3. What is your race?
1 White (Non-Hispanic) 184 80%
2 Black or African-American 9 4%
3 Asian 14 6%
4 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 1 0%
5 Hispanic or Latino 16 7%
7 Other race (please specify): 5 2%
8 I prefer not to answer 7 3%
West Indian-Jamaican
mixed
American Indian
White/Native American
adopted, native american mother, also adopted
Min Value 1
Max Value 8
Total Responses 231
# Answer Bar Response %
Other race (please specify):
Statistic Value
4. Which of the following categories describes the level of education you haveattained?
1 Less than high school 0 0%
2 High school graduate 1 0%
3 Some college but no degree 9 4%
4 Associates degree 5 2%
5 Bachelors degree 26 11%
6 Masters degree 59 26%
7 Doctoral degree 131 57%
Total 231
Min Value 2
Max Value 7
Mean 6.28
Variance 1.11
Standard Deviation 1.06
Total Responses 231
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
5. Which of the following categories best describes your current status?
1 Employed by government 23 10%
4 Other (please specify): 1 0%
5 Employed by private sector 10 4%
6 Employed by university or higher education institution 153 66%
7 Employed by non-profit organization (other than university or higher education institution) 44 19%
8 Currently unemployed 2 1%
9 Retired 1 0%
10 Graduate Student 0 0%
Employed by school district
Min Value 1
Max Value 9
Total Responses 232
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
6. Does your organization have current 501(c)(3) status?
1 Yes 42 98%
2 No 1 2%
Total 43
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.02
Variance 0.02
Standard Deviation 0.15
Total Responses 43
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
7. Roughly how many full-time employees work for your organization?
1 1-10 13 30%
2 11-50 12 28%
3 51-200 10 23%
4 201-500 5 12%
5 500+ 3 7%
Total 43
Min Value 1
Max Value 5
Mean 2.37
Variance 1.52
Standard Deviation 1.23
Total Responses 43
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
8. How much money, in U.S. dollars, does your organization raise annually?
I don't know
100,000 plus
$1,600,000
0
6,000,000
9 million
1,400,000
$1,000,00-2,000,000
2,475,000
$200000
$500,000
150,000
250000
7,000,000
$1.5 million
1,000,000
$1.2 million
11 million+
800000
13,500,000
$2,000,000
Not sure
$200,000 plus
1,000,000
$12,000,000
$85,000
$28M
$12,000,000
1.3
1,000,000
$3,000,000
1- 1.3 million
Unknown
$2 million
1,500,000
$450,000
$10,000,000
1,3000,000
$30M
Total Responses 39
Text Response
Statistic Value
9. Do you or your organization collect community data?
1 Yes 130 58%
2 No 96 42%
Total 226
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.42
Variance 0.25
Standard Deviation 0.50
Total Responses 226
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
10. Please identify what type of data is collected:
Conference evaluations primarily
economic performance data for state and local regions
school student data
primary data on individuals and families and organizations
Personal and health
Don't know exactly
Age/ ticket purchase/ interests
don't know
experimental, observational, economic indices etc.
We are the Libraries - so we collect data from all kinds of organizations -- NGO, governmental, commercial, our center for gaming research collects data related to gamingindustry
I have no idea. i do not personally collect data about my community, nor is my research about my community, but i assume my university does. However, I have no involvementwith this data.
It would have been helpful if you defined "community data". - we collect data on natural background radiation levels
water quality, air quality, student feedback
Social, professional
assessment evaluations
Assessment scores
educational data from classrooms, school administration, families and educational software
Job placement rates of graduates
K-12 education data (spending, demographics, student performance, etc)
historical records documenting the community
Economic data
Census data, public health data
Social economic status of community
psychological research data - surveys, attitudes, ability measures
Statistics regarding reference questions, as well as circulation data.
CCSD student achievement and language proficiency data.
health data, public health data, demographic data,
dietary and physical activity level data, physological profile data, geographic information system (GIS) data, and others
quantitative and qualitative data
vulnerable segments of society that have had violent interactions, just starting this with data from records housed in several repositories in S. Nevada
Weather and census
Individual- and dyadic-level data primarily. Individuals' behaviors in relationships, people's knowledge of personal, social, and health, and it's effects on their communicationand relationships.
Probably all kinds since my employer is a university, but I don't specifically know.
Health data, BRFS, Hospital inpatient and outpatient visits in Nevada
information related to infrastructure
qualitative level (case reviews, user experiences/perceptions) and quantitative, counts of system/ resource use, youth provided services, demographics, duration of servicedelivery etc.
Health and Injury data
health
mental health symptoms and satisfactions ratings
survey data
The focus of our data collection is education-centric
demographics of all types
Student data (Average Daily Attendance, GPA, Required Parent Conferences, In School Suspensions, Out of School Suspensions)
health and education
program satisfaction, frequency of family reading time
I don't collect this type of information and I'm not sure what type of data is collected but I work at UNLV so I answered yes to the previous question because I am sure peoplehere collect this type of data.
Statistics
demographic information, attitudes of community members
Demographics of zip codes and counties
Text Response
Ticket holder information, Ed Outreach demographic information
impact at schools
Mainly consumer demographics (gender, age, ethnicity, poverty status, etc) and service units
Information on program participants such as age, education level attained, ethnicity, etc.
referring agency, client's name, age, zip code, marital status, ethnicity, language spoken, infant's gender, DOB, weight, items needed
Ethnicity, Race, poberty level, encounters, type of insurance, per diagnosis e.g. diabetes, prostate cancer, HTN, among others
demographic, grant and program goals, trends, etc
Informaiton on families and children
Demographics primary but also frequency of services, distance, benefits assessment
Chronically homeless individuals/familes, thosed housed and in services, case management services, individual individuals/families that recieve general assistance
Demographics
user demographics, scholastic improvement, post training employment, web traffic, materials loaned
healthcare data
Community data, various populations, various demographics
Demographics
Program Usage by individuals; number of people trained and reached through outreach, demographics including sexual orientation and gender identity
Student homeless population
Statistics
Health and behavior assessments
Population in zip codes, % of people in those zip codes who live below poverty level, number of childre (birth - 18 y.o.) who live in the zip codes.
Student achievement data
Demographics, employment, barriers to employment, training
Fiancial comparisons
Customer data from local casinos and hospitality establishments
educational needs, social needs
Job Seeker Data, Job Placement and Training Data
demographic
Diversity
data on undergraduate research
Both quantitative and qualitative data
data on clients served, community service needs,
I work for a univeristy so this question is not written well as I don't know all of the data that is collected by the entire org. For my program, I collect BMI, Body fat, substance abusehistory, body image, eating disorders, and other similar data.
Demograhics, eligibility determination and service provision
Quantitative
Data from fieldwork about populations that I write about.
Demographics
protected health information. treatment outcomes. mental health assessment data
HMIS
diseases of our patients
Demographics, clients served, most requested services, functioning improvement
both quant and qual data is collected from justice institutions (locally, nationally), individuals (national surveys, local surveys), community members (key players/stakeholders),and local non profits.
clinic outcome data
Demographic data, socio-economic information, wealth/net worth information
Nonprofit program outcome data
Demographics, educational readiness, educational preferences
Resident needs assessments; community demographics;
Total Responses 95
Statistic Value
11. What do you or your organization use collected data for?
Strategic planning
For research in economic development, demographic and labor market analysis
Research by faculty
We use the data to write peer-review journal articles, issue briefs, reports to funders, and as information for tv and radio interviews.
Providing patient care
i don't collect data but others at the university collect data.
Season selection
don't know
testing hypotheses, building models and validating theories (if not capable of falsifying yet)
making available to users
See above.
research
Analysis of data, report and journal article writing
Research
assessment
Monitor development and progress
educational research
To determine the best way to help graduates obtain jobs
research
to support research and education
Analysis
Public health research and practice
For recruitment
metrics
psychological research
Internal uses (resource allocation, etc.)
Program evaluation and research
To analyze the health of a population (local - Clark County, state, national and international)
Data is used to increase improve measurement methodology, evalution intervention outcomes and public policy, and greater understanding of associations between humanbehavior, personal charateristics, environment and health outcomes.
program evaluation
research
Used for local research project re: homeless population
Basic and applied research
Education and academic research.
Research
sustainable community planning and design
to inform policy development, practice change, budgeting and expenses, resource allocation and system performance.
To Develope, Initiate and evaluate programs
research and student projects
to monitor treatment outcomes and satisfaction of client-therapist relationships
peer reviewed research, policy reports
Identify needs of students/famlies attending CCSD at-risk schools
to help the City run more efficiently, targeting who should be targeted so that resources are allocated fairly
Analyzing the impact of our services on the population served, demonstrating the impact of our program to funders and external stakeholders.
response to donors on effectiveness of money given to agencies.
reassessment of programs, grant applications, board knowledge
See above comment.
Quality improvement
research on attitudes regarding a number of issues, including sense of community and belonging, sexuality issues
We use the data to compare our program/work with other programs similar to ours and youth not in any programs
Better planning and targeting of marketing efforts, better programs to at-risk populations
Text Response
for grants
Statewide case management system
To track participants in programs and to determine who we should be providing outreach and education/marketing to.
creation of plans and laws
to track need by zip code, numberr of agency referrals, how many babies are served
To report to the government, to identify areas of need and create new programs, to apply for new grants.
Reporting purposes, speaking events, grants, program enhancement, etc.
Grant reports and annual marketing materials
Grant program tracking, short term impacts, policy development and evaluation, awareness raising, collaboration between entities in the network, driver of strategic planning forlong term operations, and forecasting trends
Grants applications, renewals, county management and elected officials
Reports and grants
donor accountability reports, ROI analysis, program evaluation, needs assessments
Identifying trends in healthcare utilization, quality measures, spending
community and council reporting, State/County/Federal grants, programmatic assessments and measurable outcomes.
Grant Applications, Strategic Planning, Donor Solicitation Materials
Benchmarking, to know level of community impact
Need assessment
To better serve the community
Demonstrate evidence-based practice; reporting; publications
Funding formula for Family Resource Centers
We use data for improvement of instructional practices and strategic decision making
To analyze and evaluate Title I WIA performance - employment and training services
See how well we are doing compared to our peers.
Journal articles
Develop programs, interventions
Assist people find jobs who have disabilities and other challenges to employment
audience and donor analysis
To identify needs for better and more encompassing programs
developing undergraduate research program
Primarily research and for some evaluation and performance improvement
To improve agency and community service systems
needs assessments, write journal articles
Analysis, monitoring and compliance
Performance management and program improvement
To write books and articles.
Planning
research, treatment planning, evaluation
grant reporting
Electronic Medical Records
Evaluating needs in the community, gaps of services, tailor services to population served, grant opportunities
research, publication, presentations at the local and national level.
improve quality of services, demonstrate value of organization
Fundraising and marketing initiatives.
Program reporting; reporting to funders
Financial Aid, Grants, State.Regents Reporting, Academic Scheduling, Registration.
Prioritizing new park development; programming choices; capital infrastructure determination etc.
Total Responses 97
Statistic Value
12. Does your organization share data with the broader community?
1 Yes 65 63%
2 No 25 24%
3 Unsure 13 13%
Total 103
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.50
Variance 0.51
Standard Deviation 0.71
Total Responses 103
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
13. Do you or your organization analyze data using statistical tools?
1 Yes 69 68%
2 No 17 17%
3 Unsure 15 15%
Total 101
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.47
Variance 0.55
Standard Deviation 0.74
Total Responses 101
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
14. Does your organization utilize data to improve programming?
1 Yes 74 72%
2 No 8 8%
3 Unsure 21 20%
Total 103
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.49
Variance 0.66
Standard Deviation 0.81
Total Responses 103
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
15. Are there any gaps or deficiencies in your data collection and/or analysismethods that you would like to see improved upon?
1 Yes (explain): 63 67%
2 No 31 33%
Total 94
Social science librarians to curate data
Need to have data warehouse for local regions
sometimes school district will not share
More comprehensive detail
analytical tools and supports from experts (statistics)
we have no campus plan for who is collecting what data for which purpose and how to apply metadata to it to make it discoverable --
not applicable
we need to learn how to do principle component analysis
it seems random
high quality data about students, at the student level, is difficult to get (validity, missingness)
The data are publicly available but need to be integrated into an easily usable, single database
small sample size, linking individual data to census data
Use of statistical programs and tools would help analyze the data we collect and give it more impact on our policies and practices.
Greater capacity to collect supplemental data from students.
Greater sharing of data between the different health departments in the state
the word "improve programming" is unclear. It assumes a program is already in place and the data is for improvement. Initially I though you were asking about establishing acomputer program. Some of the data I collect is directly related to evaluation of an exiting intervention while other data is exploring the need, evaluating hindrances andenhancers for a successful interventions, and measuring program outcomes.
We are beginning to explore systems mapping and are looking for tools to help with that
Training on analysis, planning phase of assessment needs help as well
At the unit/department level, more information about our students would be helpful (e.g., numbers, progression, when they register, etc.). For academic research, having datafrom non-college student population would be very valuable.
Hospital emergency room wait times
there needs to be a broader base of independent and high quality research related to physical and social measures of resilience
Many
I do not have any project that collecting the community data so I don't have these information. There are some faculties in my school that do but I do not know what they aredoing.
better facilitation of research by university of IRB
response rates
The number of respondents could be increased
I would like the data we gather from partner school districts to integrate better into our internal data system.
we are not using our data or data systems to the fullest; lack of training
cost to have verified by 3rd party limited to every 3 - 5 years, only part of puzzle so hard to weed out true impact of programs
The survey research center we have used in the past was not as efficient as we would have liked.
Not all people are documented and people move a lot. Not always up to date.
Up to date comparative demographic information would be valuable as well as survey support
# Answer Bar Response %
Yes (explain):
working with school district is a challenge - they make it difficult to collect data
More collection/analysis on the value of services offered
Some is voluntary and if it were required we would have more complete data.
The use of Statistical Tools for Measuring Outcomes
more input/participation
tracking inventory
capability to query blind data for meaning statistics
Our own internal ability to produce quality, constumizable GIS maps
Data sharing agreements
How we capture information using our current databases and registration forms/ templates
Sharpen our data collection practices
Need better data collection tools, methods to analyze data, ways to store data to easily report out information. Currently, we primarily use Excel aside from a few otherdatabases related to fundraising and volunteerism.
Which data was available thru the CCSD
Don't know enough about it
Greater community collaboration efforts
current information. Usually the data is several years old.
We are working to collect cleaner data, improve data governance of collected data, improve storage of this data through the use of data warehousing, and improve access todata analysis tools throughout the organization
Access to outside data such as UI wages
more detail and long term analysis
We need to do a better job collecting performance data on our students.
We could provide additional data about community needs through better (more timely and consistent) analysis.
Zip code & county level data
Ability to share by interfacing with other systems
data storage is always a problem
collecting data on participants that utilize multiple services within the organization
The ability to pull more detailed and specific reports by age disease race gender
mixed methods, qualitative methods, and higher statistical analysis training
Data hygiene and communication between multiple databases.
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.33
Variance 0.22
Standard Deviation 0.47
Total Responses 94
Statistic Value
16. Does your organization currently collaborate for community data collectionand analysis with other non-profit or community organizations?
1 Yes 52 53%
2 No 31 31%
3 Not currently, but interested in collaboration 16 16%
Total 99
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.64
Variance 0.56
Standard Deviation 0.75
Total Responses 99
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
17. Please tell us how much you agree with the following statements.
1 Data collection is important to my organization. 3 0 9 21 70 103 4.50
2 I am satisfied with my organization's data practices. 5 18 31 40 8 102 3.27
Min Value 1 1
Max Value 5 5
Mean 4.50 3.27
Variance 0.78 1.01
Standard Deviation 0.88 1.01
Total Responses 103 102
# Question Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Total Responses Mean
Statistic Data collection is important to my organization. I am satisfied with my organization's data practices.
18. Have you or your organization ever applied for an external grant?
1 Yes 171 86%
2 No 27 14%
Total 198
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.14
Variance 0.12
Standard Deviation 0.34
Total Responses 198
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
19. How many grants have you or your organization written in the last twoyears?
1 0 12 7%
2 1-2 43 26%
3 3-5 34 20%
4 5-10 25 15%
5 10+ 52 31%
Total 166
Min Value 1
Max Value 5
Mean 3.37
Variance 1.82
Standard Deviation 1.35
Total Responses 166
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
20. How many grants have you or your organization had awarded in the last twoyears?
1 0 29 18%
2 1-2 54 33%
3 3-5 32 19%
4 5-10 15 9%
5 10+ 35 21%
Total 165
Min Value 1
Max Value 5
Mean 2.84
Variance 1.95
Standard Deviation 1.40
Total Responses 165
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
21. What resources do you use for your grant writing?
1 We have dedicated employee(s) 50 31%
2 We have employee(s) with collateral duties 49 31%
3 We hire a third party 8 5%
4 Other (please specify): 52 33%
Total 159
there is OSR, but nothing specific to our department
I do it all.
Self
Self
I write them myself, or as a Co-PI with another faculty member
All of the above.
Don't know
I write the major grants that support my lab. My students and post-docs write for fellowships or other small grants.
we each write them ourselves
Self
ourselves, though we have support from office of sponsor program for the formatting etc.
no help
Self
existing staff
individuals write their own grants
myself
I write the grants myself, in partnership with either community partners or other UNLV faculty
I did it myself
I've only applied for one particular grant which has a fairly simple process. No resources have been needed.
We use our own resources and personnel.
not sure
my own data based on my work
Ourselves
indidual employees for their own area of expertise
sponsored programs
myself
myself
I write the grants
we do it
I wrote them myself
Faculty write grant applications themselved
Do it myself.
We write the grants ourselves
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
All of the above
Individuals apply for grants and write those
research support staff
I write them myself. The only needed resources are preliminary results from my laboratory, and references from journals obtained through the library.
some employees and some colleagues outside of unlv
Sometimes we use a third party
Mgmt staff assists grant team
Workshops
volunteers/board members
My colleagues and I write our proposals
Professors write their own grant applications
graduate research assistant
All of the above
Third party and collateral employees
I do it
i write my grants
I write the grants
Me
Min Value 1
Max Value 4
Mean 2.39
Variance 1.53
Standard Deviation 1.24
Total Responses 159
Statistic Value
22. If you or your organization use data to conduct research, which datacollection methods are used?
1 Official Documents 71 37%
2 Observations 74 39%
3 Surveys 96 50%
4 Experimental 61 32%
5 Multi-methods Approach 81 42%
6 Other (please specify): 17 9%
7 I/We do not use data to conduct research 33 17%
read legal decisions
i cannot answer this question.
NASA multispectral imagry
Hand collection of publicly available data.
Secondary data and administrative data gathered primarily by governmental organizations
administrative data
focus groups
Instruction assessment/assignment samples
All of the above
ethnography
open houses
third party
online tests, 3rd party evaluation
ethnographic interviews
Unknown
video data
search engines
Min Value 1
Max Value 7
Total Responses 191
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
23. On what topics do you or your program (or department) collect data forresearch?
Academic papers only
psychopathy, depression, personality, emotion
sexuality, parenting, fertility
Conferences
economic development, demographic analysis
Mental health
Educational
Topics related to Teaching and Learning
mental health, behavioral health, integrated health care, caregiving,
None
Biological and evolutionary research
Infrastructure health, environmental conditions, water quality, weather, seismic activity, and many others
Health disparities
Not sure
developmental genetics in model organisms
Various medical conditions
Theater
everything, that's why we are called a UNVERSity
human movement
Bioinformatics
social phenomena
dispute resolution, psychology
education, market data on prices, demand and others. cost data
Pain and spinal manipulation
we collect data for our own faculty research -- and we collect data for UNLV faculty and the community to use for their own research...... all kinds of topics - our research ismostly in gaming -- student learning -- library use and impact ..
I collect data on my field (medieval history). my university collects data on many diverse topics.
geology, physics
air quality, water quality, student feedback
Linguistic needs
none that i know of
Auditor and client communication, Auditor judgment and decision making
motivation, cognition, metacognition, and student demographics as they influence learning outcomes
K-12 Education, government funding of public services (e.g. Criminal justice, juvenile services, social services)
health care
student use of technology
Firm-Level and Intra-Firm Level Data; business formation, performance, social dynamics, behaviors, goal development, strategy, etc.
Economic research
student progress
Health
Arts
medical and dental treatment
Microviology
decision making, memory, perception, attitudes/opinions, prior experiences
Varies
K-12 literacy and English language proficiency
health, public health, health disparities
The majority of data is related to research methodology, epidemiology, physiology, public policy, and intervention outcomes.
engineering
Almost all our projects depend on some type of data creation or colletion and analysis.
Biochemistry
Text Response
responsible environmental behavior, public understanding of science
interpersonal violence, repeated violent interactions, health consequences of nonlethal violence
radiochemistry, environmental chemistry, geochemistry
Satisfaction, useability research, impact of service
Economic development, entrepreneurship, social enterprise
Communication behaviors, health, relationships,
human cognitive processes
related to project management and performance
Special education, teacher preparation, autism, counselor education, teaching english language learners, early childhood education
Information literacy instruction; library material, facility, and service use; S. NV community history; gaming
Health care access and quality; public health, community health
Topics related to dentistry
issues related to sustainability, urban design and planning
safety of children
substance abuse and domestic violence
Not research oriented
Improving relational capacity to reduce teen pregnancy.
Legal and social
materials chemistry
psychotherapy treatment outcomes
Health, Economic Stability, Education, Community Engagement
quality of life, crime, community policing, sustainability, sexual commerce, aging and health
social issues
Academic and non-academic needs of CCSD students
Cultural programs
the effects of epistemological beliefs on learning and cognition
geology, earthquakes
health status, health behaviors, risk factors, characteristics of investigators pursuing health research
I am currently researching faculty governance at universities throughout the world
Emergency response times
a wide variety of questions regarding social issues such as sexuality, sexual commerce, sex trafficking, attitudes to community, aging, safety, policing, culture, economics & jobs
Education, wage, job market, immigration
Age, gender, ethnicity, geography, ticket purchasing input, program attendance input, marketing, education
impact school gardens on STEM, health and community engagement at schools
Income, housing, employment, education, health
Pariticipation in Higher Education Savings Accounts
various
K-12 Education
animal ownership and advocacy
diabetis, COPD
Headcount of persons who utilize our programs and services
Pediatric cancer
Food insecurity, poverty, distance and service access
educational effectiveness, post training employment, event atrtendance, media utilization
Student progression, graduate programming
I collect data on youth, Child Care Subsidy, CACFP, SFSP, populations served, etc.
Children stats Annie Casey, NV State, County, City sites, COC's, hospitals, police, anywhere relevant to topic need
Homelessness
I do not collect data for research.
journalism and media studies
This table has more than 100 rows. Click here to view all responses
Total Responses 131
Statistic Value
24. Would you or your organization be interested in outside assistance withdata collection and analysis?
1 Yes 105 57%
2 No 78 43%
Total 183
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.43
Variance 0.25
Standard Deviation 0.50
Total Responses 183
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
25. Would you or your organization benefit from a center that provides a singlerepository for data across several focus areas within the community?
1 Yes 134 73%
2 No 50 27%
Total 184
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.27
Variance 0.20
Standard Deviation 0.45
Total Responses 184
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
26. Would you or your organization be willing to contribute a small amount offunds to create and maintain a central data repository?
1 Yes 9 5%
2 No 57 31%
3 Unsure 119 64%
Total 185
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 2.59
Variance 0.34
Standard Deviation 0.58
Total Responses 185
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
27. Are you or your organization familiar with the data collection and analysisservices offered by the Community Advanced Data & Research Analysis (CADRA)Lab of UNLV?
1 Yes 28 15%
2 No 157 85%
Total 185
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.85
Variance 0.13
Standard Deviation 0.36
Total Responses 185
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
1. What is your gender?
HEI DemographicsLast Modified: 08/10/2015Filter By: Report Subgroup
1 Male 77 50%
2 Female 74 48%
3 Other (please specify): 0 0%
4 I prefer not to answer 2 1%
Total 153
Min Value 1
Max Value 4
Mean 1.52
Variance 0.33
Standard Deviation 0.57
Total Responses 153
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
2. Which category below includes your age?
1 Younger than 20 years 0 0%
2 21-29 5 3%
3 30-39 36 24%
4 40-49 42 28%
5 50-59 36 24%
6 60 or older 33 22%
Total 152
Min Value 2
Max Value 6
Mean 4.37
Variance 1.35
Standard Deviation 1.16
Total Responses 152
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
3. What is your race?
1 White (Non-Hispanic) 127 84%
2 Black or African-American 5 3%
3 Asian 10 7%
4 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 1 1%
5 Hispanic or Latino 3 2%
7 Other race (please specify): 4 3%
8 I prefer not to answer 5 3%
West Indian-Jamaican
mixed
American Indian
adopted, native american mother, also adopted
Min Value 1
Max Value 8
Total Responses 152
# Answer Bar Response %
Other race (please specify):
Statistic Value
4. Which of the following categories describes the level of education you haveattained?
1 Less than high school 0 0%
2 High school graduate 0 0%
3 Some college but no degree 0 0%
4 Associates degree 0 0%
5 Bachelors degree 2 1%
6 Masters degree 24 16%
7 Doctoral degree 126 83%
Total 152
Min Value 5
Max Value 7
Mean 6.82
Variance 0.18
Standard Deviation 0.42
Total Responses 152
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
5. Which of the following categories best describes your current status?
1 Employed by government 0 0%
4 Other (please specify): 0 0%
5 Employed by private sector 0 0%
6 Employed by university or higher education institution 153 100%
7 Employed by non-profit organization (other than university or higher education institution) 2 1%
8 Currently unemployed 0 0%
9 Retired 0 0%
10 Graduate Student 0 0%
Min Value 6
Max Value 7
Total Responses 153
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
6. Does your organization have current 501(c)(3) status?
1 Yes 2 100%
2 No 0 0%
Total 2
Min Value 1
Max Value 1
Mean 1.00
Variance 0.00
Standard Deviation 0.00
Total Responses 2
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
7. Roughly how many full-time employees work for your organization?
1 1-10 0 0%
2 11-50 0 0%
3 51-200 1 50%
4 201-500 1 50%
5 500+ 0 0%
Total 2
Min Value 3
Max Value 4
Mean 3.50
Variance 0.50
Standard Deviation 0.71
Total Responses 2
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
8. How much money, in U.S. dollars, does your organization raise annually?
I don't know
Total Responses 1
Text Response
Statistic Value
9. Do you or your organization collect community data?
1 Yes 77 52%
2 No 72 48%
Total 149
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.48
Variance 0.25
Standard Deviation 0.50
Total Responses 149
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
10. Please identify what type of data is collected:
Conference evaluations primarily
economic performance data for state and local regions
school student data
primary data on individuals and families and organizations
Personal and health
Don't know exactly
Age/ ticket purchase/ interests
don't know
experimental, observational, economic indices etc.
We are the Libraries - so we collect data from all kinds of organizations -- NGO, governmental, commercial, our center for gaming research collects data related to gamingindustry
I have no idea. i do not personally collect data about my community, nor is my research about my community, but i assume my university does. However, I have no involvementwith this data.
It would have been helpful if you defined "community data". - we collect data on natural background radiation levels
water quality, air quality, student feedback
Social, professional
assessment evaluations
Assessment scores
educational data from classrooms, school administration, families and educational software
Job placement rates of graduates
K-12 education data (spending, demographics, student performance, etc)
historical records documenting the community
Economic data
Census data, public health data
psychological research data - surveys, attitudes, ability measures
Statistics regarding reference questions, as well as circulation data.
CCSD student achievement and language proficiency data.
health data, public health data, demographic data,
dietary and physical activity level data, physological profile data, geographic information system (GIS) data, and others
quantitative and qualitative data
vulnerable segments of society that have had violent interactions, just starting this with data from records housed in several repositories in S. Nevada
Weather and census
Individual- and dyadic-level data primarily. Individuals' behaviors in relationships, people's knowledge of personal, social, and health, and it's effects on their communicationand relationships.
Probably all kinds since my employer is a university, but I don't specifically know.
Health data, BRFS, Hospital inpatient and outpatient visits in Nevada
information related to infrastructure
health
mental health symptoms and satisfactions ratings
survey data
I don't collect this type of information and I'm not sure what type of data is collected but I work at UNLV so I answered yes to the previous question because I am sure peoplehere collect this type of data.
demographic information, attitudes of community members
Health and behavior assessments
Customer data from local casinos and hospitality establishments
educational needs, social needs
Diversity
data on undergraduate research
Both quantitative and qualitative data
I work for a univeristy so this question is not written well as I don't know all of the data that is collected by the entire org. For my program, I collect BMI, Body fat, substance abusehistory, body image, eating disorders, and other similar data.
Data from fieldwork about populations that I write about.
Demographics
protected health information. treatment outcomes. mental health assessment data
Text Response
both quant and qual data is collected from justice institutions (locally, nationally), individuals (national surveys, local surveys), community members (key players/stakeholders),and local non profits.
clinic outcome data
Demographics, educational readiness, educational preferences
Total Responses 52
Statistic Value
11. What do you or your organization use collected data for?
Strategic planning
For research in economic development, demographic and labor market analysis
Research by faculty
We use the data to write peer-review journal articles, issue briefs, reports to funders, and as information for tv and radio interviews.
Providing patient care
i don't collect data but others at the university collect data.
Season selection
don't know
testing hypotheses, building models and validating theories (if not capable of falsifying yet)
making available to users
See above.
research
Analysis of data, report and journal article writing
Research
assessment
Monitor development and progress
educational research
To determine the best way to help graduates obtain jobs
research
to support research and education
Analysis
Public health research and practice
metrics
psychological research
Internal uses (resource allocation, etc.)
Program evaluation and research
To analyze the health of a population (local - Clark County, state, national and international)
Data is used to increase improve measurement methodology, evalution intervention outcomes and public policy, and greater understanding of associations between humanbehavior, personal charateristics, environment and health outcomes.
program evaluation
research
Used for local research project re: homeless population
Basic and applied research
Education and academic research.
Research
sustainable community planning and design
research and student projects
to monitor treatment outcomes and satisfaction of client-therapist relationships
peer reviewed research, policy reports
See above comment.
research on attitudes regarding a number of issues, including sense of community and belonging, sexuality issues
Demonstrate evidence-based practice; reporting; publications
Journal articles
Develop programs, interventions
To identify needs for better and more encompassing programs
developing undergraduate research program
Primarily research and for some evaluation and performance improvement
needs assessments, write journal articles
To write books and articles.
Planning
research, treatment planning, evaluation
research, publication, presentations at the local and national level.
Text Response
improve quality of services, demonstrate value of organization
Financial Aid, Grants, State.Regents Reporting, Academic Scheduling, Registration.
Total Responses 53
Statistic Value
12. Does your organization share data with the broader community?
3 Unsure 9 16%
2 No 15 26%
1 Yes 34 59%
Total 58
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.57
Variance 0.57
Standard Deviation 0.75
Total Responses 58
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
13. Do you or your organization analyze data using statistical tools?
1 Yes 43 75%
2 No 7 12%
3 Unsure 7 12%
Total 57
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.37
Variance 0.49
Standard Deviation 0.70
Total Responses 57
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
14. Does your organization utilize data to improve programming?
1 Yes 34 59%
2 No 4 7%
3 Unsure 20 34%
Total 58
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.76
Variance 0.89
Standard Deviation 0.94
Total Responses 58
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
15. Are there any gaps or deficiencies in your data collection and/or analysismethods that you would like to see improved upon?
1 Yes (explain): 32 60%
2 No 21 40%
Total 53
Social science librarians to curate data
Need to have data warehouse for local regions
sometimes school district will not share
More comprehensive detail
analytical tools and supports from experts (statistics)
we have no campus plan for who is collecting what data for which purpose and how to apply metadata to it to make it discoverable --
not applicable
we need to learn how to do principle component analysis
it seems random
high quality data about students, at the student level, is difficult to get (validity, missingness)
The data are publicly available but need to be integrated into an easily usable, single database
small sample size, linking individual data to census data
Use of statistical programs and tools would help analyze the data we collect and give it more impact on our policies and practices.
Greater capacity to collect supplemental data from students.
Greater sharing of data between the different health departments in the state
the word "improve programming" is unclear. It assumes a program is already in place and the data is for improvement. Initially I though you were asking about establishing acomputer program. Some of the data I collect is directly related to evaluation of an exiting intervention while other data is exploring the need, evaluating hindrances andenhancers for a successful interventions, and measuring program outcomes.
We are beginning to explore systems mapping and are looking for tools to help with that
Training on analysis, planning phase of assessment needs help as well
At the unit/department level, more information about our students would be helpful (e.g., numbers, progression, when they register, etc.). For academic research, having datafrom non-college student population would be very valuable.
Hospital emergency room wait times
there needs to be a broader base of independent and high quality research related to physical and social measures of resilience
I do not have any project that collecting the community data so I don't have these information. There are some faculties in my school that do but I do not know what they aredoing.
better facilitation of research by university of IRB
response rates
The survey research center we have used in the past was not as efficient as we would have liked.
Greater community collaboration efforts
We need to do a better job collecting performance data on our students.
Zip code & county level data
data storage is always a problem
mixed methods, qualitative methods, and higher statistical analysis training
Min Value 1
# Answer Bar Response %
Yes (explain):
Statistic Value
Max Value 2
Mean 1.40
Variance 0.24
Standard Deviation 0.49
Total Responses 53
16. Does your organization currently collaborate for community data collectionand analysis with other non-profit or community organizations?
1 Yes 28 52%
2 No 18 33%
3 Not currently, but interested in collaboration 8 15%
Total 54
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.63
Variance 0.54
Standard Deviation 0.73
Total Responses 54
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
17. Have you or your organization ever applied for an external grant?
1 Yes 112 87%
2 No 17 13%
Total 129
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.13
Variance 0.12
Standard Deviation 0.34
Total Responses 129
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
18. Please tell us how much you agree with the following statements.
1 Data collection is important to my organization. 3.45% 0.00% 13.79% 15.52% 67.24% 58 4.43
2 I am satisfied with my organization's data practices. 5.26% 10.53% 31.58% 43.86% 8.77% 57 3.40
Min Value 1 1
Max Value 5 5
Mean 4.43 3.40
Variance 0.95 0.96
Standard Deviation 0.98 0.98
Total Responses 58 57
# Question Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Total Responses Mean
Statistic Data collection is important to my organization. I am satisfied with my organization's data practices.
19. How many grants have you or your organization written in the last twoyears?
1 0 12 11%
2 1-2 38 35%
3 3-5 23 21%
4 5-10 12 11%
5 10+ 23 21%
Total 108
Min Value 1
Max Value 5
Mean 2.96
Variance 1.77
Standard Deviation 1.33
Total Responses 108
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
20. How many grants have you or your organization had awarded in the last twoyears?
1 0 27 25%
2 1-2 44 41%
3 3-5 20 19%
4 5-10 2 2%
5 10+ 15 14%
Total 108
Min Value 1
Max Value 5
Mean 2.39
Variance 1.62
Standard Deviation 1.27
Total Responses 108
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
21. What resources do you use for your grant writing?
1 We have dedicated employee(s) 26 26%
2 We have employee(s) with collateral duties 27 27%
3 We hire a third party 1 1%
4 Other (please specify): 47 47%
Total 101
there is OSR, but nothing specific to our department
I do it all.
Self
Self
I write them myself, or as a Co-PI with another faculty member
All of the above.
Don't know
I write the major grants that support my lab. My students and post-docs write for fellowships or other small grants.
we each write them ourselves
Self
ourselves, though we have support from office of sponsor program for the formatting etc.
no help
Self
existing staff
individuals write their own grants
myself
I write the grants myself, in partnership with either community partners or other UNLV faculty
I did it myself
I've only applied for one particular grant which has a fairly simple process. No resources have been needed.
We use our own resources and personnel.
not sure
my own data based on my work
Ourselves
sponsored programs
myself
myself
I write the grants
we do it
I wrote them myself
Faculty write grant applications themselved
Do it myself.
We write the grants ourselves
All of the above
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Individuals apply for grants and write those
research support staff
I write them myself. The only needed resources are preliminary results from my laboratory, and references from journals obtained through the library.
some employees and some colleagues outside of unlv
Workshops
My colleagues and I write our proposals
Professors write their own grant applications
graduate research assistant
All of the above
I do it
i write my grants
I write the grants
Me
Min Value 1
Max Value 4
Mean 2.68
Variance 1.68
Standard Deviation 1.30
Total Responses 101
Statistic Value
22. If you or your organization use data to conduct research, which datacollection methods are used?
1 Official Documents 49 40%
2 Observations 54 44%
3 Surveys 68 55%
4 Experimental 55 44%
5 Multi-methods Approach 57 46%
6 Other (please specify): 12 10%
7 I/We do not use data to conduct research 12 10%
read legal decisions
i cannot answer this question.
NASA multispectral imagry
Hand collection of publicly available data.
Secondary data and administrative data gathered primarily by governmental organizations
administrative data
focus groups
Instruction assessment/assignment samples
All of the above
ethnography
ethnographic interviews
video data
Min Value 1
Max Value 7
Total Responses 124
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
23. On what topics do you or your program (or department) collect data forresearch?
Academic papers only
psychopathy, depression, personality, emotion
sexuality, parenting, fertility
Conferences
economic development, demographic analysis
Mental health
Educational
Topics related to Teaching and Learning
mental health, behavioral health, integrated health care, caregiving,
None
Infrastructure health, environmental conditions, water quality, weather, seismic activity, and many others
Health disparities
Not sure
developmental genetics in model organisms
Various medical conditions
Theater
everything, that's why we are called a UNVERSity
human movement
Bioinformatics
social phenomena
dispute resolution, psychology
education, market data on prices, demand and others. cost data
Pain and spinal manipulation
we collect data for our own faculty research -- and we collect data for UNLV faculty and the community to use for their own research...... all kinds of topics - our research ismostly in gaming -- student learning -- library use and impact ..
I collect data on my field (medieval history). my university collects data on many diverse topics.
geology, physics
air quality, water quality, student feedback
Linguistic needs
none that i know of
Auditor and client communication, Auditor judgment and decision making
motivation, cognition, metacognition, and student demographics as they influence learning outcomes
K-12 Education, government funding of public services (e.g. Criminal justice, juvenile services, social services)
health care
student use of technology
Firm-Level and Intra-Firm Level Data; business formation, performance, social dynamics, behaviors, goal development, strategy, etc.
Economic research
student progress
Health
medical and dental treatment
Microviology
decision making, memory, perception, attitudes/opinions, prior experiences
Varies
K-12 literacy and English language proficiency
health, public health, health disparities
The majority of data is related to research methodology, epidemiology, physiology, public policy, and intervention outcomes.
engineering
Almost all our projects depend on some type of data creation or colletion and analysis.
Biochemistry
responsible environmental behavior, public understanding of science
interpersonal violence, repeated violent interactions, health consequences of nonlethal violence
Text Response
radiochemistry, environmental chemistry, geochemistry
Satisfaction, useability research, impact of service
Economic development, entrepreneurship, social enterprise
Communication behaviors, health, relationships,
human cognitive processes
related to project management and performance
Special education, teacher preparation, autism, counselor education, teaching english language learners, early childhood education
Information literacy instruction; library material, facility, and service use; S. NV community history; gaming
Health care access and quality; public health, community health
Topics related to dentistry
issues related to sustainability, urban design and planning
Legal and social
materials chemistry
psychotherapy treatment outcomes
quality of life, crime, community policing, sustainability, sexual commerce, aging and health
social issues
the effects of epistemological beliefs on learning and cognition
geology, earthquakes
health status, health behaviors, risk factors, characteristics of investigators pursuing health research
I am currently researching faculty governance at universities throughout the world
a wide variety of questions regarding social issues such as sexuality, sexual commerce, sex trafficking, attitudes to community, aging, safety, policing, culture, economics & jobs
Student progression, graduate programming
I do not collect data for research.
journalism and media studies
Health; childhood obesity; substance abuse; rural health; nutrition; physical activity
customer behavior
education, special education, early childhood education, English Language Learners, Mental Health, Addictions
science education
Psychology-related areas
undergraduate research
mainly nonprofit and government organizations and student performance data
too many to list for department; nutrition, substance abuse, physical activity, body image, eating pathology for my program
Topics in cultural anthropology.
mental health
Thinking and attitude patterns of K-16 students and UNLV professors.
crime, policing, violence, perceptions of the three, justice system responses to the three, reentry, etc.
my area of research is second language acquisition
Gaming, impact of gaming, hospitality related issues
movement
Sports Related Injuries
Education
Appointment
Rely on institutional research.
neuropsychology, mental illness, substance abuse
Total Responses 94
Statistic Value
24. Would you or your organization be interested in outside assistance withdata collection and analysis?
1 Yes 63 53%
2 No 56 47%
Total 119
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.47
Variance 0.25
Standard Deviation 0.50
Total Responses 119
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
25. Would you or your organization benefit from a center that provides a singlerepository for data across several focus areas within the community?
1 Yes 80 67%
2 No 40 33%
Total 120
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.33
Variance 0.22
Standard Deviation 0.47
Total Responses 120
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
26. Would you or your organization be willing to contribute a small amount offunds to create and maintain a central data repository?
1 Yes 4 3%
2 No 41 34%
3 Unsure 75 63%
Total 120
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 2.59
Variance 0.31
Standard Deviation 0.56
Total Responses 120
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
27. Are you or your organization familiar with the data collection and analysisservices offered by the Community Advanced Data & Research Analysis (CADRA)Lab of UNLV?
1 Yes 17 14%
2 No 104 86%
Total 121
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.86
Variance 0.12
Standard Deviation 0.35
Total Responses 121
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
1. What is your gender?
NPO DemographicsLast Modified: 08/10/2015Filter By: Report Subgroup
1 Male 12 28%
2 Female 31 72%
3 Other (please specify): 0 0%
4 I prefer not to answer 0 0%
Total 43
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.72
Variance 0.21
Standard Deviation 0.45
Total Responses 43
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
2. Which category below includes your age?
1 Younger than 20 years 0 0%
2 21-29 5 11%
3 30-39 6 14%
4 40-49 13 30%
5 50-59 13 30%
6 60 or older 7 16%
Total 44
Min Value 2
Max Value 6
Mean 4.25
Variance 1.49
Standard Deviation 1.22
Total Responses 44
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
3. What is your race?
1 White (Non-Hispanic) 36 82%
2 Black or African-American 2 5%
3 Asian 2 5%
4 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0%
5 Hispanic or Latino 5 11%
7 Other race (please specify): 1 2%
8 I prefer not to answer 0 0%
White/Native American
Min Value 1
Max Value 7
Total Responses 44
# Answer Bar Response %
Other race (please specify):
Statistic Value
4. Which of the following categories describes the level of education you haveattained?
1 Less than high school 0 0%
2 High school graduate 1 2%
3 Some college but no degree 7 16%
4 Associates degree 2 5%
5 Bachelors degree 12 27%
6 Masters degree 20 45%
7 Doctoral degree 2 5%
Total 44
Min Value 2
Max Value 7
Mean 5.11
Variance 1.54
Standard Deviation 1.24
Total Responses 44
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
5. Which of the following categories best describes your current status?
1 Employed by government 0 0%
4 Other (please specify): 0 0%
5 Employed by private sector 0 0%
6 Employed by university or higher education institution 2 5%
7 Employed by non-profit organization (other than university or higher education institution) 44 100%
8 Currently unemployed 0 0%
9 Retired 0 0%
10 Graduate Student 0 0%
Min Value 6
Max Value 7
Total Responses 44
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
6. Does your organization have current 501(c)(3) status?
1 Yes 42 98%
2 No 1 2%
Total 43
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.02
Variance 0.02
Standard Deviation 0.15
Total Responses 43
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
7. Roughly how many full-time employees work for your organization?
1 1-10 13 30%
2 11-50 12 28%
3 51-200 10 23%
4 201-500 5 12%
5 500+ 3 7%
Total 43
Min Value 1
Max Value 5
Mean 2.37
Variance 1.52
Standard Deviation 1.23
Total Responses 43
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
8. How much money, in U.S. dollars, does your organization raise annually?
I don't know
100,000 plus
$1,600,000
0
6,000,000
9 million
1,400,000
$1,000,00-2,000,000
2,475,000
$200000
$500,000
150,000
250000
7,000,000
$1.5 million
1,000,000
$1.2 million
11 million+
800000
13,500,000
$2,000,000
Not sure
$200,000 plus
1,000,000
$12,000,000
$85,000
$28M
$12,000,000
1.3
1,000,000
$3,000,000
1- 1.3 million
Unknown
$2 million
1,500,000
$450,000
$10,000,000
1,3000,000
$30M
Total Responses 39
Text Response
Statistic Value
9. Do you or your organization collect community data?
1 Yes 29 69%
2 No 13 31%
Total 42
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.31
Variance 0.22
Standard Deviation 0.47
Total Responses 42
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
10. Please identify what type of data is collected:
Social economic status of community
Student data (Average Daily Attendance, GPA, Required Parent Conferences, In School Suspensions, Out of School Suspensions)
health and education
program satisfaction, frequency of family reading time
Demographics of zip codes and counties
Ticket holder information, Ed Outreach demographic information
impact at schools
referring agency, client's name, age, zip code, marital status, ethnicity, language spoken, infant's gender, DOB, weight, items needed
demographic, grant and program goals, trends, etc
Informaiton on families and children
Demographics primary but also frequency of services, distance, benefits assessment
Demographics
user demographics, scholastic improvement, post training employment, web traffic, materials loaned
Demographics
Program Usage by individuals; number of people trained and reached through outreach, demographics including sexual orientation and gender identity
Student homeless population
Job Seeker Data, Job Placement and Training Data
demographic
data on clients served, community service needs,
Quantitative
HMIS
diseases of our patients
Demographics, clients served, most requested services, functioning improvement
Demographic data, socio-economic information, wealth/net worth information
Total Responses 24
Text Response
Statistic Value
11. What do you or your organization use collected data for?
For recruitment
Analyzing the impact of our services on the population served, demonstrating the impact of our program to funders and external stakeholders.
response to donors on effectiveness of money given to agencies.
reassessment of programs, grant applications, board knowledge
We use the data to compare our program/work with other programs similar to ours and youth not in any programs
Better planning and targeting of marketing efforts, better programs to at-risk populations
for grants
to track need by zip code, numberr of agency referrals, how many babies are served
Reporting purposes, speaking events, grants, program enhancement, etc.
Grant reports and annual marketing materials
Grant program tracking, short term impacts, policy development and evaluation, awareness raising, collaboration between entities in the network, driver of strategic planning forlong term operations, and forecasting trends
Reports and grants
donor accountability reports, ROI analysis, program evaluation, needs assessments
Grant Applications, Strategic Planning, Donor Solicitation Materials
Benchmarking, to know level of community impact
Need assessment
Assist people find jobs who have disabilities and other challenges to employment
audience and donor analysis
To improve agency and community service systems
Performance management and program improvement
grant reporting
Electronic Medical Records
Evaluating needs in the community, gaps of services, tailor services to population served, grant opportunities
Fundraising and marketing initiatives.
Total Responses 24
Text Response
Statistic Value
12. Does your organization share data with the broader community?
1 Yes 16 64%
2 No 7 28%
3 Unsure 2 8%
Total 25
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.44
Variance 0.42
Standard Deviation 0.65
Total Responses 25
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
13. Do you or your organization analyze data using statistical tools?
1 Yes 11 44%
2 No 7 28%
3 Unsure 7 28%
Total 25
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.84
Variance 0.72
Standard Deviation 0.85
Total Responses 25
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
14. Does your organization utilize data to improve programming?
1 Yes 22 88%
2 No 2 8%
3 Unsure 1 4%
Total 25
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.16
Variance 0.22
Standard Deviation 0.47
Total Responses 25
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
15. Are there any gaps or deficiencies in your data collection and/or analysismethods that you would like to see improved upon?
1 Yes (explain): 19 79%
2 No 5 21%
Total 24
I would like the data we gather from partner school districts to integrate better into our internal data system.
we are not using our data or data systems to the fullest; lack of training
cost to have verified by 3rd party limited to every 3 - 5 years, only part of puzzle so hard to weed out true impact of programs
Not all people are documented and people move a lot. Not always up to date.
Up to date comparative demographic information would be valuable as well as survey support
working with school district is a challenge - they make it difficult to collect data
The use of Statistical Tools for Measuring Outcomes
tracking inventory
capability to query blind data for meaning statistics
Our own internal ability to produce quality, constumizable GIS maps
Sharpen our data collection practices
Need better data collection tools, methods to analyze data, ways to store data to easily report out information. Currently, we primarily use Excel aside from a few otherdatabases related to fundraising and volunteerism.
Which data was available thru the CCSD
more detail and long term analysis
We could provide additional data about community needs through better (more timely and consistent) analysis.
Ability to share by interfacing with other systems
collecting data on participants that utilize multiple services within the organization
The ability to pull more detailed and specific reports by age disease race gender
Data hygiene and communication between multiple databases.
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.21
Variance 0.17
Standard Deviation 0.41
Total Responses 24
# Answer Bar Response %
Yes (explain):
Statistic Value
16. Does your organization currently collaborate for community data collectionand analysis with other non-profit or community organizations?
1 Yes 11 44%
2 No 8 32%
3 Not currently, but interested in collaboration 6 24%
Total 25
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.80
Variance 0.67
Standard Deviation 0.82
Total Responses 25
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
17. Please tell us how much you agree with the following statements.
1 Data collection is important to my organization. 0 0 1 5 19 25 4.72
2 I am satisfied with my organization's data practices. 2 8 4 10 1 25 3.00
Min Value 3 1
Max Value 5 5
Mean 4.72 3.00
Variance 0.29 1.25
Standard Deviation 0.54 1.12
Total Responses 25 25
# Question Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Total Responses Mean
Statistic Data collection is important to my organization. I am satisfied with my organization's data practices.
18. Have you or your organization ever applied for an external grant?
1 Yes 38 97%
2 No 1 3%
Total 39
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.03
Variance 0.03
Standard Deviation 0.16
Total Responses 39
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
19. How many grants have you or your organization written in the last twoyears?
1 0 0 0%
2 1-2 0 0%
3 3-5 6 16%
4 5-10 9 24%
5 10+ 23 61%
Total 38
Min Value 3
Max Value 5
Mean 4.45
Variance 0.58
Standard Deviation 0.76
Total Responses 38
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
20. How many grants have you or your organization had awarded in the last twoyears?
1 0 0 0%
2 1-2 4 11%
3 3-5 8 22%
4 5-10 10 27%
5 10+ 15 41%
Total 37
Min Value 2
Max Value 5
Mean 3.97
Variance 1.08
Standard Deviation 1.04
Total Responses 37
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
21. What resources do you use for your grant writing?
1 We have dedicated employee(s) 18 47%
2 We have employee(s) with collateral duties 13 34%
3 We hire a third party 4 11%
4 Other (please specify): 3 8%
Total 38
indidual employees for their own area of expertise
Mgmt staff assists grant team
volunteers/board members
Min Value 1
Max Value 4
Mean 1.79
Variance 0.87
Standard Deviation 0.93
Total Responses 38
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
22. If you or your organization use data to conduct research, which datacollection methods are used?
1 Official Documents 9 24%
2 Observations 11 29%
3 Surveys 14 37%
4 Experimental 2 5%
5 Multi-methods Approach 15 39%
6 Other (please specify): 3 8%
7 I/We do not use data to conduct research 15 39%
third party
online tests, 3rd party evaluation
Unknown
Min Value 1
Max Value 7
Total Responses 38
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
23. On what topics do you or your program (or department) collect data forresearch?
Arts
Improving relational capacity to reduce teen pregnancy.
Health, Economic Stability, Education, Community Engagement
Education, wage, job market, immigration
Age, gender, ethnicity, geography, ticket purchasing input, program attendance input, marketing, education
impact school gardens on STEM, health and community engagement at schools
Income, housing, employment, education, health
K-12 Education
animal ownership and advocacy
Headcount of persons who utilize our programs and services
Pediatric cancer
Food insecurity, poverty, distance and service access
educational effectiveness, post training employment, event atrtendance, media utilization
Children stats Annie Casey, NV State, County, City sites, COC's, hospitals, police, anywhere relevant to topic need
Homelessness
Television audiences, community needs, educational needs
Employment Statistics, Job Assistance programs, Veteran population demographics, Job Availability,
numerous
nutrition, employment, homelessness, seniors, health
Unknown
healthcare
marketing trends, purchasing/fundraising trends and demographics
Total Responses 22
Text Response
Statistic Value
24. Would you or your organization be interested in outside assistance withdata collection and analysis?
1 Yes 27 71%
2 No 11 29%
Total 38
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.29
Variance 0.21
Standard Deviation 0.46
Total Responses 38
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
25. Would you or your organization benefit from a center that provides a singlerepository for data across several focus areas within the community?
1 Yes 32 86%
2 No 5 14%
Total 37
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.14
Variance 0.12
Standard Deviation 0.35
Total Responses 37
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
26. Would you or your organization be willing to contribute a small amount offunds to create and maintain a central data repository?
1 Yes 4 11%
2 No 9 24%
3 Unsure 25 66%
Total 38
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 2.55
Variance 0.47
Standard Deviation 0.69
Total Responses 38
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
27. Are you or your organization familiar with the data collection and analysisservices offered by the Community Advanced Data & Research Analysis (CADRA)Lab of UNLV?
1 Yes 7 18%
2 No 31 82%
Total 38
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.82
Variance 0.15
Standard Deviation 0.39
Total Responses 38
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
1. What is your gender?
Public Sector DemographicsLast Modified: 08/10/2015Filter By: Report Subgroup
1 Male 6 26%
2 Female 17 74%
3 Other (please specify): 0 0%
4 I prefer not to answer 0 0%
Total 23
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.74
Variance 0.20
Standard Deviation 0.45
Total Responses 23
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
2. Which category below includes your age?
1 Younger than 20 years 0 0%
2 21-29 0 0%
3 30-39 9 39%
4 40-49 9 39%
5 50-59 2 9%
6 60 or older 3 13%
Total 23
Min Value 3
Max Value 6
Mean 3.96
Variance 1.04
Standard Deviation 1.02
Total Responses 23
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
3. What is your race?
1 White (Non-Hispanic) 14 61%
2 Black or African-American 1 4%
3 Asian 2 9%
4 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0%
5 Hispanic or Latino 4 17%
7 Other race (please specify): 0 0%
8 I prefer not to answer 2 9%
Min Value 1
Max Value 8
Total Responses 23
# Answer Bar Response %
Other race (please specify):
Statistic Value
4. Which of the following categories describes the level of education you haveattained?
1 Less than high school 0 0%
2 High school graduate 0 0%
3 Some college but no degree 0 0%
4 Associates degree 2 9%
5 Bachelors degree 5 22%
6 Masters degree 14 61%
7 Doctoral degree 2 9%
Total 23
Min Value 4
Max Value 7
Mean 5.70
Variance 0.58
Standard Deviation 0.76
Total Responses 23
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
5. Which of the following categories best describes your current status?
1 Employed by government 23 100%
4 Other (please specify): 0 0%
5 Employed by private sector 0 0%
6 Employed by university or higher education institution 0 0%
7 Employed by non-profit organization (other than university or higher education institution) 0 0%
8 Currently unemployed 0 0%
9 Retired 0 0%
10 Graduate Student 0 0%
Min Value 1
Max Value 1
Total Responses 23
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
6. Does your organization have current 501(c)(3) status?
1 Yes 0 0%
2 No 0 0%
Total 0
Min Value -
Max Value -
Mean 0.00
Variance 0.00
Standard Deviation 0.00
Total Responses 0
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
7. Roughly how many full-time employees work for your organization?
1 1-10 0 0%
2 11-50 0 0%
3 51-200 0 0%
4 201-500 0 0%
5 500+ 0 0%
Total 0
Min Value -
Max Value -
Mean 0.00
Variance 0.00
Standard Deviation 0.00
Total Responses 0
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
8. How much money, in U.S. dollars, does your organization raise annually?
Total Responses 0
Text Response
Statistic Value
9. Do you or your organization collect community data?
1 Yes 18 78%
2 No 5 22%
Total 23
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.22
Variance 0.18
Standard Deviation 0.42
Total Responses 23
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
10. Please identify what type of data is collected:
qualitative level (case reviews, user experiences/perceptions) and quantitative, counts of system/ resource use, youth provided services, demographics, duration of servicedelivery etc.
Health and Injury data
The focus of our data collection is education-centric
demographics of all types
Mainly consumer demographics (gender, age, ethnicity, poverty status, etc) and service units
Information on program participants such as age, education level attained, ethnicity, etc.
Ethnicity, Race, poberty level, encounters, type of insurance, per diagnosis e.g. diabetes, prostate cancer, HTN, among others
Chronically homeless individuals/familes, thosed housed and in services, case management services, individual individuals/families that recieve general assistance
Community data, various populations, various demographics
Statistics
Population in zip codes, % of people in those zip codes who live below poverty level, number of childre (birth - 18 y.o.) who live in the zip codes.
Student achievement data
Demographics, employment, barriers to employment, training
Demograhics, eligibility determination and service provision
Resident needs assessments; community demographics;
Total Responses 15
Text Response
Statistic Value
11. What do you or your organization use collected data for?
to inform policy development, practice change, budgeting and expenses, resource allocation and system performance.
To Develope, Initiate and evaluate programs
Identify needs of students/famlies attending CCSD at-risk schools
to help the City run more efficiently, targeting who should be targeted so that resources are allocated fairly
Statewide case management system
To track participants in programs and to determine who we should be providing outreach and education/marketing to.
creation of plans and laws
To report to the government, to identify areas of need and create new programs, to apply for new grants.
Grants applications, renewals, county management and elected officials
community and council reporting, State/County/Federal grants, programmatic assessments and measurable outcomes.
To better serve the community
Funding formula for Family Resource Centers
We use data for improvement of instructional practices and strategic decision making
To analyze and evaluate Title I WIA performance - employment and training services
Analysis, monitoring and compliance
Prioritizing new park development; programming choices; capital infrastructure determination etc.
Total Responses 16
Text Response
Statistic Value
12. Does your organization share data with the broader community?
1 Yes 13 81%
2 No 2 13%
3 Unsure 1 6%
Total 16
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.25
Variance 0.33
Standard Deviation 0.58
Total Responses 16
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
13. Do you or your organization analyze data using statistical tools?
1 Yes 11 73%
2 No 3 20%
3 Unsure 1 7%
Total 15
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.33
Variance 0.38
Standard Deviation 0.62
Total Responses 15
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
14. Does your organization utilize data to improve programming?
1 Yes 15 94%
2 No 1 6%
3 Unsure 0 0%
Total 16
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.06
Variance 0.06
Standard Deviation 0.25
Total Responses 16
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
15. Are there any gaps or deficiencies in your data collection and/or analysismethods that you would like to see improved upon?
1 Yes (explain): 11 85%
2 No 2 15%
Total 13
Many
The number of respondents could be increased
More collection/analysis on the value of services offered
Some is voluntary and if it were required we would have more complete data.
more input/participation
Data sharing agreements
How we capture information using our current databases and registration forms/ templates
Don't know enough about it
current information. Usually the data is several years old.
We are working to collect cleaner data, improve data governance of collected data, improve storage of this data through the use of data warehousing, and improve access todata analysis tools throughout the organization
Access to outside data such as UI wages
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.15
Variance 0.14
Standard Deviation 0.38
Total Responses 13
# Answer Bar Response %
Yes (explain):
Statistic Value
16. Does your organization currently collaborate for community data collectionand analysis with other non-profit or community organizations?
1 Yes 12 75%
2 No 2 13%
3 Not currently, but interested in collaboration 2 13%
Total 16
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.38
Variance 0.52
Standard Deviation 0.72
Total Responses 16
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
17. Please tell us how much you agree with the following statements.
1 Data collection is important to my organization. 1 0 0 5 10 16 4.44
2 I am satisfied with my organization's data practices. 0 4 8 3 1 16 3.06
Min Value 1 2
Max Value 5 5
Mean 4.44 3.06
Variance 1.06 0.73
Standard Deviation 1.03 0.85
Total Responses 16 16
# Question Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Total Responses Mean
Statistic Data collection is important to my organization. I am satisfied with my organization's data practices.
18. Have you or your organization ever applied for an external grant?
1 Yes 17 81%
2 No 4 19%
Total 21
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.19
Variance 0.16
Standard Deviation 0.40
Total Responses 21
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
19. How many grants have you or your organization written in the last twoyears?
1 0 0 0%
2 1-2 4 25%
3 3-5 6 38%
4 5-10 3 19%
5 10+ 3 19%
Total 16
Min Value 2
Max Value 5
Mean 3.31
Variance 1.16
Standard Deviation 1.08
Total Responses 16
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
20. How many grants have you or your organization had awarded in the last twoyears?
1 0 2 13%
2 1-2 5 31%
3 3-5 4 25%
4 5-10 2 13%
5 10+ 3 19%
Total 16
Min Value 1
Max Value 5
Mean 2.94
Variance 1.80
Standard Deviation 1.34
Total Responses 16
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
21. What resources do you use for your grant writing?
1 We have dedicated employee(s) 3 19%
2 We have employee(s) with collateral duties 8 50%
3 We hire a third party 3 19%
4 Other (please specify): 2 13%
Total 16
Sometimes we use a third party
Third party and collateral employees
Min Value 1
Max Value 4
Mean 2.25
Variance 0.87
Standard Deviation 0.93
Total Responses 16
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
22. If you or your organization use data to conduct research, which datacollection methods are used?
1 Official Documents 9 45%
2 Observations 4 20%
3 Surveys 12 60%
4 Experimental 2 10%
5 Multi-methods Approach 7 35%
6 Other (please specify): 1 5%
7 I/We do not use data to conduct research 4 20%
open houses
Min Value 1
Max Value 7
Total Responses 20
# Answer Bar Response %
Other (please specify):
Statistic Value
23. On what topics do you or your program (or department) collect data forresearch?
Biological and evolutionary research
safety of children
Not research oriented
Academic and non-academic needs of CCSD students
Cultural programs
Pariticipation in Higher Education Savings Accounts
various
diabetis, COPD
I collect data on youth, Child Care Subsidy, CACFP, SFSP, populations served, etc.
citizen satisfaction
program satisfaction, training objectives
Total Responses 11
Text Response
Statistic Value
24. Would you or your organization be interested in outside assistance withdata collection and analysis?
1 Yes 14 70%
2 No 6 30%
Total 20
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.30
Variance 0.22
Standard Deviation 0.47
Total Responses 20
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
25. Would you or your organization benefit from a center that provides a singlerepository for data across several focus areas within the community?
1 Yes 18 90%
2 No 2 10%
Total 20
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.10
Variance 0.09
Standard Deviation 0.31
Total Responses 20
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
26. Would you or your organization be willing to contribute a small amount offunds to create and maintain a central data repository?
1 Yes 1 5%
2 No 5 25%
3 Unsure 14 70%
Total 20
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 2.65
Variance 0.34
Standard Deviation 0.59
Total Responses 20
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
27. Are you or your organization familiar with the data collection and analysisservices offered by the Community Advanced Data & Research Analysis (CADRA)Lab of UNLV?
1 Yes 2 11%
2 No 17 89%
Total 19
Min Value 1
Max Value 2
Mean 1.89
Variance 0.10
Standard Deviation 0.32
Total Responses 19
# Answer Bar Response %
Statistic Value
PROGRAM EVALUATION OF CADRA PROJECT 197
Appendix B – Qualitative Interview Matrix
QuestionsCommunity Advanced Data &
Research Analysis Project, UNLVUniversity of Washington DataLab UC Berkeley D‐Lab Princeton University Data & Statistical Services (DSS) Lab University of Tennessee Census State Data Center
Ball State University CBER Data Center
Penn State Social Capital Index Minnesota Population Center
1) How long has the program been in operation?
Since April 2015
The D‐Lab opened its doors in April 2013. Prior to opening its doors, there was a fairly lengthy (multi‐year) design process, and the D‐Lab folded in some existing programs that provided and supported data access and research.
50 YearsThe State Data Center program started in 1978 (see above) and the Center for Business and Economic Research (CBER) at UT, Knoxville, has been the lead agency since 1980.
Established in the early 1970s in response to a research initiative by the Cooperative State Research Service‐‐USDA (Title V of the Rural Development Act of 1972 added extension activities to the Centers' function.) The Northeast Center was moved from Cornell to Penn State in 1985.
The Minnesota Population Center (MPC) was established in March 2000 by founding collaborators from four colleges: John Adams (Geography); Dennis Ahlburg (Industrial Relations Center); Lynn Blewett (Health Services Research); Deborah Levison (Public Affairs); and Steven Ruggles (History). IPUMS began in 1993. The MPC is an interdisciplinary center hosting new projects and new ideas for individuals who share interest in population funding.
2) What is your focus area? What type of services are available? Who is your main audience?
Grant Writing, Non‐profit Audits, Data Mining
We have foci in training (methods, tools, data, campus resources), consulting (research questions), community‐building (working groups, cross‐unit development meetings), computing infrastructure (local, standard images, cloud), and data (public use, restricted use). We support graduate students (primary audience), faculty, staff, and researchers at centers.
Social science data and statistics though we assist researchers in the sciences and humanities also. Assist researchers with locating appropriate data, preparing restricted data plans, understanding methodology, assist with getting ready for statistical packages, assist with the various statistical packages (Stata, R, SPSS, SAS, Matlab), assist with determining proper statistical methods to use
Our main audience are the data users (of all kinds). The services we provide are to the Census, to our affiliates, and to data users across the state. We provide:•technical assistance on Census data analysis and mapping, •efficient access to Census Bureau data and data products, including timely data summaries, research, and statistical reports, •user‐training workshops and conferences on all aspects of demographic data to a broad range of users, •a State Data Center website (http://tndata.utk.edu), •an E‐newsletter•service as the primary contact for data users who require demographic or economic data for Tennessee, its counties, cities, tracts, blocks and zip code areas. •serves as the official Federal‐State Population Estimates Cooperative representative to the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Division to include data gathering, estimates review and dissemination.
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development believes that small towns and rural places are the basic building blocks of rural society, and, in the context of a global society, they are becoming increasingly complex and multi‐dimensional, resulting in an ever increasing number of public issues needing resolution. The Center recognizes that individuals, the foundation of these rural communities, are capable of growth, development and change, and that rural society can be enhanced by increasing the individual, organizational, and problem‐solving knowledge and skills of its residents. Finally, the Northeast Center believes that creating a shared vision for the future of sustainable communities requires democratic participation.
Focus on Social Sciences & Health and Data
Audience is the University Community ‐ Students, Faculty
3) Who are your internal and external stakeholders? Do you have any strategic partnerships? If so, with who? Public or Private?
Internal ‐ Faculty Researchers, Graduate Students
External ‐ Applied Analysis
Internal (campus) stakeholders include the professional schools, Letters & Sciences, campus IT, and the Library. External stakeholders/partners are limited at this time, but include the Census Bureau.
We are a private university. Resources restricted to our own researchers. Informal partnerships with GIS (another part of the library system), Library's Systems Department (they manage and maintain the many servers), Office of Population Research Data Archive (largely informational in terms of acquisitions), and the Center for Health & Well Being Data Archive (we are in the process of taking over all their nonrestricted data)
The TN SDC is a partnership between the State of Tennessee and the US Census Bureau.
The Northeast Center is administered by a joint agreement between USDA and the site institution operating for the Extension Service and the Experiment Station in the region. Major core funding comes from the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) ‐ and the region's land‐grant universities. Increasingly, other federal and state agencies, private foundations, and public interests contribute funding in support of special programs
Internal stakeholders include Faculty, Students, and Staff.
External stakeholders inlude US Census Bureau's National Statistical Office
4) How is the program funded? Can you describe your early funding structure?
By writing itself into grants
Initial funding came from four sources: private gifts (used primarily for space renovation), central campus startup funds (3 years), L&S funding (ongoing), and voluntary annual common good support from deans of the professional schools and academic departments.
A regular line in the library budget (staff, software, collections, etc.) Was part of the former Computing Center (now OIT) until 1995 when it moved into the Library.
We are funded through the TN Department of Finance & Administration.
Major core funding comes from the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service and the region's land‐grant universities. Increasingly, other federal and state agencies, private foundations, and public interests contribute funding in support of special programs.
Infrastructure Projects are federally funded and have an advisory board. Some University funding comes from the Office of the VP for Research.
5) Do you provide assistance in the writing of grants? If so, about how many per year?
Yes, N/AWe provide training and workshops in grant writing directed toward specific funders (e.g. NIH, NSF).
No No YesProgram development grants support for affiliated research. Nearly 30 grants written in 2014.
6) Do you work with the non‐profit community? If so, do you assist them with writing grants?
Yes, Anticipated yes No No No No No
7) What is your program structure? How many staffers? Are they Salaried? Volunteers? Graduate Assistants?
Several Faculty at UNLV, Part time employee of local NPO, Graduate Assistants
Staff include a faculty director (part‐time), executive director (full‐time), academic coordinator (part‐time), data archivist (part‐time), IT specialist (full‐time), and applied software/tool developers (2 x part‐time). We also employ graduate student and staff as consultants (approximately 15‐20 per semester, 3‐5 hours/week), workshop presenters (15‐20 per semester), and GSR operational staff (usually 5‐7 half‐time). All are paid.
3 full time librarians; 2 full time statistical consultants; 1/2 FTE support staff member; 40 hours Graduate Assistants per week. All are paid. No volunteers. While not part of DSS, we receive assistance from Systems for server support; time from a high level cataloger for cataloging of microdata; and several other librarians also help with finding data
The Census disseminates data to me and I pass along to the affiliates and/or the public.
There are 19 affiliates in the state of TN (http://tndata.utk.edu/sdcaffiliates.htm) that work with me as a small portion of their regular jobs. I’m not sure if they are paid as an affiliate or if they volunteer for this. I imagine the 19 have different arrangements. They assist me big time! They know what is happening in their respective communities and relay that information to me.
A board of directors is composed of administrators and faculty from the institutions, representatives of NIFA, and the Economic Research Service (ERS) ‐‐USDA, and representatives from public and private agencies and organizations establishes policies and programming emphases.
Staff consists of a program director, four administrative staffers, two postdoctoral scholars, and five graduate assistants.
168 staff ‐ Infrastructure awards by grants, 75 of which are non‐students. (i.e. research staff, software developers)
6‐7 University Funded Employees.
8) What methods are used to raise awareness of your program?
In progressEmail newsletters, departmental mailing lists, participation in meetings and projects, facebook, twitter, website.
We can't keep up with demand so not a lot of promotion. We are very heavily used. We do regular classes.
We have an annual data users conference as well as other workshops across the state to help get data users be more efficient and more aware of what the Census is working on and what data is available. Starting this year, we are pushing social media more than before. We have a TN SDC twitter account, TN SDC facebook account, TN SDC website, TN SDC E‐newsletter, TN SDC listserv, and I’ve got linked in to communicate with other SDC leads. Press releases are another way to get information out. One of the perks of being housed at a University is that we can use the UTK communications department to do a press release when something exciting is released by the Census and tell why it is important/what happened in our state.
Assists Northeast states in responding to rural development needs.Initiates and facilitates workshops and conferences on current rural development issues.Provides grant to support outcome focused activities.Initiates and coordinates networking among rural development partners.Produces and distributes research and educational materials through newsletters, annual reports, other publications, and its web page.
Academic researchers exhibit at special events for professional societies.
Articles get cited using MPC data.
University hosted publicized events and data workshops.
9) How would you assess the data literacy in your community?
Poor, which is why the need was established for CADRA in the first place
Varies – we emphasize openness to researchers at all levels (IOKN2K! – It’s OK Not to Know!) – but it is a big community.
Among the social sciences extremely high. Economics, Finance, Politics and Sociology are extremely quantitative departments. Public policy becoming increasingly so. Sciences less so (largely lab focused); humanities increasing but low.
At the moment, this is hard for me to answer. Since I am new to this job, I am not aware of how data literate the community is. This also depends on what you mean by “community”. Since I’m at a University in a research department, I’m surrounded by very literate folks. Further than that is hard for me to say. I would have a better idea after I get through my first workshop or conference.
We provide workshops and conferences that are designed to aid the community in accessing the data. We are also trying to get the word out that the TN SDC exists as a resource for people to come to with questions.
Must have high data literacy to use interface. Target audience are research staff and student researchers who are familiar with data and queries for the system's interface.
10) What advice or lessons learned would you give to a University beginning implementation of a Community Assessment and Data Analysis lab?
N/A
Build partnerships with faculty and listen to their needs. Rely on graduate students heavily – they are more in tune with needs and frustrations, they are eager to help other graduate students, they bring lots of energy, and they have networks you can use for offering and building services around. Don’t reinvent wheels – collaborate with campus partners. Build in feedback and evaluation mechanisms while building your program. Create buzz, but try not to over‐promise. Accept failures, learn, cut your losses and move on.
Focus on your actual university not the trends out there. Don't jump on band wagons without seeing what is really needed. Have subject experts that understand the actual fields they represent (economics, politics, sociology, etc.). Don't expect one person to know all data content and multiple statistical packages. Take advantage of graduate students knowledge. Attend the biennial summer workshop at ICPSR on managing a social science data service.
N/APay attention to mission. Pay what is necessary for quality employees. Trickle‐up good ideas. Take energy and successes and build off of them.
11) How do you measure data needs and type of data needed?
Via customers and clients that request CADRA services
By working directly with students and faculty. By being an expert in one's subject area to know what is out there and possible.
We keep a record of the data requests that come in. The affiliates also keep me informed with what people need in their communities.
Based on grants received and professional research staff needs.
Qualitative Interview Comparison Matrix