WENDY SEDLAK AND GERRI SPILKA

OMG CENTER FOR COLLABORATIVE LEARNING

AND A

NETWORKED APPROACH

NEW CONNECTIONS

1

The OMG Center for Collaborative Learning is an independent, nonprofit research and consulting organization based in Philadelphia. OMG applies the principles of action research, organizational learning, and collaborative planning in a variety of organizational settings. Formally established in

1988, the Center has maintained a focus on public and urban policy issues. A significant portion of OMG’s work examines national-level demonstrations that include multiple sites and employ multi-dimensional strategies to affect systemic change.

2 Introduction

3 ASocialNetworkAnalysisConvening:ThreeCaseStudies

4 LessonsLearned

8 Conclusion

CONTENTS

ABOUT THE OMG CENTER

The case study research illustrated in this guide was generously supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

OMGCenterforCollaborativeLearning1528WalnutStreet,Suite805/Philadelphia,PA19102215-732-2200/www.omgcenter.org

32

T’S NOT WHAT YOU KNOW, BUT WHO YOU

KNOW.”Thismantrarepeatsoverandoveragaininavarietyofcircumstancesandhasevengreaterpowertodayduetothebatteryofcommunicationtechnologiesthatexist.Whenpeople

gotolookforanewjoboranewdentist,theyregularlyturntofamilymembers,currentandpastcolleagues,neighbors,friends,and,morerecently,TwitterorFacebookaccounts.Theseconnectionsoftenresultinenhancedsocialandeconomicopportunitiesforboththepeopleandthecommunitiestheyrepresent.Thissamelogicholdstrueinphilanthropicinitiatives.Fundersunderstandnotonlythesignificanceofprovidingfundsandexpertise,butalsotheimportanceofconnectingpeopleandorganizationstoachievesocialchange.

ShortlyafterbeginningtoworkattheRobertWoodJohnsonFoundation(RWJF),DebraPérez,aProgramOfficerattheFoundation,sharedherideasaboutpromotingdiversityinRWJFprogrammingwithmembersoftheFoundation’sExecutiveGroup.Dr.PérezhadrecentlycompletedherdoctorateandbelievedthatanewprogramfocusedonmakingnewconnectionsbetweenRWJFandresearchersandconsultantsfromunderrepresentedgroupscouldbemutuallybeneficialtojuniorinvestigators,moreseniorconsultants,aswellastheFoundation.Throughobservationof,andpersonalexperiencewithin,highereducationandphilanthropy,Dr.Pérezrecognizedthattalentedpeoplefromunderrepresentedcommunitiesareoftenisolatedintheirearly-ormid-careerpathwaysandoverlookedforfunding.Asaresult,theNewConnectionsprogramwasbornandlaunchedin2005.

NewConnectionsisanationalprogramadministeredwithinRWJF’sBuildingHumanCapitalportfoliothatworkstodevelopandretainadiverse,well-trainedleadershipandworkforceinhealthandhealthcaretomeettheneedsofallAmericans.NewConnectionsisdesignedtoexpandthediversityofperspectivesthatinformRWJFprogramstrategyandintroducenewresearchersandscholarstotheFoundation,aswellastoincreasetheFoundation’sexposuretoresearchersandexpertsthatrepresenthistoricallyunderrepresentedresearchcommunities.Asapartofthiswork,RWJFisevaluatingtheimpactofparticipationinNewConnectionsongrantees’careerdevelopmentandonthenatureofgrantee-RWJFrelationships.NewConnectionswillusesocialnetworkanalysis(SNA)aspartofitsevaluation

toprovideinsightintowhichaspectsoftheprogramdesignmightleadtonewandstrongerconnections.

WhiletheassessmentofhumancapitaldevelopmentamonggranteesisfamiliarterritoryfortheFoundationandhasbeenexploredthroughtraditionalquantitativeandqualitativemethodologies,evaluatingthedevelopmentofsocialnetworksraisestheneedtoexplorenewmethodologies.SNAisoneofthevariousapproachesbeingusedforthispurpose.TheFoundationhasalreadycommissionedseveralevaluationsthatuseSNAtodescribethenatureandusesofnetworksoffellows,scholars,andalumni,andtoimproveitsunderstandingofavarietyofhealthandhealthcarephenomena.

However,Dr.PérezandothersontheHumanCapitalteamrealizedthemethodologyhasbeenusedinconsistentlyandwithoutaclearunderstandingofthecostsandbenefitsinvolved.Sometimesthemethodologyhasbeensoundandothertimesithasbeenusedinappropriately.Whenreviewingproposals,ithasbeendifficulttodetermineifSNAisanappropriatemethodologygiventhemodelandavailableresourcesandwhenadifferentmethodologymightbebetter.

Socialnetworkanalysiscanbeausefulmethodologyatmultiplestagesofaprojectandprovidebothformativeandsummativeinformation.Inparticular,SNAcanhelpfundersunderstandtheflowofinformationandinnovationthroughanetwork,testtheeffectivenessofcollaborations,andgaugetheextenttowhichnetworksarelikelytobesustainedbeyondthelifeofaprogram.Thisarticlehighlightssomeoftheearlylessonslearned,considerationsofwhentousesocialnetworkanalysisasanevaluationtool,andbenefitsandchallengestothisparticularmethodology.

“I

1Wellman,Barry.“NetworkAnalysis:SomeBasicPrinciples.”Sociological Theory1(1983):155-200.

RECENTLY RWJF HAS RECOGNIZEDthatthenetworksithashelpedcreate,andtheincreaseininformationflowingbetweenpeopleandorganizations,signifiesanimportantoutcomeinandofitself.TheFoundationwouldliketodigalittledeeperintheevaluationcomponentofitsworktounderstandwhichnetworkingstrategieshaveprovensuccessfulandwhichhavebeenineffective.

RWJFcanthenelevatethesuccessfulstrategiestoultimatelyimprovegrantmakingandprogramming,whichinturnwillimpacttheoverallmissionoftheFoundationtoimprovehealthandhealthcareforallAmericans.

DuetotheincreasedinterestinsocialnetworksandSNAasameansofimprovingevaluationatRWJF,anumberofSNAevaluationsareplannedoverthenextfewyears.Theexpectationisthattheseevaluationswillshedlightoneffectivewaysofnetworkingandeffectivesocialnetworks.Tobuildfurtherunderstandingofthismethodology,theFoundationheldaone-dayconveningonSNA.AgroupofProgramOfficersfromtheHumanCapitalteamatRWJFandrepresentativesfromseveralofitsNationalProgramOfficesgatheredinPrinceton,NewJersey,tolearnhowSNAcouldbeusedinthedesign,evaluation,andimprovementofprogramsthat—implicitlyorexplicitly—contributetothedevelopmentofsocialcapital.

Threecasestudieswereusedasthebackboneoftheconvening.SpeakerspresentedanddiscussedthesecasestudiestohelpstimulatethinkingaroundthecurrentandpotentialapplicationsofSNAinevaluation.TwocasesconsistedofcompletedorongoingevaluationsthatemploySNAmethodologies.TheLaddertoLeadership(LTL)evaluationisgatheringongoingnetworkdatausingapre-andpost-testdesigntocomparehowleaders’networkschangeovertime.TheStateHealthLeadershipInitiative(SHLI)evaluationlookedattheimpactoftheinitiative’snetworkingeffortsontheaccesstonewknowledgeamongstatehealthofficials.In

ordertoexploreavarietyofperspectivesonSNAapplicationstothesecases,thediscussantpanelsforeachofthesetwocasesincludedthreedifferentstakeholders:1)practitionersorprogramleaderswhohaveusedSNAasaprogramevaluationtool;2)funderswhosupportsocialcapitaldevelopmentthroughtheirstrategicinvestmentsandwhofundevaluationsthatemploySNAmethodologies;and3)SNAresearchers.

Thethirdcase,theNewConnectionsprogram,hasnotyetbeenevaluated,butakeycomponentofitsdesign,whichreliesonmentoringandnetworking,suggestsSNAcouldbeanappropriatemethodology.ThreeSNAresearcherswereaskedtoreflectonthevalueNewConnectionscouldobtainfromusingSNA.Theywerealsoaskedtosuggestthebestwaytocapturetheimpactofthisprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,SNAmethodologies.

BelowaresomeoftheearlylessonslearnedandconsiderationsaroundtheuseofSNAinprogramevaluation.ExamplesfromLTLandSHLIareusedtohighlightsomeofthemainfindings.

GOALS OF CONVENING:

To expose participants to actual applications of SNA

Understand the strengths and shortcomings of the SNA methodology

Introduce new knowledge about when to use SNA

Understand how SNA studies can improve grantmaking and program impact and effectiveness

SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS refers to a body of quantitative methodologies based upon graph theory, and matrix mathematics applied to the study of social, communal, communication, and transactional relations. Network analysis provides the tools to structurally and objectively quantify the characteristics of a network at the individual, group, and network levels. SNA can empirically identify the roles and advantages of individuals within the network, and provide graphical images of the network’s structure.1

INTRODUCTION A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS CONVENING: Three Case Studies

5

WHO’S DRIVING THIS THING? PROGRAM THEORY TO DRIVE METHODOLOGY

Aprimarythemeraisedduringtheconveningwastheimportanceoftheprogram’stheoryofchangeorlogicmodelindeterminingwhethersocialnetworkanalysisisanappropriateevaluationmethodand,ifso,whatprogramoutcomesitcanmeasure.Forexample,buildingrelationships,includingincreasingeffectivecollaborationandpeersupport,isanoutcomesharedbytwooftheprogramshighlightedattheconvening.ResearchersandpractitionershadtheopportunitytolearnaboutusingSNA—measuringthestrengthoftiesanddocumentingtheresourcesthatpassthroughanetwork—andhowtoidentifyifandwhenSNAisanappropriatemethodologicalchoice.

Discussantsagreedthatthereisnoformulaicnetworkstructureforwhichallprogramsshouldstrive.Intheiropinion,thedesirednetworkstructureshouldbedrivenbytheprogramtheory—whatnetworkingbehaviorsareexpectedfromparticipantsasaresultoftheirinvolvementintheprogram,andwhatdothenetworksthatresultfromtheirinteractionslooklike?Whentheexpectednetworkbehaviorisunknown,SNAcanhelpbuildatheoryofwhatnetworkingbehaviorwillresultfromthecurrentprogramorsimilarprogramsinthefuturebymappingactualnetworkingbehaviors.Socialnetworkanalysisinanevaluationapplicationisstillemergingandthereiscurrentlyverylittleliteratureonhowtointerveneinnetworkstochangethem.Becausetheliteratureisstilldeveloping,discussantsexpectthatsocialnetworkanalysiswillbeusedinmanycasesfortheorybuildingasresearchersandevaluatorsseektounderstandmoreabouthownetworksbehave.

HOW DO I USE THIS NEW TOOL? APPLICATION OF SNA IN PROGRAM EVALUATION

Dependingontheendgoals,SNAcanbeanimportanttoolduringmultiplephasesofaproject.FollowingarethreewaysSNAcanbeusedfromthebeginningtotheendofaproject.

Improving Program Design

AnearlyanalysisusingSNAcanprovideinitiallessonsonhownetworksareoperatingandhowinformationflows.Bothapreliminaryintakeofthe

networkoranearlyassessmentofthenetworkcanbehelpfulinmakingadjustmentsandmid-courserevisionsandchangesasneeded.Insomecases,theendgoalissimplytoseewhointeractswithwhomandhowinformationflows.Inothercases,fundersorgranteeswanttodemonstratethebestwayofreachingtheendgoal.Inthesecases,aformativeanalysismayyieldhelpfulinformation.Forexample,althoughitisnottheprimarypurposeoftheStateHealthLeadershipInitiative(SHLI),buildingsocialcapitalandnetworktiesareimportanttotheinitiative’seffectivenessbyprovidingstatehealthofficials(SHOs)withaccesstoknowledgeandresourcesnecessarytodotheirjobs.InthecaseofSHLI,theevaluatordiscoveredthatSHOshavefewinteractionsandtheiroverallnetworkisasparse,hub-and-spokenetwork1—thatis,asmallnumberofSHOsconnecttomultiple,otherwiseisolatedSHOs.IftheFoundationhadinformationfromtheanalysisearlier,thisparticularprogramcouldhavemadesomemid-coursecorrectionstotheoverallprogramdesigntoresultingreaternetworking.

Process Evaluation

Thistypeofevaluationmeasurestheextenttowhichaprogramisoperatingasitwasintended.TwoareasofprogrammingthatNewConnectionsisparticularlyinterestedinevaluatingaretheimpactofparticipationinNewConnectionsongrantees’careerdevelopmentandthenatureofgrantee-RWJFrelationships.NewConnectionsanticipatesthatusingSNAaspartofitsevaluationplanwillprovideinsightintohownetworkingandmentoringactivitiesbuiltintotheprogramdesignimpactthecareerdevelopmentofgranteesandalumniandtheirrelationshipwithRWJF.Socialnetworkanalysiscouldbeusedtomeasurewhethertheseactivitiesarehelpingaccomplishthesegoals.

Impact Evaluation

Thisformofevaluationassessesthechangesthatcanbeattributedtoaspecificintervention,suchasaprogramorpolicy.Ideally,impactevaluationidentifiesboththeexpectedchangesaswellastheunintendedchanges.Incontrasttooutcomemonitoring,whichexamineswhethertargetshavebeenachieved,impactevaluationisstructuredtoanswerthequestions:1)howdidtheparticipants’well-beingchangeasaresultoftheinterventionand2)howwould

1Ahub-and-spokenetworkisasystemofconnectionsarrangedlikeabicyclewheel,whereoneorafewpeopleactasthe“hub”throughwhichthemajorityofinformationflowstotheothersinthenetwork,whoarelessconnected.

participants’well-beinghavechangediftheinterventionhadnotbeenundertaken?Inthistypeofevaluation,thecollectionofbaselinedataandthepresenceofacontrolorcomparisongrouparenecessarytogaugetheeffectoftheintervention.Forexample,intheLaddertoLeadership(LTL)program,evaluatorsareusingSNAtoassessthesecondarygoalsofnetworkingamongprogramparticipantsandorganizations.TheFellowsNetworkSurveyisadministeredtoparticipantspriortostartingtheLTLprogram,againwhentheycompletetheprogram,andoneyearafterprogramcompletion.Socialnetworkanalysisishelpingtomeasurehowcollaborationandnetwork-buildinginvestmentscontributetoleadershipdevelopment.

WHEN THE MONEY RUNS OUT: THE FUNDER’S ROLE

Thecasestudiesrepresentfunder-drivennetworksandcanprovidelessonstofundersregardingtheirroleinbuildingandsupportingnetworks.Discussantsrepresentingthefunderperspectivenotedthatfunder-drivennetworkscanhavemorechallengesthannaturallyemergingnetworksbecauseofthepotentialpowerimbalancebetweenfunderandgrantees,competitionbetweengranteesforresources,andthe“forced”natureofthenetwork.Thesediscus-santsalsoagreedthatfundingorganizationsoftenthinkthathavingaclearstatementoftheproblem,andprovidinginitialresourcestocatalyzeanetwork,willbeenoughtocreateasustainednetwork.Theypointedout,however,thatmanyfunder-drivennetworksdissipateshortlyaftertheinterventionorfundingendsbecausetheimpetusforconveningwasexternal.Inlightofthesechallenges,aprimaryquestionposedbythefunderswas,“Howcanfundersbettersupportnetworkcreation?”

DiscussantssuggestedthatfunderscanuseSNAasaplanningtoolwithorganizations—sharingfindingsfromSNAevaluationsorstudieswithagroupoforganizationstohighlightwhatthesocialresourcelimitationsareandhowtheseresourcesaredistributed.Forexample,onlysomanycontactscanbeeffectivelymaintainedbyanyoneorganizationorindividual.SNAcanprovidedatatohelpthegroupcollectivelydeterminethepeopleandorganizationsthenetworkneedstoinclude,andsparkdiscussionsofhoworganizationscan

leverageeachother’sconnectionsformutualbenefit.

Funderpanelistsalsostatedthatmostfundersareaccustomedtohavingabilateralrelationshipwithgrantees,andarenotnecessarilyusedtoexaminingtheirrelationshiptocommunitiesandtheroletheymayplayinhelpingorhinderingnetworks.Reversingthistrendwouldrequireashiftinthinkingformanyfunders.Thereareexceptionstothis,oneexamplebeingtheBarrFoundation’suseofSNAtobridgegapsbetweenenvironmentalistsandhealthspecialistsworkinginthesamecommunityonthesameissues,butinisolationfromoneanother.Tocreatemoresustainablenetworks,fundersmayneedtobemoreintentionalinhowtheyfacilitateandsupportsocialnetworks.Thereisatension,however,betweenthisintentionalityandcreatingspaceforanemergentnetwork.Dependingontheendgoal,fundersmayneedtoletthenetworktakeshapeorganically;evenwhenitmaybedifferentfromwhatthefunderbelievesisimportant.Furthermore,fundersshouldperiodicallyreexaminethepurposeofthenetworkanditsvaluetothenetworkparticipants.Bypromotingtheunderstandingthatalearningcommunityisbeingbuiltandshowingthatitvaluesrelationshipbuilding,afundercancreatelonger,morevestedbuy-inamongorganizations.

HEY WHERE AM I? THE IMPORTANCE OF CONTEXT

Aprimarythemethatemergedwasaroundtheimportanceofcontexttoasocialnetworkanalysis.Researchersandpractitionersnotedthatnetworkmapswithoutcontexthavelittlemeaning.Under-standingwhatpolitical,social,historical,andotherfactorsexistedduringthetimeoftheprogramscanhelpwithinterpretationoftheSNAresults.Forexample,acontextualanalysiscanhelpanswerwhysomecollaborationsworkandothersdonot,orcanexposeconflictsthatmakenetworkingdifficult.Discussantsagreedthatitisimportanttoinvolvecommunityrepresentativesintheinterpretationofnetworkdata.

NetworkmapsfromseveralLTLcommunitiesgen-eratedadiscussionaboutthedifficultyincomparingnetworksacrossgeographiesbecausesizeand

4

LESSONS LEARNED

7

communitycontextaffectthenetworks.Discussantsnotedthatorganizationsoperatinginacommunitywheretherearemanyotherorganizationsmayshowupasisolatesononenetworkmapbutmay,infact,beoperatinginadifferentnetworkaltogether.LTLisusingmultipledatacollectiontools,includingSNA,initsevaluation.Thedataitiscollectingthroughothersurveys—thatmeasuretheextenttowhichtheFellowsaredevelopingasleaders—andinterviewswithFellowsandtheirsupervisorscapturecontextualinformationthatwillbeimportanttointerpretingthenetworkanalysisovertime.

InthecaseofSHLI,discussantsobservedthatthequalitativeinterviews“toldthestory”andprovidedinformationthathelpedexplainwhatwasseeninthesocialnetworkanalysis.Forinstance,thesparsenatureofthenetworkcanbeexplainedbytheshortjobtenureofSHOs.Also,thediversityinSHOs’networkmemberships(e.g.,peer,political,policy-related)couldbearesultoftherelativevaluetheyseeineachgroup.ForsomeSHOs,politicalandpolicy-relatednetworksappeartobejustasormoreimportantthanpeernetworks.

Givenwhatweknowabouttheimportanceofcontext,usingacombinedapproachtogatheringdataisessentialtoclearlyunderstandthestorywithinthenetwork.Whereverpossible,itisidealtotriangulateSNAdatawithotherdatatoensureaccuracyandpaintaclearpictureofwhatistakingplace.Forexample,gatheringdataabout(a)wholenetworks,and/or(b)personaloregocentricnetworkscanshedlightonthecompositionandeffectivenessofnetworksonavarietyoflevels.Wholenetworksareallofthetieswithinadefinedgroup(e.g.,acohortofdoctoralcandidatesinaparticularprogram).Personaloregocentricnetworksaretheconnectionsthatindividualshaveintheirpersonalcommunities(e.g.,thenetworkofeachindividualdoctoralcandidatethatincludespeopleoutsidetheprogram).

WHAT’S IN IT FOR ME? THE BENEFITS OF SNA

Researchers,funders,andpractitionersinbothappliedandacademicsettingsenjoyworkingwithSNAbecauseitprovidesawaytomakethehiddenvisible,andtheintangibleconcrete.SNAcandepict

humanandorganizationalrelationshipsbothvisuallyandmathematically.

Socialnetworkanalysisasamethodologyinprogramevaluationisanemergingfield.AsadvanceshavebeenmadeinSNAtoolsandasthetoolshavebecomeeasiertouse,moreorganizationsareconsideringusingSNAtoevaluatetheirprograms.

OneoftheprimarybenefitstousingSNAisitspowertomeasureandunderstandthecomplexnatureoforganizations.SNAcanhelporganizationsunderstandhoweffectivetheirprogramsare,andhighlightthecapacityofanorganizationtoengageinparticularactivities.Forexample,networkscanbecomparedwithoutcomestodeterminewhoorwhataretheimportantfactorsatworkandhowdifferencesinorganizationorteamstructuresmayaffectoutcomes.SNAresultscanbecomparedwithaprogram’sexpectationstoassesshowwelltheexistingnetworkreflectstheprogram’sintent.Thiscomparisontothe“model”networkmaypointtowaysinwhichthenetworkcouldbeenhanced,orhelpidentifychangesinthemodel.

Socialnetworkanalysiscanenhanceformativeandsummativeevaluationactivitiesinwaysthatimprovetheformationandexecutionofprograms.ResultsintheformofanSNAmapcanbecirculatedtoteammembersandusedtoconfirmordenywhetherthenetworkpictureaccuratelyreflectswhatistakingplace.UsingSNAinevaluationcanserveasawonderfultooltohelpbuildaprogramoranorganization.Itallowsevaluatorstheopportunitytoidentifythenetwork,howitoperates,andhowitaffectsprogramoutcomes.Itcanbeusedcollaboratively—wheremanymembersofanorganizationgettogetheranddrawamapofwheretheyareandwheretheywanttobe(e.g.,inthecaseofstrategicplanning).SNAcansuggestwaystomakechangesearlyonintheimplementationstagebyidentifyingwhoismoreorlessinvolved,whoispartneringwithwhom,andpotentialinterventionopportunities.

THEN AGAIN MAYBE I WON’T: CHALLENGES TO USING SNA

WhileSNAhasaseriesofbenefitsandcanofferadeeperunderstandingofwhatistakingplaceand

howitistakingplace,membersofanorganizationmaybedisinterestedintheideaofSNAwhenitisframedasonlyanevaluationtool,ratherthanatoolthatcanhelpassesshowtouseresourcesandmodifyinterventionstomaximizedesiredoutcomes.

AdditionallyorganizationsneedtohavethenecessaryresourcestocoverthecostsofSNAasapartofanevaluation.Traditionallyfundingforevaluationisonly5%ofatotalprogram.SNAissometimesanafterthoughtandthereisnofundingtodothecomprehensiveSNAmethodologythatacademicsoftenuseintheirwork.Moneyisnottheonlyissue,timeisalso.Dependingonthesizeofthenetwork(numberofpeopletobesurveyed)andthenumberandtypesofquestionsinvolved,conductingSNAresearchcanbeverylaborintensive.OrganizationsconsideringusingitneedtounderstandtheseconstraintsbeforelaunchingintoanSNAmethodologyandaskwhetheritisworththeinvestment:Willitbeofgreatvaluetothestakeholdersinvolved?

Finally,SNAcanbeachallengingmethodologyduetoconfidentialityissues.Dependingonthetypeofproject,peoplecanbeaversetonamingnamesparticularlywhenitcomestoassessingthequalityoftheirrelationships.Ifparticipantsinanetworkdonottalkaboutothersbyname,theresultismissingdataandlimitsontheinterpretationofthedata.AnyoneconsideringusingSNAmustbemindfulofparticipantsintheirsampleanddatacollectionstrategiestoensureaveryhighresponserate.EarlyandthoughtfulplanningwillgreatlyreduceresponsechallengesandresultinamoreeffectiveapplicationofSNA.

6

IVEN THE WIDE ARRAY OF SNA TOOLSandtherecentexplosionofavarietyofsocialmediaandsocialnetworkingwebsites,nowisagoodtimetorevisitthepotentialuseofSNA.Inthepast,intheirreviewofproposals,theHuman

CapitalteamatRWJFrealizeditdidnothavealltherighttoolstodeterminewhentouseSNA.TheteamisnowarmedwiththeappropriateknowledgetobetterassesstheproposalsitreceivesandmakethoughtfuldecisionsaroundthetypesofprogramsorinitiativesthatmightbestbesuitedforSNA.TheRobertWoodJohnsonFoundationisinterestedinnotonlyunderstandinghowsocialnetworkanalysiscanbeusedtoimproveprogramsbutalsohowitcanpotentiallyimprovecommunicationstrategies.AstheFoundationcontinuestoworkintheareasofhealthandhealthcareandthroughtraditionalnetworkingstrategies,aswellasthroughnewsocialmediaoutletssuchasFacebookandTwitter,itwillbeabletogleanimportantinformationabouttherelationshipsbetweenpeopleandgroupsandtoexplainhowthoserelationshipsaffectprograms.Thenewworkbeingdoneinthisareawilllikelyresultinmoretargetedapproachestobolsterorfosternetworkstomakegreaterstridesacrossallareasofwork.

Socialnetworkanalysiscanaddtoourunderstandingofaprogramorinitiativeandcreateopportunities

forinterventiontostrengthenresults.However,SNA,aswithothermethods,needstobeusedwithcarefulconsiderationofitsfittoaprogramorinitiativedesign.ElucidatingtheprogramtheoryandlogicmodelcanbeaveryusefulfirststepindeterminingwhetherSNAisanappropriatemethodologyfortheevaluation.Furthermore,aswithothermethods,thecontextwithinwhichtheprogramorinitiativeisoperatingmustbeconsideredinconcertwithSNAtoprovideacompleteunderstandingofwhatisandisnottakingplacewithinnetworks.Additionally,thecostsandresourcesinvolvedinconductingasolidSNAareimportantconsiderations.

TherecentgrowthofSNAasanevaluationtoolpresentsopportunitiesfordiscussionofitsapplicationandvariedapproaches.Conveningssuchastheonehighlightedinthisarticleshouldbecontinuedtofurtheraidinthedisseminationofknowledge.FundersinparticularcanuseSNAtorethinktheirroleswithgranteesandcommunities—bothwheretointerveneandwhentostepout.AsSNAinprogramevaluationgrows—aswithanyemergingfield—researchers,practitioners,andfundersshouldcontinuetoshare,learn,andadaptSNAtobestservetheneedsofprogramsandinitiativesinthefield.

CONCLUSION

G

8