RIPPLE EFFECT MAPPING(REM)

• Scott Chazdon, PhD, University of Minnesota• Alyssa Chiumento, University of Minnesota• Gretchen Nicolls, Twin Cities LISC

February 11, 2015

Twin Cities: Building Sustainable Communities Target Areas

Evaluating Impact: Qualitative / Quantitative

1) Moving Beyond the Gap: An Assessment of Neighborhood Health (Quantitative)2) Ripple Effect Mapping: Creating a Narrative of Change (Hybrid)3) BSC Evaluation: Overall and Site Specific Reports (Qualitative)

Gretchen Nicholls, Twin Cities LISC

Today’s speakers

Scott Chazdon, PhDEvaluation and Research Specialist Center for Community Vitality University of Minnesota Extension

Alyssa ChiumentoCommunity-Based Research AssistantThe Center for Urban and Regional Affairs University of Minnesota

Gretchen NichollsProgram OfficerTwin Cities LISC

Webinar Overview

What is Ripple Effect Mapping? Why REM?

How does it work?

Examples from Twin Cities LISC

What does it offer as an assessment tool?

Why Ripple Effect Mapping?

The challenge of capturing impact

Limitations of traditional evaluation methods

Why Ripple Effect Mapping?

Purpose: To better understand intended and unintended results

Post-program as part of impact evaluation

Part of developmental evaluation

Unrecognized social capital

People do not act in isolation

Unforeseen impacts

Direct vs. Indirect Impacts

Pictorial Method Note taking

Brainstorming

Organizing

Problem solving

Evaluation

For more on mind mapping, see Buzan, T. (2003). The mind map book. London: BBC Books.Image: Mindmap, Graham Burnett, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mindmap.gif

Mind Mapping and Radiant Thinking

How Does it Work?

Identify the intervention

Schedule the event and invite participants

Group mapping session held

Follow-up interviews

Cleaning, coding, analysis

Not all interventions are right for REM.

Are there likely both intended and unintended effects?

Is the intervention something people can attribute influence to, or at least identify contributions made?

Do people already talk about the “ripples” from the intervention?

Identify the Intervention

Identify the Intervention

Community leadership development

Business Retention & Expansion program

Tourism Assessment program

Engaged scholars program

Ramsey County Master Gardeners

LISC’s Building Sustainable Communities (BSC)

Conducted among pairs of participants

Examples of questions: Tell me a story about how you have used the information from the program? Is there anything that resulting from the program that you are proud to share? List an achievement or a success you had based on what you learned.

“Floating Topics”

Appreciative Inquiry

Theming Group identifies which items are closely related Group generates initial theme names Floating topics moved and organized

Rippling Group cross-validation Potential for probing using the Community Capitals Framework

Theming and Rippling

Twin Cities LISC’s Ripple Effect Mapping

Blake Road Corridor Collaborative

Native American Community Development Institute

Examples from BSC

The Blake Road Corridor Collaborative

A Major Theme: Reducing Crime

Native American Community Development Institute

A Major Theme: Building Power in the Community & in Individuals

Cleaning, Coding, Analysis

Organize map

Follow-up interviews

Excel/Google Drive Sheets

Thematic framework and type of outcome Something learned Action taken Change in system

Increased private and public wealth that is invested in the well-being of

organizations, individuals and households, and communities.

Improvement of structures, (e.g. housing, retail, etc.) and

infrastructures that contribute to the well-being of organizations, individuals, and communities.

Strengthened ability of

organizations or communities to

protect landscape, air, water, soil, and

biodiversity of both plants and

animals.

Strengthened ability of organizations or communities to support diverse

worldviews and to transmit knowledge of spiritual, cultural heritage, artistic expression, and traditions to future generations; recognize and build on

cultural strengths; systems accepting that there may be different frames.

Change in knowledge, attitudes, or skills among organization or

community members; leadership.

Strengthened or expanded trust or connections among people, groups, and

organizations and their resources.

Increased ability of organizations or communities

to mobilize public engagement or influence the distribution of

public resources.

Coding Example: FRAN

Category of EffectsCount of Reported Effects(96 total)

Percent of Reported Effects

Examples

Human 28 29.2% Changed engagement strategy to reach more people.

Social 31 32.3% Initiated or revitalized Cops and Kids Fishing and Cops and Kids Shopping Programs.

Civic 26 27.1% Expanded National Night Out events; instituted Joint Community Police Partnership (JCPP).

Financial 19 19.8% Facilitated improvements, i.e. regional storm water management.

Built 19 19.8% Influenced siting and design issues regarding Blake Station Park and Ride and Operation and Maintenance facility.

Health* 10 10.4% Given Allina funding for gatherings at the garden related to healthy eating and active living.

Cultural 10 10.4% Held PTO meetings at Westside Village, where many Somali families live.

Natural Environment 4 4.2% Environmental remediation of brownfield sites was conducted.

The Blake Road Corridor Collaborative

* Improvements in the physical, mental, and emotional health and well-being of community residents.

Native American Community Development Institute

Category of Effects

Count of Reported

Effects(65 total)

Percent of Reported

Effects Examples

Human 23 35.4% Community engagement sessions in gallery generated hundreds of ideas about what is wanted for the community and for the city.

Social 28 43.1% It is a safe, inviting place; when people need a place to go, they know to go to NACDI.

Civic 28 43.1% During the Make Voting a Tradition Campaign, we trained leaders in the community about getting out the vote.

Financial 4 6.2% NACDI is pulling in more financial support for all sorts of projects. It is a contact list for the community and a pipeline to resources outside of it.

Built 5 7.7% Influenced re-siting of the 21st Street Station by leveraging our prior work and our credibility.

Health 2 3.1% NACDI makes me feel good.

Cultural 17 26.2% Indigenous People's Day established in 2014 with the help of NACDI staff and Native American Indian community members.

Natural Environment 1 1.5% Picking up trash with Jay in Phillips.

Human Social Civic Financi

al Built Health Cultural

Natural Environment

Total

BRCC 28 31 26 19 19 10 10 4 96

29.2% 32.3% 27.1% 19.8% 19.8% 10.4% 10.4% 4.2%

NACDI 23 28 28 4 5 2 17 1 65

35.4% 43.1% 43.1% 6.2% 7.7% 3.1% 26.2% 1.5%

Program Comparisons

Cultural Capital Civic Capital Social Capital

BRCC

Held PTO meetings at Westside Village, where

many Somali families live; use of pool at Blake School restricted at certain times

for women only.

Expanded National Night Out Events; instituted Joint

Community Police Partnership (JCPP).

Initiated or revitalized Cops and Kids Fishing and Cops and

Kids Shopping Programs.

NACDI

Indigenous People's Day established in 2014 with the

help of NACDI staff and Native American Indian community members.

Relationship between community and established

power structure has changed; politics feels more visible and

accessible; the community iterates its own points of view

into the power structure.

Until NACDI joined, there was no indigenous organization

within the Alliance for Metropolitan Stability. NACDI

brought an Indian perspective.

Community Capitals Highlights

Benefits and Limitations

Simple tool

Complex work

Captures consequences

For people familiar and unfamiliar with program

Cathartic experience

Clarify misunderstandings

Potential for bias

Incomplete information

Inconsistency implementation

Not sufficient alone

Suggestions

Facilitator, recorder and “mapper”

“Probing” for responses Community capitals

Recognition or credit for all change

Probe for negatives

Lessons Learned Thus Far

Balance between breadth and depth

Scheduling

Recruitment and explanation

Setting

External facilitators

Differences in maps

Facilitation and evaluation

For more information: http://blog-ripple-effect-mapping.extension.umn.edu/

Contact Information

Scott Chazdon, PhDEvaluation and Research Specialist Center for Community Vitality University of Minnesota ExtensionE-mail: schazdon@umn.edu

Alyssa ChiumentoCommunity-Based Research AssistantThe Center for Urban and Regional Affairs University of MinnesotaE-mail: chium001@umn.edu