An analysis of community assessments: the perceived relationship between funding resourses and survey scope

Abstract

Interviews were conducted with spokespersons from graphics. seven area health service organizations regarding recent community assessments conducted by their organizations. Specifically, the participants were asked to explain the process by which their organization constructs an assessment instrument and estimate the amount of finding resources their organization dedicated toward the development phase of the assessment. The funding resources were then examined in terms of number of staff required, total time spent developing the assessment tool, and overall dollars their organization spent towards instrument development. The participants consisted of 7 health service organizations listed in the local health services directory and were invited to participate in this study. The population of Bryan and College Station, Texas, principally consists of individuals with a moderate income, primarily Caucasian, in an urban area with a combined population of approximately 120,000 residents according to the 1990 U.S. Census. The common characteristic shared by these agencies was the fact that each assumed the responsibility of performing a community assessment within Bryan/college Station during the years 1992-1997. This study investigated the relationship between the financial resources available to these organizations conducting community assessments and the impact those resources had on assessment instrument scope. The evidence suggests that community assessments with increased scope can be achieved, if sufficient time in addition to dollars is allotted to their development. The perceived connection between funding and instrument breadth was believed to be a direct correlation resulting from a linear relationship. As assessment funding increased, so did instrument breadth. The analysis of data tends to support this hypothesis, however, the relationship between the two variables is not as robust as anticipated. For a firm correlation to have been made, those organizations with superior financial resources would have had to have employed assessment tools possessing substantial subject breadth. Due to the self-reported funding information and the lack of documentation regarding organizations' assessment finances, the true impact funding resources had on assessment instrument development can only be estimated. Future assessment attempts may achieve a more definite interpretation of the true impact funding has on assessment development if precise