A process to evaluate area planning and development commissions

GA
C500.G3
M1
1975
P7
June 1975 Institute of Community and Area Development University of Georgia, Athens

'BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET

1. Report No.

1

n.a.

4. Title and Subtitle

A Process to Evaluate Area Planning and Development

Commissions

1. Author(s)
see #9 below
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Institute of Community and Area Development University of Georgia Athens, Georgia 30601

12. Sponsoring Orga nization Name and Address
Department of Community Development Bureau of Community Affairs, Room 640, Atlanta, Georgia 30334

7 Hunter

Street S.W.

15. Supplementary Notes

3. Recipient's Access io n No.
5. Report Date
June 1975
6.
8. Performing Organization Rept. No.
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
11 . Contract/Grant No.
CPA-GA-04-06-1034 lJ. T ype of Report & Period
Covered
final
14.

16. Abstracts
This report describes an evaluation method or process to help Georgia's area planning and development commissions (APDCs) meas ure their performance and the impact of their work. Proposed for use by the individual APDC, the process consists of three components des igned to improve its work programs (the work program component), internal management (the management component), and mutual understanding with its client of the role it performs (the perception component). The appendices are particularly important because they contain materials essential for an APDC to develop and carry out the evaluation process. They include some illustrat i ve examples to guide an APDC and checklists needed to carry out the perception and management components of the evaluation. A section on the use of demographic data is also included.

17. Key Words and Document Analysis . 17a. De scr ipto rs
evaluation (performance, impact) self-improvement process sub-state planning districts

17b. Identifiers /Open-Ended Terms

~ 17

c
OSAT!

Field/ Group

II. hail ab1Ttty Statement

19. Security Class (This

21. No. of Pages

release unlimited

Report ) .UNCJ .ASSTFIED
20. Secunty Class (This

217
22. Price

Page

~~,.. T~IS~-a~s iI RREEVv. .10~-7~3)~~~~~~~~~~~~~------~~~~~~ugN~C~L~A~S~S~!F~I~E~D~___l__________~~

ENDORSED BY ANSI AND UNESCO.

THIS FORM MAY BE REPRODUCED

uscoMM-DC azss-P74

FOREWORD

The Institute of Community and Area Develop ment (ICAD) and the Institute of Government at the University of Georgia have been allied with the state 1s area planning and development commissions (APDCs ) from the beginning. Common interests in serving local governments and assisting regional development have encourage d a mutual working relationship between the university and the APDCs. In this relationship, ICAD and the Institute of Government have often served as a resource to the APDCs.
In keeping with this tradition, we are pleased to comply with a request of the Association of APDCs by submitting this report on a project to develop a method for evaluating APDCs.
We wish to acknowledge the Georgia Association of APDCs, the State Advisory Committee on Area Planning and Development, and the Georgia Re gional Executive Directors Association for their guidance and participation. Sp~cial thanks go to the Association of APDC 1s executive committee which advised the project team.
The cooperation and assistance of the APDCs is gratefully acknowledged. In particular, the North east Georgia, the Southwest Georgia, and the North Georgia APDCs were very generous and contributed significantly to the project.
We also wish to thank the Department of Community Development for its encouragement and financial assistance as supplied through a HUD 701 grant (CPA -GA -04-06 -l 034).
i

As project director, I wish to acknowledge the able leadership of Mr. R. E. Sellers who served as associate project director and principal investigator and the insight and knowledge of Mr. Burton Sparer who served throughout as the project s staff consultant. Both Mr. Sellers and Mr. Sparer are joint staffed with ICAD and the Institute of Government. Mr. Lewis Bender and Mr. Walter Denero made significant contributions to the project as research assistants. Thanks are also extended to ICAD staff members Messrs. Charles Clegg, Howard Schretter, Chrystos Siderelis, and Len Wright, who advised the project team. Our t.hanks also go to university faculty members Dr. Vincent L. Marando and Dr. Abraham Tesser for their help as consultants.
Dr. Edward E. Cahill, formerly a research associate at the university s Institute of Behavioral Research, is acknowledged for his section on the use of demographic data.
And we extend our special appreciation to Ms. Lorena Akioka for editing the final report and to Ms. Elizabeth Finn for typing project materials and the final report.
Ernest E. Melvin, Director Institute of Community and Area Development University of Georgia
i i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i FOREWORD

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ix SUMMARY

1 1 WHY AND HOW THIS PROJECT WAS CARRIED OUT

1

WHY THE APDCS NEED AN EVALUATION PROCESS

2

HOW THE PROJECT STARTED

3

HOW THE PROJECT WAS CONDUCTED

4

PROJECT PHASES

4

literature review

4

design

4

three components

4

development

5

perception component

5

management component

6

work program component

7 2 OVERVIEW OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS

7

DEFINITION

7

IDENTIFYING THE OBSTACLES

8

ADVISORY NATURE OF APDCs

8

COMPLEXITY

8

STAFF SUPPORT

8

ADAPTING THE PROCESS

9

SUMMARIZING THE PROCESS

9

PERCEPTION COMPONENT

9

MANAGEMENT COMPONENT

9

demographic profile

iii

*WAR

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

11

WORK PROGRAM COMPONENT

11

HOW THEY FIT TOGETHER

11

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROCESS

11

INTEGRATED WITH PLANNING

12

MODULARITY

12

SELF-IMPROVEMENT

12

PROMOTES UNDERSTANDING AND MOTIVATION

15 3 THE PERCEPTION COMPONENT

15

PURPOSES

16

I PURPOSES AND FUNCTIONS

16

II PROGRAM GOALS

16

III EXTERNAL INFLUENCES

17

IV INTERNAL INFLUENCES

17

V PLANS AND STUDIES

17

VI TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

18

REVIEW AND COMMENT

18

VII SPECIAL SERVICES

18

PEOPLE TO INTERVIEW

18

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

19

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

19

STAFF

19

PUBLIC OFFICIALS

19

PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS

19

COMPARABILITY OF QUESTIONNAIRES

iv

21 21 21 22 22
23 23 23 23
24 24 24
26
27 27 27
31 31 31
t
32 32
'
35 35

4 THE MANAGEMENT COMPONENT
PURPOSE SCOPE
ADMINISTERING THE QUESTIONNAIRE USING THE RESULTS
5 THE WORK PROGRAM COMPONENT
PURPOSE FRAMEWORK
APDC GOAL PROGRAM AREAS OBJECTIVES
ultimate immediate intermediate PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES EVALUATION CRITERIA
6 PUTTING THE EVALUATION PROCESS INTO PRACTICE
START WITH WORK PROGRAM COMPONENT OTHER COMPONENTS FOLLOW THE EXTERNAL TASK FORCE ON-SITE VISIT
LOGISTICS AND SAMPLES
7 RECOMMENDATIONS
USE THE EVALUATION PROCESS

v
...

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

35

ORGANIZE THE TASK FORCE

35

MEMBERSHIP

36

rotating staff assistance

36

permanent staff

36

credibility and continuity

36

CONTINUE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO APDCS

37

START WITH THE WORK COMPONENT

37

POLICY SUPPORT

FIGURES
10 1: OVERVIEW OF APDC EVALUATION PROCESS
25 2: EVALUATION FRAMEWORK FOR WORK PROGRAM
28 3: HIERARCHY OF OBJECTIVES AS ILLUSTRATED FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE

A- 1
A- 1
A-31 A-33

APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1: MANAGEMENT STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE
APDC INTERNAL ADMINISTRATION/MANAGEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE
APPENDIX 2: PERCEPTION COMPONENT QUESTIONNAIRES
APDC STAFF INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

vi

A- 57 A- 83 A-101 A-119

APDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR QUESTIONNAIRE APDC BOARD MEMBERS INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE PUBLIC OFFICIALS INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

A-127
A-129 A-130 A-131 A-132 A-133
A-135 A-137 A-143 A-149 A-157 A-165
l/
(
A-171
~ '
~
;h
:{:
... -.\:,?l ;~{

APPENDIX 3: CHARTS CORRELATING QUESTIONS FROM THE DIFFERENT QUESTIONNAIRES
CHART: COMPARABLE QUESTIONS - APDC PURPOSE AND FUNCTIONS CHART: COMPARABLE QUESTIONS - APDC PROGRAMS CHART: COMPARABLE QUESTIONS - EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON APDCs CHART: COMPARABLE QUESTIONS - INTERNAL INFLUENCES CHART: COMPARABLE QUESTIONS - APDC FUNCTIONAL AREAS
APPENDIX 4: ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES OF WORK PROGRAMS
AGING CRIMINAL JUSTICE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT RECREATION
APPENDIX 5: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FOR USE IN THE EVALUATION PROCESS

vii
I,

I
I'
I
i'
!
I

SUMMARY

A persistent and practical problem facing Georgia 1s area planning and development commissions (APDCs) is that of evaluating their performance and effectiveness. Recognizing this need, the Georgia Association of APDCs requested that the Institute of Community and Area Development and the Institute of Government at the University of Georgia assist them in developing an evaluation methodology.
This report describes an evaluation method or process to help the APDCs measure their performance and the impact of their work. The process presented here is designed for use by the individual APDC to improve its work programs, internal management, and mutual under standing with .its clients about the role and functions it performs.
The process is composed of three components: a perception component, a management and demographic con1ponent, and a work program component.
The perception component is concerned with gaining an understanding of what the APDC is, what the APDC is doing, and how important and effective it is, as viewed by different persons associated with a particular APDC.
The management component views the internal conditions and the demographic characteristics of the APDC. A checklist of management standards has been designed to help the APDC determine possible weaknesses in its administrative structure. Demographic data characterzing the social and economic conditions of the region served by the APDC are useful for describing regional needs and resources, for establishing commission measures of performance
ix

and effectiveness, and for insuring that evaluation findings are viewed in the social and economic context particular to the APDC.
The work program component is concerned with how well the APDC' s various programs achieve the ends for which they are intended. It serves as an analytical tool to help the APDC systematically examine its various programs from the standpoint of accountability and effectiveness.
Chapter 1 explains why this evaluation project was undertaken and describes how the project team carried out its assignment. Chapter 2 presents an overview of the process itself. Subsequent chapters explain the major components of the process in more detail.
The appendices are particularly important because they contain materials essential for an APDC to develop and carry out the evaluation process. They include some illustrative examples to guide an APDC in developing its work program evaluation, as well as some questionnaires and checklists needed to carry out the perception and management components of the evaluation. A section on the use of demographic data is also included.
X

I
:li
, I

1 WHY AND HOW THIS PROJECT WAS CARRIED OUT

WHY THE APDCS NEED AN EVALUATION PROCESS

While this study was formally initiated by the Georgia Association of APDCs in March 1974, the need for an evaluation process originated in the APDCs' early years.

In the fifteen years since the first Georgia APDC was organized in the Coosa Valley, APDCs have acquired considerable public recognition and institutional status. These achievements were underscored in 1970 when the General Assembly passed Act 1066 formally assigning permissive and mandatory responsibilities to APDCs.

In addition to statutory recognition, APDCs have benefitted from continuing and, in some instances, increasing financial support from state and federal governments in spite of growing competition for limited planning grant dollars. And even though APDCs are advisory in nature, the scope and significance of their program content has continued to broaden because of the A-95 functions and the expanding range of program activities emerging between APDCs and state and federal agencies.

Given the maturity and visibility that many APDCs have attained, inevitable questions about their effectiveness have been raised. As a result, recognition of the need for designing and implementing a method for evaluating APDCs and their programs has become evident to a variety of people.

For example, it is important to any healthy organization to be able to respond affl.rmatively to the question, "are we doing a good job?" In order to answer this question, the executive director and board must be able to make some objective estimates

- 1-

I
I I!
HOW THE PROJECT STARTED
i :
ill

about what is happening to their agency's programs and activities. Thus, the APDC has a primary internal interest in its ability to measure its performance and effectiveness.
Second, local, state, and federal sources of planning grant funds are increasing their demands for accountability from agencies they support. Since many grantee agencies compete for scarce dollars, it is imperative that APDCs have the means to demonstrate their ability to carry out their objectives.
Third, ultimately APDCs must answer to the citizens and public officials in their regions. They,
too, want to know what benefits are accruing to them
and at what cost. Being able to identify the APDC 1s effectiveness at the grass roots level is basic to the long-term survival of the area commission.
Finally, APDCs are faced with a very practical concern: unless we undertake some meaningful self-evaluation program of our own, we may be faced with external evaluation carried out by state or federal government agencies which may have little knowledge of area planning and development. There is little question that the latter alternative is an anathema to virtually every APDC board and staff in the state.
Recognizing these needs, the Georgia Association of APDCs initiated this study at its meeting on March 22, 1974. On that occasion, association members unanimously adopted a motion to discuss the development of a ''mechanism for evaluation of APDCs" with the Institute of Community and Area Development (ICAD) and Institute of Government at the University of Georgia.
A joint committee on evaluation was established to coordinate and facilitate this discussion. It was composed of representatives from the Georgia Association of APDCs and the State Advisory Committee on Area Planning and Development to the Department of Community Development (now the Bureau of Community Affairs). On subsequent
-2-

I
I!
I
occasions, university personnel and the joint committee met to identify primary objectives and to develop a fran'lework for an evaluation process.
On the basis of these meetings and some preliminary analysis by ICAD and Institute of Government staff, a formal proposal was made by the university to assist the Association in developing an evaluation process for APDCs. The proposal was funded by the Georgia Department of Community Development with HUD 701 monies designated for statewide improvement projects.

HOW THE PROJECT WAS CONDUCTED
. r

ICAD and the Institute of Government assembled a team of personnel from each Institute (including graduate assistants) to conduct the project. Faculty associates from academic disciplines served as staff consultants .
Given the purpose of designing a largely selfadministering method of evaluating APDC effectiveness- -with minimum help from an external task force- -the project team refined its objectives as follows:
1. To develop materials and procedures to determine differences in perceptions and attitudes about the APDC 1s functions and programs among staff, board of directors, and client groups.
2. To develop a means for assessing strengths and weaknesses in the APDC 1s administrative and management capability.
3. To develop a logical and systematic framework for evaluating an APDC 1s programs.
4. To develop examples showing how the evaluation method could be applied.
5. To develop an evaluation manual so that an individual APDC would have sufficient guidelines to conduct the evaluation.

- 3-

Essentially, the work undertaken by the pro-

ject staff consisted of three phases: reviewing the

PROJECT PHASES

literature, designing the process, developing and testing the process. As the final product, this re-

port is intended as a guide for the APDC. It describes

the evaluation process, and contains copies of the

questionnaire and examples of how to evaluate work

,,:I

programs.

,,I

At the outset, the project staff acquired and

j!

1i terature

reviewed literature on the developmental and poli-

i

review

II

i

tical perspectives of sub-state regional councils; current APDC reports and newsletters; and selec-

tive readings on evaluation theory and practice.

i I

In particular, they examined evaluative

I

approaches applied by other planning and development

agencies. Such efforts- -undertaken in Texas, Ken-

tucky, and Virginia- -appeared limited because they

only emphasized organization and management as-

pects of agency evaluation. They did not show how to

j,

evaluate the impact of work programs carried out by

'

area planning agencies.

li 'I
II
I
II design
]I

Georgia 1s project staff was concerned with developing a comprehensive evaluation process that could be appl:i.ed to the organizational, operational, and program aspects of any APDC.
The next concern was designing the process to achieve the purpose and objectives stated above. The design was derivE;!d from the review of other attempts at evaluation of regional planning agencies, the team1s review and knowledge of evaluation theory and practice, and its understanding of the evaluation needs of APDCs. The resulting evaluation design was a composite of three components:

!
I
II

three components

1. a perception component to examine attitudes about APDC functions and programs;

2. a management component;

3. a work program component.

development

The way in which the project staff developed and conducted preliminary testing of the evaluation design is summarized below.

-4 -

perception component
-' management component

The perception component consists of a set of interview questionnaires. The project staff first established areas of interest it felt should be probed. Within each of these interest areas, a series of questions was developed for each group to be interviewed. Considerable effort was made to insure that parallel questions would be asked of all groups. In many cases, either the same or comparable questions would be asked.
The initial set of questionnaires was submitted to two faculty associates who served as project consultants. Their substantive and methodological criticism resulted in some revision and restructuring of the questionnaires. The questionnaires were also pre-tested in the Northeast Georgia APDC where several staff members and a board member were used as respondents. Following another round of revisions, the questionnaires were administered in a limited field test at the Southwest Georgia APDC.
As result of this field test, the project team again made some revisions before finalizing the questionnaires for the evaluation process. Based on the field test, the project team also performed a perception analysis and submitted an evaluation report to the Southwest Georgia APDC. Although the sample of clients, board and staff persons was limited, the field test produced useful experience in the logistics and time required to administer the questionnaire.
The management component involved the development of a questionnaire aimed at determining the management policies and procedures used by each APDC and the relative importance of having such policies and procedures. These questionnaires were mailed to all eighteen APDCs with return envelopes attached. Information obtained from the questionnaires was analyzed and compiled. The results- -collectively for all APDCs and inci.ividually for participating APDCs- -were distributed to the APDCs. Based on the analysis of the re~ponses, a checklist of important management standards has been compiled and made a part of the evaluation method.

-5-
_ _ _ __::_*'_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

work program component

The work program component proved to be the niost difficult and time-consuming aspect of the project. Formulating the theoretical process was relatively easy, but putting it into practice was quite another task. The project team tried several different approaches in an effort to formulate objectives and identify criteria for measuring the performance and impact of APDC program activities.
One approach was the 11 one -to -one" situation where a project team member would sit with an APDC staff member and attempt to hammer out objectives and evaluation criteria. The second was the group approach in which several members of the project team interacted with a multi-disciplinary team from one APDC. In the third approach, the project team met with a group of specialists in a single discipline from several APDCs and again attempted to develop an evaluation component for that single area.
Each approach had merits as well as drawbacks and each seemed to serve a purpose. For future development, a combination of the three should probably be used with particular emphasis on the third and first methods.
A more general result can be obtained by initially using specialists from several APDCs (the third approach). Then using the 11 one-to-one 11 situation, these general results can be refined for a particular APDC.

-6-

2 OVERVIEW OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS

DEFINITION

Evaluation means different things to different people. Some equate it with the monitoring of projects and activities; others see it as an assessment that takes place at the end of a program or project. To still others, it is a "gut" feeling that a "good job'' is being done. At the other extreme are those who think evaluation must meet the test of scientifically controlled experimental research.
The basic point is that evaluation involves determining the value or worth of something. Most attempts at a definition contain the concept of value or worth either explicitly or implicitly.
In keeping with this broad definition, the approach suggested here attempts to determine the worth of an APDC in terms of its performance and its impact. It is intended to be used as a self-improvement device and, as such, it provides the APDC with information on how it is perceived both internally and externally, how well it is performing, and how effective it is in terms of program impact.

IDENTIFYING THE OBSTACLES
f> . :7 r.
'. t~ ,.,.. '

Given this definition and the evaluation 1s usefulness in helping adjust the direction and pace of APDC affairs, there should be little reason to avoid its use. This is not so in practice.
Although a sensible concept in theory, it is handicapped by many obstacles inhibiting its application. The brief passage which foll9ws identifies some of the more important obstacles likely to apply to most APDCs. These are noted not for the sake of argument but because they are recognized as real and legitimate concerns.

- 7-

The APDC is basically a non-implementing

j

I

agency, although its efforts are directed toward the

ADVISORY NATURE OF APDCs

achievement of end results that are beyond its immediate control. Some argue, therefore, that it is un-

fair to evaluate the APDC on the basis of end results

(a problem made more difficult by the years which

sometimes separate planning recommendations from

client action). This issue has important consequences

in terms of identifying suitable objectives from the

perspective of each APDC.

COMPLEX

Furthermore, APDCs are only one among many public and private agencies in a complex political and social environment. Evaluating APDCs on the basis of their effectiveness would artificially single out the APDC from the great variety of other agencies and people who influence the decisions and actions of their clients.

The application and use of this evaluation,

. particularly the development and implementation of

STAFF SUPPORT

the work program component, is largely dependent

on APDC staff. However, staff cooperation and in-

volvement may be difficult to acquire for the follow-

I

ing reasons:

I

l. l'heir interests and professional lean-

ings may not coincide with the demands

of evaluation.

.2. They may allot insufficient time and

priority for evaluation.

3. They may .feel that their programs and

activities are not capable of being eval-

I'II'

uated or that evaluation cannot change the

things they are doing.

4. They may feel there is an implied threat

that they will be held accountable for

any shortcomings in program achieve-

ments.

ADAPTING THE PROCESS

Finally, there are many apparent difficulties in adapting the evaluation design to the APDC' s work program. One such difficulty, for example, is the requirement to identify objectives which are specific, measurable, and referenced to some time period. It is not easy to state objectives in planning and

-8-

technical assistance, especially in human resource

planning, to meet these criteria. Another difficulty

involves developing useful and practical indicators

of achievement. How does one measure, for exam-

ple, the effectiveness or impact of a project aimed

I

at establishing financial management standards in

I'

local governments? There is also the very practi-

cal problem of locating and obtaining data needed in

conjunction with these evaluation measures.

SUMMARIZING THE PROCESS
PERCEPTION COMPONENT
MANAGEMENT COMPONENT
demographic profile

The evaluation process proposed here is essentially composed of three components as shown in Figure 1: a perception component, a management and demographic data component, and a work program component.
The perception component is concerned with gaining an objective understanding of what the APDC is, what the APDC is doing, and how important and effective it is as viewed by different persons associated with the APDC.
This aspect of the evaluation is intended to provide information to the policy makers and administrator of the APDC concerning whether significant differences in opinion or understanding regarding various APDC functions and activities exist am.ong the different sets of interviewees. This component is described in more detail in chapter 3. The associated interview questionnaires are included in Appendix 2.
The management and demographic profiles focus on the internal management conditions and the demographic setting of the APDC. A checklist of management standards has been designed to assist the APDC in determining possible weaknesses in its administrative structure. A more detailed description of this component is presented in chapter 4. The management standards checklist is contained in Appendix 1.
Demographic data characterizing the social and economic conditions of the region served by the APDC are useful for describing regional needs and resources, for establishing comm.ission measures

- 9-

Figure 1

TASK

APDC

FORCE 1------------------

PERCEPTION
- EVALUATION

MANAGEMENT
- EVALUATION

WORK PROGRAM EVALUATION

--Board
-----.. Staff and Executive Director
'--- Public Officials

- Management Standards
,____ Demographic Characteristics

'-- Criminal Justice
--Economic Develop-ment
"---Aging r--- Transportation

-- Special Interest Groups

r-- Community Develop ment
'--Recreation

r-- Housing

r-- Governmental Management

r-- Land Use

r-- Etc.
I'
I

I
EVALUATION REPORT TO APDCs
OVERVIEW OF APDC EVALUATION PROCESS

- 10 -

WORK PROGRAM COMPONENT
HOW THEY FIT 1 - , TOGETHER

of performance and effectiveness, and for insuring that evaluation findings are viewed in the social and economic context particular to the APDC. A section on demographic data is contained in Appendix 5.
The work program component is the heart of the evaluation process proposed in this report. This component is concerned with how well the APDC;s various programs achieve the ends for which they are intended. It serves as an analytical tool to help an APDC critically examine its various programs in a systematic way from the standpoint of accountability and effectiveness. Properly implemented, it should enable the APDC to review its overall program of work in an objective fashion with a view towards improving the allocation of resources and effort to meet stated objectives.
Chapter 5 details the work program component. Appendix 4 contains sample illustrations of a variety of work program evaluations typical of APDCs.
Although each component can be administered as an independent element, the usefulness of the evaluation process is also related to how well the APDC ties the three components together. For example, work programs considered important by staff, but not perceived as important by the APDC1 s client groups, require some adjustment in content or attention to the education of client groups (itself a significant work project), or some combination of both.
In turn, improved management policies and practices can help correct administrative difficulties which inhibit the achievement of specific program objectives.

CHARACTERISTICS

This chapter concludes with a discussion of

OF THE PROCESS the characteristics of the evaluation process which

enhance its usefulness to the APDC.

INTEGRATED WITH PLANNING

First and perhaps foremost, the work program component integrates evaluation with planning. It is applied during the program planning stages and becomes part of the planning process. Thus, the

- 11 -

process views planning and evaluaeion as a continuous and unified process aptly described as systematic program development.

MODULARITY

Another feature of this evaluation method is that it does not have to be applied by an APDC all at once. Considerable effort and time are required to develop objectives and the associated performance and effectiveness criteria in any given program area. Hence, it may be advantageous (depending on the APDC) to implement the process on an incremental basis. This modular or building block approach enables the APDC to adapt the evaluation process at a pace suitable to its ability and desire.

Moreover, the first attempts at identifying objectives a:n,d establishing measurement criteria for activity performance and program achievement may prove somewhat inadequate. The evaluation process, however, provides its own remedy by continuous refinement and improvement through each stage of its implementation.

The evaluation process is further characterized

by the fact that it is a self-improvement device. One

SELF-IMPROVEMENT clear principle of management psychology is that or-

ganizations, like people, only change when they want

to or when th_ey realize they must do so in order to

I

exist. Therefore, an underlying assumption of this

,I ,

proposed approach is that the APDC is honestly seek-

I

ing self-improvement.

PROMOTES UNDERSTANDING AND MOTIVATION

Evaluation requires that an APDC carefully and concisely identify the details of its work program activities and accomplishments, look at its management and administrative capabilities, and review its image and activities as perceived by its clients. All of these actions contribute to the sharpening of the understanding of what the APDC is attempting to accomplish, how it is going to accomplish its objectives, and what impact the APDC is having. Also, because the process emphasizes the participation of the APDC 1s policy makers, its administrators, its staff, and its clients, this increased understanding of the APDC is broadcast to a large audience.

i
!,

- 12 -

,.1
!
In turn, this improved understanding contributes to increased motivation of those involved with the APDC. Nothing helps motivate people in their work more than an understanding of what they are doing, why they are doing it, and what they have achieved,
Given the relatively high levels of ability and dedication currently displayed by APDCs, this increase in understanding and motivation should translate into more meaningful and relevant achievements for APDCs.

' .

- 13 -

3 THE PERCEPTION COMPONENT

PURPOSES

The perception component consists of a set of interview questionnaires to be administered and analyzed by an external task force (discussed in chapter 6 ). The overall questionnaire is designed to indicate:
1. the facts and data about the overall operation of the APDC;
2. the extent of each respondent's knowledge of the APDC and its operations;
3. the respondent's attitudes and perceptions of the APDC and the various programs with which it is involved;
4. the respondent's views and attitudes about what the APDC should be accomplishing and the programs with which it should be involved;
In another sense, however, the interview instrument does not exhaust all of the possible areas of inquiry into the total APDC operation. Rather, it serves as a catalyst for discussion between the interviewer and the respondent regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the APDC. In this vein, the intent is to aid the respondent in his attempt to gain a better understanding of the APDC for evaluative purposes.
The questionnaire is divided into seven sections. Each focuses on a generalized segment or aspect of the total APDC operation. Not all respondents are asked to answer questions in all seven areas. Rather, questions requiring specialized knowledge or information will be directed only to those individuals who could be expected to respond knowledgeably.

- 15 -
\:
t

Furthermore, the same question area does not necessarily ask exactly the same questions of each responding group. Within each area area differing though corresponding questions which are tailored to the concerns and backgrounds of the respondents.

I PURPOSE AND FUNCTIONS

Question Area I inquires about respondent views and perceptions of the overall APDC purpose and functions. These questions attempt to determine what the respondent feels is the primary reason for the existence of the APDC. In line with this, there are also questions regarding his views of where APDC resources should be directed in order to meet this overall purpose.

Finally, this question area explores the respondent's knowledge of the APDC in terms of its general activities. How informed are various respondents regarding APDC work activities?

II PROGRAM GOALS

Question Area II more specifically explores how APDC program goals and objectives are established. This involves the setting of goal priorities, coordination of goals with other affiliated programs, and the contributions from various APDC related groups and individuals. This question area also asks for the respondent's perceptions of factors which bring about changes in program goals and objectives.

In conjunction with the work program component, this question area also inquires about the respondent's knowledge of whether measures of performance and effectiveness have been designed for the APDC 1s programs. That is, is the APDC attempting to measure the performance and impact of its various programs?

III EXTERNAL INFLUENCES

Question Area III asks, in part, about the

external influences and constraints which affect an

APDC's performance and effectiveness. Because the

relationship between the APDC and its member gov-

ernments and client groups is critical to its success-

ful operation, this question area focuses on the meth-

\

ods of communication between the APDC and its clients.

! !

Questions are raised to determine which individuals

and groups communicate most often with the APDC

and whom they communicate through or with.

- 16 -

IV INTERNAL INFLUENCES
V PLANS AND STUDIES
VI TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
~ .;
';:

This section also attempts to reveal the possible sources of conflict which might exist between the APDC and member local governments and other client groups. Hopefully, this will enable the APDC to deal better with problems before they become too intensified. Also, the intent is to give the task force an opportunity to communicate wishes and desires which normally might not be communicated in day-to-day APDC operations.
Question Area IV examines the internal influences and constraints which exist within the APDC. This includes the nature of the internal decision-making process, the roles which various office-holders play within the APDC, and the perceptions which respondents have about their own jobs and the jobs of others.
This section, in part, attempts to determine the extent of an APDC 1s internal coordination. It also gives the respondents an opportunity to constructively evaluate their own roles within the APDC.
Question Area V examines the planning and studies function of the APDC operation, including the extent of coordination between the APDC planning staff and local planning agencies within its region. The questions touch on the problem of overlap and duplication of planning and study efforts. In conjunction with this, inquiries are made about the possible existence and utility of information exchange agreements. The inter-relationship between the APDC and other planning agencies within the region in respect to role is also examined.
Finally, this section briefly examines the past record of implementation of proposed APDC plans and studies.
The sixth question area examines the two functional areas of technical assistance and project application review and comment. In terms of technical assistance, the questions focus on the amount, quality, and type of assistance which the APDC offers to member communities and client groups. This section also examines other APDC rules and policies which determine whether or not a perspective client is eligible to receive APDC assistance.

- 17 -
I
i:

REVIEW AND COMMENT
VII SPECIAL SERVICES

The review and comment segment surveys the regulations and policies which affect the A-95 review process. Are clients and involved individuals satisfied with the current operation? What possible changes are suggested, etc.? In general, the emphasis is to bring to the attention of the APDC any points of conflict which may have arisen or might arise from the A-95 review process.
The last question area generally examines the specialized services which an APDC can administer within its region. This area applies only to those involved in the direct administration of grants or programs.
In particular, this question area determines whether the APDC has established policies regarding the type of services it is willing to directly administer and whether there is conflict with local government or other groups because of APDC involvement. Also included are questions specifying whether measures of performance and effectiveness are part of the APDC 1s present overall administration of these programs. Finally, this section considers client satisfaction with the program or service being administered.

PEOPLE TO INTERVIEW

Several groups and individuals have been identified for interviews in order to get a complete and accurate picture of the APDC. Given a sample of sufficient size, the individuals included here represent a wide variety of-functions and activities inside and outside the APDC.

It is important that members of the APDC

'

BOARD OF

Board be interviewed because they represent the communities and governments served by the APDC. It

DIRECTORS

is also important because they are responsible for

the total APDC operation.

Because of the logistical problems involved

in interviewing boards with twenty or.more members

on an individual basis, it is recommended that a

I

meeting be held for all board members. The task

force can divide the members present into smaller

groups of four or five and then conduct the interview.

.

- 18 -

This also provides a good forum for the board members 1 discussion of various aspects of the APDC. A
copy of the board questionnaire is contained in Appendix 2, pp. A - 83 to A - 100.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Due to the critical nature of his position, the Executive Director is interviewed on all aspects of APDC policy and operation. A copy of this questionnaire is contained in Appendix 2, pp. A-57 to A-82.

STAFF

Not all members of the staff are interviewed by the task force. Rather, the emphasis is on interviewing those staff members responsible for supervising program formulation and execution. This includes the individual responsible to the executive director for program coordination. This would not ordinarily include clerical staff. A copy of this questionnaire is contained in Appendix 2, pp. A-31 to A-56.

PUBLIC OFFICIALS

The public officials interview is directed to locally elected and appointed officials who are the clients and beneficiaries of various APD C progra~s, activities, and policies. These officials include mayors, local city managers, county administrators, law enforcement representatives, and other local officials knowledgeable about APDC activities. A copy of this questionnaire is contained in Appendix 2, pp. A-101 to A-118.

PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS

This questionnaire is aimed at representatives of public service agencies having some as sociation with the APDC. This might include local chambers of commerce, community action program representatives, local labor officials, and other groups or persons having a direct interest in the APDC. A copy of this questionnaire is contained in Appendix 2, pp. A -11 9 to A -12 6 .

COMPARABILITY OF QUESTIONNAIRES
/ --

To a great extent, many of the recommenda-
tions which the task force will make to the APDC
will depend on the comparisons of various respondents' answers to certain key questions. The charts in Appendix 3, pp. A-127 to A-134, will serve as a guide to the task force and the APDC in determining
- 19-

which responses should be compared. Question Areas I through VI are charted and contain questions comparable to those in other sections.
- 20-

4 THE MANAGEMENT COMPONENT

- PURPOSE SCOPE

The APDC management questionnaire was developed as an evaluation tool which could be either self-administered or administered by persons from outside the APDC. The questions are concerned with policies, procedures, and other subjects which relate primarily to the internal operations of APDCs.
This questionnaire is separated into the six areas ordinarily considered when management audits are conducted in private or public agencies. The areas are:
1. policies, 2. organization, 3. operating methods, 4. financial procedures, 5. personnel practices, 6. facilities and equipment.
A recent survey of the eighteen APDCs reveals that a majority already possess written or established procedures and policies relating to internal management and administration. The survey also shows that management procedures are indispensable to the APDC if it is to function smoothly and efficiently.
The survey pointed out, however, that although the majority of respondents placed great importance on management procedures, differences in the operations and scope of activities among APDC preclude the possibility that each might adopt the same set of uniform and absolute management st9-ndards. Consequently, any evaluation of the internal administration of APDCs must take the differences existing among them into account.

- 21 ! I

J

ADMINISTERING THE QUESTIONNAIRE

While it is essential that the executive director and key staff members fill out the management questionnaire periodically- -perhaps annually- -the benefits to the APDC would be considerably greater if all staff members participated. In effect, the management questionnaire serves a double purpose: it provides an opportunity to adjust policies and practices to the agency's benefit, and it provides a periodic, constructive outlet for staff complaints and recommendations.

As previously noted, the questionnaire can be either self-administered or administered by an external task force. I the latter method is used, the questionnaires should be forwarded to the APDC and returned to the task force prior to the actual on- site visit by task force members. I this is done, it allows the task force the opportunity to analyze responses in time to identify problems that deserve closer attention during the visit.

USING THE RESULTS

Once the questionnaire has been administered and the responses compiled and analyzed, specific findings and possible recommendations should be submitted to the APDC executive director for appropriate action. One method he might employ to investigate methods of dealing with specific management problems would be checking with those APDCs having a high rating in those administrative and management areas where his APDC may be weak or in need of help. A copy of the management questionnaire is contained in Appendix 1.

- 22 -

5 THE WORK PROGRAM COMPONENT

PURPOSE
, .. FRAMEWORK . APDC GOAL

The work program component is a mechanism which will enable the APDC board, executive director, and staff to logically and systematically assess what each program area is attempting to accomplish and to what extent intended objectives are being achieved. Basically, it is a self-improvement tool designed to be used internally by an individual APDC. By continually using this mechanism to critically review and analyze its program, the APDC should be able to improve its overall performance and effectiveness. This process will also provide the APDC with a better understanding of where it stands, where it is going, and what degree of success it is having in meeting needs and resolving problems in each of its program areas .
The framework of this component is shown in Figure 2. The process for utilizing this framework is outlined below:
1. identify overall APDC goal; 2. identify program areas; 3. establish objectives for each program area; 4. indicate projects and activities under-
taken to satisfy or achieve objectives; 5. determine evaluation criteria which will
measure achievement of objectives.
Examples of how these steps are applied to several program areas are contained in Appendix 4.
An overall APDC goal is important not only to the work program component but to the other two components as well. This is particularly true of the perception component since it makes an effort to determine whether differences exist in respect to the APDC' s target or goal. The idea of a goal at

- 23 -

this level is to establish why the APDC exists and what it is generally trying to accomplish. Although the overall goal need not be stated in specific, measurable terms, it should be stated in such a way that one can determine whether progress toward the goal is or is not being achieved.

Each APDC performs its work activities with-

in a framework of program areas. Generally, these

PROGRAM AREAS

program areas are readily identified because they are

substantive in nature (e. g., criminal justice, trans-

portation, governmental management). It should be

pointed out that, although some program areas are

common to all APDCs (e. g., criminal justice, eco-

nomic development), there is considerable variability

in program areas among APDCs. Also, even in in-

stances where several APDCs conduct the same pro-

grams, there may be considerable variation among

them regarding the emphasis accorded that program.

These differences result from a combination of fac-

tors such as area needs, APDC staff, and available

resources.
1,',

OBJECTIVES

Objectives are defined as c;tn end product or end condition desired at some future time. Objectives must be understandable, achievable, and measurable. Figure 2 shows three levels of objectives for each program area: ultimate, intermediate, and immediate.

ultimate

The first or highest level is called the ultimate or long range level. These go beyond what the APDC itself can do directly in its advisory role. For example, the APDC is not a law enforcement agency, yet it may have as an ultimate objective to reduce the rate of crime. Or in housing, its ultimate objective may be to reduce the number of substandard dwellings without having the direct means to effect this.

There are several purposes for writing objectives at a level on which an APDC does not have direct control. First, it provides a perspective from which the program staff can more readily write immediate and, if necessary, intermediate objectives. Having ultimate objectives thus provides a guideline or a target. By working toward this target, the APDC

- 24 -

I
Figure 2

r---.=-

..

-

OVERALL APDC

-."..'

I

GOAL(S)

'

CRIMINAL JUS'! ICE
PROGRAM AREA
! .
Ultimate Objectives
Intermediate Objectives
Imm'ediate Objectives

..",.. . ETC.

Ul
> ~

I~ONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

l-1
uE-t ~

ROGRAMAREA

t:Q
0

Cz l
~

Ultimate Objectives
Intermediate Objectives
Immediate Objectives

Ul ~

~Ul .. 0 ~

.

P1~tt:

oa~

~UUl)lO-f p:j~~ fEi-l Zt~~
~p~-~

0zo~i-~4
~-~zu
~:-~ ~-G
<~G~~~o

l><Gii~N

PROJECTS/ ACTIVITIES

l

PROJECTS/ ACTIVITIES

EVALUATION CRITERIA
Ji"

EVALUATION CRITERIA
li'

EVALUATION IN TERMS OF

PERFORMANCE AND IMPACT

I

i

EVAL DATION FRAMEWORK I FOR WORK PROGRAM

- 25- .

immediate

staff should be better able to develop immediate objectives which logically and causally relate to the ultimate objectives.
A second purpose is that it will enable that APDC to see over a period of time whether and to what degree desirable goals are being achieved. Thus, it will have the means for evaluating itself on a longitudinal time basis in terms of its impact on regional problems and needs.
In addition, given well-expressed ultimate objectives, the APDC should be able to distinguish between effective and ineffective projects- -again, in terms of long range desired impact. Thus, the APDC will have information for timely decision-making regarding which projects should be continued and/ or proliferated within its region.
It is understood, of course, that the programs and projects of the APDC are often among those of other agencies contributing to long-range client objectives. It is a useful feature of the evaluation method, therefore, to help determine--whenever possible-cause and effect relationships between APDC projects and long -term client objectives. Some techniques for determining this include longitudinal time studies coupled with possible use of comparisons and controls.
Finally, it is likely that there will be some concern on the part of the APDC staff that writing objectives over which they f?.ave no control could connote a negative or threatening situation. It should be emphasized, however, that the evaluation mechanism's intention is self-improvement. It is not used as a club or for comparison of one APDC 1s achievements over another. Positive and constructive aspects of this process will exceed the negative risks.
Immediate objectives contrast sharply with long-range objectives because the APDC can affect or influence these in a direct way. Imme_diate objectives need to be stated in measurable terms and should include a specific time frame for completion. They should relate directly to projects and activities undertaken by the APDC. Hence they give direction to planned activity in all of the agency's functional
- 26 -

intermediate
PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES EVALUATION CRITERIA

work areas- -planning, technical assistance, review and comment.
Also, these objectives should define results or end products to be achieved and not activities to be performed. Finally, they ought to bear a. logical and consistent relationship to ultimate objectives. This may require some assumptions or a "logical leap" between the two.
Intermediate objectives bridge this gap and thus serve as logical steps between that which the APDC can influence directly- -the immediate objectives- -and the ultimate objectives which it can only affect indilectly. In many cases, this intermediate level is unnecessary, but in other cases, it is useful. For example, consider the hierarchy of objectives for a criminal justice program area (depicted in Figure 3 ). Note that a considerable amount of reasoning is required in order to go directly from the immediate to ultimate objective. The process becomes more reasonable with the introduction of the intermediate objective.
Projects and activities are planned in order to achieve or obtain the specified immediate objectives. Once the immediate objectives are set, projects and activities can be selected to help achieve them within the constraints and resources influencing the APDC work program.
Evaluation criteria are the measures of performance and effectiveness which indicate achievementor progress. Performance m.easures are basically measures of work output. They are "means" oriented. Examples of performance measures might be number of persons trained, or number of building codes produced. Effectiveness measures, on the other hand, indicate the degree of impact or whether a desired result was obtained. They are 11 end" oriented. Some examples might be a relative decrease in the number of substandard housing units for a given community or a relative decrease in the average time for the adjudication of court cases in a specific jurisdiction.

- 2 7-

Figure 3
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROGRAM AREA

ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE: To improve the administration of Justice in the region.
INTERMEDIATE OBJECTIVE: To increase the clearance rate of cases reported in those law enforcement agencies in the region which have a minimum of eight full-time, sworn officers.
IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVE:
To assist three law enforcement agencies in the region in developing qualified investigative capabilities during FY 1976.
I PROJECTS/ ACTIVITIES
I EVALUATION CRITERIA

Hierarchy of Objectives As Illustrated for Criminal Justice

I!

- 28 -

I

The development of evaluation criteria follows the establishment of objectives and planned activities. As noted earlier, objectives should be either directly measurable or should be structured so that implicitly one can develop criteria which indicate achievement or progress. In either case, it should be possible to write evaluation measures. For some objectives-notably the immediate- -it may be that only performance measures can be obtained. In other cases- -perhaps for ultimate objectives- -only effectiveness or impact measures may be appropriate.
In developing evaluation criteria, it is necessary to remember the data requirements associated with evaluation criteria. If data used in conjunction with effectiveness measures are unobtainable (or are too difficult or expensive to get) then such criteria will be of impractical use.
Often a criterion for judging the achievement of some desired objective is dependent on having baseline data: indicating a condition at some previous point in time. If these data are unavailable, the criterion is of questionable value. For example, a measure of effectiveness of court administration may be reduction in the average time for the adjudication of cases. If one has no estimate of this average time for some period before the project began, then one has nothing to compare with at the end of the project.
It is also important to emphasize that the development of good evaluation criteria is highly dependent on the ingenuity and innovation o the staff person working in the APDC 's substantive program area. Developing useful and practical criteria, like writing meaningful objectives, will not just happen. It evolves over a period of time after applying the evaluation process several times over.
- 29 r

r

I
II

I

1 11!:

I
I

!jllI'

.

I111''1,1' 1.1 ;I

6 PUTTING THE EVALUATION PROCESS INTO PRACTICE

START WITH WORK PROGRAM COMPONENT

Given the interrelationships among the three components of the evaluation p:rocess, it would be possible for the APDC to start the process with any one of them. It seems appropriate to the project team, however, that the APDC initiate the process with the work program component.
There are several reasons to suggest this. For example, the work program component is carried out entirely by the agency staff and can be scheduled when most appropriate for the agency. Moreover, this component takes time to gear up to the point where it can be usefully integrated with information from the two other components.
For these reasons, the work program component seems to be a likely starting point for an APDC. In addition, the APDC should begin its involvement within each program area well before the start of a program year or funding cycle. This will allow the process to be systematically related to program plenning and development.

OTHER COMPONENTS FOLLOW THE EXTERNAL TASK FORCE

An appropriate time to begin the other two evaluation components and to tie their results in with the work program analysis is prior to the beginning of the APDC fiscal year. This presumes that sufficient effort and lead time has been previously allotted to the work program component, so that some feedback from this component is available.
An external task force would assist the APDC in undertaking the perception and the management components of the evaluation process. The task force would probably be a five or six person team

- 31 -

of representatives from other APDC staffs, the Bureau of Commuriity Affairs, and Georgia Association of APDCs, and the University of Georgia or some other agency with evaluation capability. It is essential that these task force members be knowledgeable about APDCs in general but not directly associated with the APDC being evaluated.
Prior to its arrival for the on- site evaluation, the task force would submit the management standards checklist to the APDC. The APDC should respond to this checklist and provide the task force with appropriate demographic data. Additionally, the task force should request information concerning the APDC board, staff, and clients. This information would provide a basis for determining an appropriate sample and a time schedule for carrying out the perception component interviews.

1:

Following receipt of the requested information

ON-SITE VISIT

from the APDC, the task force should review the material and prepare for its on- site visit and interview. During this period, the APDC would assist the

task force in setting up the interview schedule. The

task force would also review with the APDC the re-

sults of the management component and conduct the

perception component inte.rviews.

LOGISTICS AND SAMPLES

To obtain an adequate sample of interviews, however, the task force should stay in the APDC region for three or four days. Keeping this on-site visit as short as posstble will require skillful coordination of and careful attention to the scheduling of interviews.

There is no problem with obtaining interviews from the executive directive and staff since they are centrally located. However, the fact that other respondents are spread throughout the region and have non-APDC -related jobs will create some logistical problems. In the case of APDC board members, it is suggested that one hour of a regularly scheduled board meeting be devoted to the perc-eption interviews. Interviews with a sample of the non-attenders could be arranged for at a time and place convenient for them.

- 32 -

In regard to public officials and special interest representatives, it is suggested that three counties-along with their included cities- -should serve as the base for selecting an interview sample. The counties would be selected according to their representativeness of the APDC region as a whole. One approach might be to rank the counties in the APDC region according to the relative amount of work the APDC is conducting for them. Then the three counties could be selected from the upper third, middle third, and the lower third of the rankings.
The sample of public officials and special interest representatives should consist of individuals holding the same, or similar, job or office in each of the three counties. For example, if the sheriff is interviewed in one county, then sheriffs in the other counties should also be interviewed along with police chiefs from the included cities.
During its site visit, the task force would also review the work program component with the APDC. Thus upon its departure, the task force would have a complete picture of the APDC from an evaluation standpoint and would be in a position to prepare and distribute an evaluation report to provide the APDC with a better and more comprehensive understanding of its strengths and weaknesses.
- 33 -

I,

. 7 RECOMMENDATIONS

.,,

''

USE THE

EVALUATION

PROCESS

The project team recommends that Georgia APDCs adapt and apply the evaluation process described in this report.

The process is basically a design of how to develop and undertake an overall evaluation of an APDC for self-improvement. It is a flexible methodology that can be modified and tailored to the needs and existing circumstances of an APDC.

ORGANIZE THE TASK FORCE
MEMBERSHIP
,,,.;~'f
~;/ '
.:-._: . ! l,

In order to help carry out the process, however, a task force must be organized to assist the APDC in conducting the perception and management components. The task force would also analyze and report the results of the entire process to the APDC.
The task force could be chaired by a representative from the State Advisory Committee for Area Planning and Development. It has been suggested by the evaluation steering committee that the state advisory committee accept the responsibility for insuring the continuity of the overall evaluation effort. Other prime membership on the task force would come from the Georgia Association of APDCs, Georgia Regional Executive Directors Association, and the Bureau of Community Affairs.
Additional representation might come from: the Governor's office; State Department of Administrative Services; State Office of Planning and Budget; private business (e. g., Georgia Power); Association County Commissioners of Georgia; Georgia Municipal Association; and federal agencies.

- 35-

rotating staff assistance
permanent staff
credibility and continuity
CONTINUE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO APDCS

In addition, the task force would need other working staff. It is suggested that each APDC assign a staff member (available on an as -needed basis) to assist in the on-site aspects of the evaluation being conducted in a different but nearby APDC. It would be understood that this commitment would not exceed a reasonable time for on-site assistance, perhaps one man-week, on the part of any APDC. Initially, the Institute of Community and Area Development and Institute of Government at the University of Georgia would also be a staff resource for the evaluation effort. Possibly, the Industrial Development Division at Georgia Tech or the School of Urban Life at Georgia State could provide other staff resources for ongoing evaluation efforts.
Experience may also indicate the need for a part-time or full-time pe1son to assist the state advisory committee and the task force in completing the evaluation reports. Alternatively, this staff function could be contracted to a university or some other agency with evaluation capability.
The constant use of a task force and state advisory committee to oversee APDC evaluations will help promote both credibility and continuity in the evaluation program. It is important that credibility be established and maintained in order to strengthen the APDC 1s position with its clients and state and federal agencies. It is also important for the evaluation process to have an element of permanency associated with it. Establishing, supporting, and using a task force will help to insure a dynamic continuity to the evaluation efforts.
The APDCs will also need some continuing technical assistance to get an evaluation process underway. For example, since the wol!'kp;rogram component at this stage is incomplete, the technical assistance program would be directed to further developing and formulating practical examples of the evaluation methodology in specific APDC program areas. These examples would be illustrative but could serve as the bases from which an APDC could derive its ow.n work components.

----

START WITH THE WORK COMPONENT

In this regard, it is also suggested that each APDC attempt to initiate the work program component on a limited basis in all of its program areas. This approach is in keeping with the modular and evolutionary characteristics of the process and would permit the APDC to accumulate some internal expertise in evaluation. In this way, the APDC can initially concentrate its limited efforts on those program areas (and within areas, on those projects) which lend themselves to evaluation.

POLICY SUPPORT

Finally, and perhaps most important, the project team recommends that the Georgia Association of APDCs, the state advisory committee, and the Georgia Regional Executive Directors Association individually and collectively promote and support the evaluation program. It is also suggested that the board of directors and the executive director also voice their support of the evaluation process at the individual APDC level. Policy level support is needed to legitimize the evaluation process and encourage its implementation among the APDCs.

- 37 -

APPENDIX 1 MANAGEMENT STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE
A -1

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~-!--

Background Information The Institute of Community and Area Development contracted
to develop a process or system whereby individual APDCs could evaluate themselves or be evaluated by an external Task Force. To do this it was necessary that standards be identified so the way APDCs conducted their affairs could in some way be measured.
The following Internal Administration/Management Questionnaire was developed to be used as an evaluation tool. The questions address themselves to policies, procedures, and other areas which primarily relate to internal management and administration and they have been formulated in such a way so as to be answered by the APDC Director or key staff people. As noted above, the Questionnaire can be self-administered or administered by someone outside the APDC.
Questionnaire The Internal Administration/Management Questionnaire is
separated into the six (6) areas which are ordinarily considered when management audits are conducted. In a recent survey of the 18 Georgia APDCs it was revealed that the vast majority of the APDCs already possessed written or established policies or procedures in the areas covered in the Questionnaire. In addition, the survey showed that both the APDC directors and their key staff people believed these mat-
,
ters to be either "important'' or "very important" in order for the APDC to function smoothly and efficiently.
A-3

~..... --------------------------------------------------

It should be noted, however, that although the vast majority of

the individuals who were included in the original APDC survey felt

that these administration and management elements were important

to consider when APDCs are evaluated, a number of individuals called

attention to the differences which existed among APDCs. For that rea-

son, it is important that individual differences be taken into account

whenever this Questionnaire is administered. Flexibility appears to

I

be a hallmark of many APDCs, and this should certainly be maintained.

'I

The evaluator, however, whether he be from within or without the

APDC, should be conscious that flexibility should be orderly and not

be used as an excuse fo.r lack of organization.

Administering the Questionnaire It is suggested that the Questionnaire be administered at least
once a year. It is further proposed that it be filled out both by the APDC Executive Director and key staff people. It should take less than 30 minutes to complete.

Analysis of Questionnaire The Questionnaire can be used as a self-help tool. It is designed
to focus in on what are considered to be key internal management areas. In most instances~ a 11 yes 11 answer would be considered to be
the appropriate response, but this certainly would not always be the case. Again, flexibility and other factors would account for individual
A-4

II

APDCs responding to the same questions in different ways. For this reason, space is provided after each question for comments to allow opportunity for the respondent to more fully explain or clarify his response.

I. I ~
'
<
ii!
1-

A- 5

II
1,!

''' '
APDC
INTERNAL .ADMINISTRATION /MANAGEMENT S 'I' A N :0 .A !\:0 S
prepared by ICAD, University of Georgia, for the Department of Community Development June, 1975
A-7

APDC:
Person Completing Questionnaire:
Title:
Per son Administering Questionnaire:
Title:
Additional Comments:
II
i1l i
1 1if'
:,1 I'
II
'r'

Date:

A-8

INTERNAL ADMINISTRATION/MANAGEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

I. Policies 1. Does the APDC have written policies related to its overall purpose? Comments:

Yes No

2. Are such policies shared with key APDC personnel? Comments:

Yes No

3. Have policies been evaluated and updated with the past 12 months? Comments:

Yes No

A-9

4. Does the APDC have a set of By-laws which clearly establish the rules and regulations for the conduct of its affairs? Comments:

Yes No

I

II
I

5. If the APDC has a set of By-laws, have

Yes No

I' I
these been updated within the past 12

months? Comments:

II. Organization 1. Does the APDC have an updated (within the past 12 months) Organization Chart? Comments:

Yes No

A-10

2. Is the APDC departmentalized (i.e., organized according to components)? Comments:

Yes No

3. Does the APDC Board of Directors determine which projects will be undertaken? Comments:

Yes No

4. If the APDC Board of Directors determines which projects are to be undertaken, has this created any administrative/management problems? Comments:

Yes No

A-ll

5.

Do representatives of Federal, State,

and Local governments ever get involved

in the internal administration and

management of the APDC?

Comments:

Yes No

6. If governmental representatives get in-
valved in the internal administration and management of the APDC? Comments:

Yes No

A- 12
,,, :'i
I 'I

III. Operating Methods 1. Has the APDC a written Manual of Policies and Procedures? Comments:

Yes No

2.

Does the APDC have written or established

(i.e. , not written, but understood by APDC

staff) management information, communi-

cation, and reporting procedures?

Comments:

Yes No

3. Does the APDC have written or established procedures which relate to coordination with public agencies and organizations? Comments:

Yes No

A-13

r

4.

Does the APDC have written or established

procedures which relate to community

organization and citizen participation?

Comments:

Yes No

5. Does the APDC have written or established
procedures which relate to review and comment responsibilities upon applications by local units of governments for project grants? Comments:

Yes No

6. Does the APDC have written procedures
which relate to the selection of the APDC Board of Directors? Comments:

Yes No

A- 14

----

7. Does the APDC have written or established
procedures which relate to correspondence (out-going and in- coming) routing? Comments:

Yes No

8. Does the APDC have written or established
procedures which relate to filing? Comments:

Yes No

9. Does the APDC have written or established

procedures which relate to reproducing

materials (i.e., printing, photo-copying,

etc. )?

', .

Comments:

~~

-

Yes No

A-15

1o. Does the APDC have written Travel
procedures? Comments:

Yes No

11. Does the APDC have written or established
procedures which relate to Requests for Technical Assistance from local governments? Comments:

Yes No

12. Does the APDC have written or established procedures which relate to the use of the telephone for long distance calls? Comments:

Yes No

A- 16

13. Does the APDC have written or established procedures which relate to the employment of professional consultants? Comments:

Yes No

IV. Financial Procedures 1. Does the APDC have written Budgeting procedures? Comments:

Yes No

2.

Does the APDC have written Accounting

procedures?

Comments:

Yes No

A- 17

3. Does the APDC have written Reporting procedures? Comments:

Yes No

I

4. Does the APDC have written Auditing
procedures? Comments:

Yes No

5. Does the APDC have written Supply

Yes No

Requisition procedures?

I ,

Comments:

I I
I
!

I :

I'

A- 18

I,,

I'
'

I /

----
6. Does the APDC have written Supply
Requisition procedures? Comments:

Yes No

7. Does the APDC have written procedures for maintaining records of indirect costs and in-kind contributions? Comments:

Yes No

8. Does the APDC have written procedures which relate to Leave and Vacation? Comments:

Yes No

A- 19

II

9. Does the APDC have written or established

Yes No

procedures for the use of Petty Cash?

Comments:

10. Does the APDC have written or established procedures which relate to contract procedures? Comments:

Yes No

11. Does the APDC have written or established procedures which relate to the Inventory of supplies and equipment? Comments:

Yes No

A- 20

12. Is the APDC Fiscal Staff adequate, i.e., do you feel you have an adequate number of trained, capable Fiscal people? Comments:

Yes No

13. Do APDC Fiscal procedures basically correspond to those contained in A-1 02 and A-87 Circulars? Comments:

Yes No

14. Does making APDC Fiscal procedures correspond to A-102 and A-87 Circulars create any internal administration/ management problems? Comments:

Yes No

.A-21

15. Is the APDC required to utilize more than one specific type of budget (e. g., Line Item, Lump Sum, Performance, or Program)? Comments:

Yes No

16. If required to use more than one type of
budget, does this create any internal administration/ management problems? Comments:

Yes No

I i
,i
!

17. Does the APDC maintain Time Sheets or other attendance records?

Yes No

Comments:
I
,I,
I,
i I

A-22

---

18. Does the APDC have Fidelity Bonding for employees who operate the Fiscal system? Comments:

Yes No

19. Does the APDC have a Fiscal Control System which provides for adequate cash flow and control for on-going operating expenses? Comments:

Yes No

20. Do APDC funding sources require it to monitor agencies with which it has entered into contract? Comments:

Yes No

A- 23

V. Personnel Practices l. Does the APDC have written Personnel policies? Comments:

Yes No

2. Has the APDC encountered difficulty in recruiting capable staff? Comments:

Yes No

3. Does the APDC have established criteria for the selection and promotion of personnel? Comments:

Yes No

I

I

I

A- 24

' '

4.

Does the APDC have procedures and

policies for the regular evaluation of personnel?

Comments:

Yes No

'

s.

Does the APDC have policies which relate

Yes No

to staff training and development?

Comments:

6.

Does the APDC have a Position Classifica-

tion Plan or something similar?

Comments:

Yes No

A-25

7.

Does the APDC have job/position descrip-

tions which outline duties and respon-

sibilities of staff?

Comments:

Yes No

8.

Does the APDC have an established Pay

Plan?

Comments:

Yes No

Are APDC salaries and fringe benefits competitive? Comments:

Yes No

A- 26
I
1,1' ,'1 I

---

i

1o. Does the APDC maintain a file on each
employee which includes such information as his /her original application, references, performance evaluation, etc.? Comments:

Yes No

11. Does the APDC have established Grievance procedures? Comments:

Yes No

12. Has staff turnover created any problems over the past 12 months? Comments:

Yes No

A- 27

f

13. Do Project Directors and Component Heads possess substantial autonomy? Comments:

Yes No

14. Does the APDC have an Affirmative Action Plan? Comments:

Yes No

A- l;!8
I
I' I
I, 1'1,
II., I

---

VI. Facilities and Equipment

1.

Is the APDC facility adequate to meet

its needs?

Comments:

Yes No

2.

Is the APDC' s equipment adequate to meet

its needs?

Comments:

Yes No

A- 29

APPENDIX 2 PERCEPTION COMPONENT QUESTIONNAIRES
A-31

APDC STAFF
INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
prepared by ICAD, University of Georgia, for the Department of Community Development June, 19 75 A- 33
J

APDC STAFF 1. Name: ------------------ 2. Age:_ under 30
30-45 46-60 over 60
A- 34

QUESTION AREA I APDC STAFF
1. What is ~he overall purpose of your APDC as you understand it to be?

2. Below y_ou will find listed a number of functions which might charac-
terize different APDCs. After looking the list over, indicate in the
colurr~n an the left the relative importance that each function should
have for the APDC. Do this by recording a 1 11 11 next to the function
which should be most important, a "2" beside the next most important,
etc. The least important function will be designated with the number
"4".
Technical Assistance Function Review and Comment Function (e. g., A-95 Review) Planning and Studies Function Special Services Function (direct administration of programs, etc.)
3, With regard to regional or multi-county and multi-municipal concerns,
would you say that the emphasis of your work activities should be:

0
all regional

D
mostly regional

D
half local half regional

D
mostly local

0
all local

A- 35

4. Does this agree with what your activities currently are?

Yes -----
Comments:

No -----

5. Listed below are the client groups an APDC might serve. Please rank the groups according to the extent that the resources of your department should be allocated in serving them. Assign the rank of_!_ to that group you feel should receive the largest allocation of your department's resources, assign the rank of~ to that group you feel should receive the next largest allocation of resources, etc.

Desired allocation of APDC resources Local municipal governments Local county governments
State agencies I

Comments

Local school districts
Private enterprise
Civic groups

Public districts & authorities
Other (please listj

A- 36
j

6. Does the above agree with your department's current allocation of

resources?

Yes ----
Comments:

No -----

7. Also, please indicate your view of how knowledgeable each group

is with respect to your department's work activities.

Local municipal governments
Local county governments

Client knowledge of your department

no
knowledge
0

little
knowledge
0

moderate good deal of

knowledge knowledge

0

0

0

0

o

0

State agencies

D

0

0

0

Local school

D

D

0

D

districts

Private enterprise D

0

D

0

Civic groups

0

0

0

0

Public districts

D

0

0

0

& authorities

Other (please list)

0

0

0

0

A- 37

QUESTION AREA II APDC STAFF

1. In your particular program area, do you have program goals?

Yes -----

No -----

2, Are they written?
Yes -----

No -----

3, Do members of your staff know what these goals are and understand

them?

Yes ----

No ----

4, Within this program, do you have clearly stated objectives?

Yes ----

No -----

5. Are your goals and objectives logically related?

Yes -----

No -----

6. Do you involve the APDC Board in establishing goals and objectives?

Yes ----
If so, how?

No ----

A- 38

j

7. Are goals and objectives ranked a~ cording to priority within the
program?

Yes -----
If so, how?

No- - - - -

8. Do you involve the APDC Board in ranking goals and objectives?

Yes -----
If so, how?

No -----

9. Do you involve clients in ranking goals and objectives?

Yes -----
If so, how?

No -----

A- 39

10. Have these goals and objectives been reviewed with respect to other local and area-wide programs of a related nature either within or without the APDC? (Coordination)

11. What factors usually bring about changes in departmental objectives?

---available funding
0
great influence ---local needs
0
great influence ---local government requests
0
great
influence ---other (identify)
D
great influence

0
moderate influence
0
moderate influence
0
moderate influence
D
moderate influence

D
little influence
D
little influence
D
little influence
0
little influence

12. Are you able to measure progress toward achievement of your pro-

gram goals and objectives?

Yes ----
If so, how?

No -----

A-40

13. For each project is there an established list of performance guidelines?

Yes -----

No -----

14. If so, are these checked periodically?

Yes -----

No -----

15. At the formative stages of your programs, are measures of evaluation

(effectiveness) built in?

Yes -----

No -----

16. If so, are these quantifiable measures?

Yes -----

No -----

17. Do these include a time frame?

Yes -----

No -----

18. How often do you evaluate your goals and objectives?

19. With respect to your program area, would you say the APDC Board

of Directors is:

0
well informed

0
moderately informed A-41

0
poorly informed

20. With regard to your program area, would you say that the local governments in your APDC region are:

D
well informed

0
moderately informed

D
poorly informed

A- 42

--

QUESTION AREA III APDC STAFF

1. Do you perceive any negative feelings toward the APDC from your

client contacts in local government?

Yes ____ If so, why?

No ----

2. Are there any sources of conflict which you see between clients and

the APDC? (e. g., political, personal, A -95 Review, financial, etc.)

Yes

No -----

If so, identify and explain.

3. Are your relationships with, and responsibilities to, Federal agencies

adequately and satisfactorily defined?

Yes -----

No _____

A- 43

4. What changes, if any, would you suggest?

5. Are your relationships with and responsibilities to the State of Georgia

adequately defined?

Yes -----

No -----

6. What changes, if any, would you suggest?

A-44

--

7. Are A-95 procedures appropriate for carrying out A-95 review?

Yes -----
If ~, please explain.

No -----

8. How beneficial is the A-95 review process?

0
very beneficial

0
beneficial

0
not beneficial

A- 45

QUESTION AREA IV APDC STAFF

l. Is your present staff adequate to carry out the overall purpose and

functions of your departmental area?

Yes -----

No -----

2. If not, what types of positions do you need filled?

3. Do you feel that you are adequately used in the process of establishing

goals and in general decision-making within your department?

Yes -----

No -----

4. How often are you consulted?

0
consulted frequently

0
consulted adequately

0
consulted seldom

0
never consulted

5. In general, is staff morale a problem?

0
often

0
sometimes

D
rarely

0
never

A-46

6. Who usually determines which projects will be undertaken by the staff?

7. How much autonomy would you say project directors have in executing

projects and related activities?

D
too much

0
enough to properly do the job

0
too little

8. Do you perceive your role differently than your job description defines it?

Yes -----
If so, how?

No -----

9. Are you responsible to any Advisory Board or Council other than the

APDC Board of Directors (e. g., Health, Aging, etc,)?

Yes -----

No -----

A- 47

10. If so, is this a source of conflict?

Yes ----

No -----

11. If so, explain.

12. What do you perceive to be the Board1s role in the APDC?

A-48

QUESTION AREA V PROGRAM COORDINATOR

I. Is there a means of exchanging information among agencies

which plan or deliver services in your area?

Yes 0

No 0

2. What is the APDC's role in this system?

3. Has the APDC determined those agencies and organizations

with which it must attempt to achieve planning coordination?

Yes 0

No 0

4. If so, which ones?

A- 49

5. How is planning coordination accomplished with state planning agencies?
13. How is planning coordination accomplished with local planning agencies?
7. What cooperative arrangements exist for planning resources, i.e. , funds, facilities, personnel, services?
A- 50

"*""

8. Is the APDC seeking ways to increase cooperation?

Yes 0

No 0

9. If so, how?

10. If so, what are some of the things you are attempting to achieve?

11. If so, has it been effective?

Yes 0

No 0

12. Within the APDC are study/plan priorities determined annually?

Yes 0

No 0

A-51

'
13. What role does the Board play in this?

14. Have written or established procedures been developed for the

conduct of studies/plans to assure that they support the goals

and missions of the agency?

Yes 0

NoD

A-52

15. Although, in general, the APDCs have no authority for implemen-

tation, they are concerned about helping clients with their tech-

nical assistance to implement their plans. With this in mind , how effective is the APDC in getting formal plans and studies

implemented in the following areas:

Very Effective

I. Aging

0

2. Housing

0

3. Criminal Justice

D

4. Industrial Development 0

5. Manpower Planning

0

D 6. Comprehensive Health

0 7. Governmental Management

8. Local Planning

D

9. Annual Devel. Plan

D

10. Education

0

11. Natural Resources

D

12. Agriculture Devel.

0

13. Forestry

D

14. Fire Protection

D

15. Solid Waste Disposal

0

16. Transportation 17. Recreation

0 D

18. Child Care

0

19. Other

D

Effective
D
0 D 0 0 0 D
0 D 0 D 0 D
D D
0 D 0 D

Ineffective
D
0 D
0
0 D D 0 D
0
D 0 0 D D 0 D 0 0

Comments

A-53

QUESTION AREA VI APDC STAFF

1. Are there established APDC guidelines to determine which agencies

and programs are eligible to receive assistance from your department?

Yes -----

No -----

2. Are most of your clients satisfied with the amount of assistance which

you have given them?

Yes -----

No -----

3. Are most of your clients satisfied with the quality of assistance which

you have given them?

Yes -----

No -----

4. Do you attempt to meet with clients at the formative stages of applica-

tion development?

Yes -----

No -----

A-54

5. Although, in general, the APDCs have no authority for implementation, they are concerned about helping clients with their technical assistance to implement their plans. With this in mind, how effective is the APDC in getting formal plans and studies implemented in the following areas?

Very Effective

Aging

D

Housing

0

' Criminal Justice

D

~. Industrial Development

D

''

Manpower Training Comprehensive Health

0 0

0 7. Governmental Management (e. g.,

budgeting, personnel training)

~. Local Planning (e. g. , land use,

0

zoning, water and sewer)

J. Annual Development Plan

0

). Education

0

L. Natural Resources

0

~. Agricultural Development

D

~. Forestry
' Fire Protection
s. Solid Waste Disposal

0 0
D

&. Transportation
7. Recreation
B. Child Care
,_.

0 D D

Other

D

Effective
D 0
0
D
0 0
D
0 0 0 0
D
0 0 D D
D D D

Ineffective
D D D D D D
D
0
D D 0 0 0 0 D D D 0 D

Comments

A- 55

6. In your opinion, should the APDC be involved in providing direct

services to communities?

Yes -----
Explain:

No -----

A- 56

_j

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR INTER VIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
prepared by !CAD, University of Georgia, for the Department of Community Development June, 1975 A- 57

APDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

1.

Name: --------------------------------------

2.

A g e : _ _ _u n d e r 30-45

30

46-60

over 60

3. Number of people you supervise: 4. Years employed by APDC: ______________________ 5. Time in Current Position: 6. Educational Background: 7. Previous Major Work Experience:

8. Membership in Professional Societies:

9. Offices held:
10. Years in Public Service:

Elected: ________ Appointed: _________

11. Major Job Duties (by Priority):-------------------

A- 58

QUESTION AREA I APDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
1. What is the overall purpose of your APDC as you understand it to be?

2. Below you will find listed a number of functions which might characterize different APDCs. After looking the list over, indicate in the column on the left the relative importance that each function should have for the APDC. Do this by recording a.!. next to the function which should be most important, a~ beside the next most important, etc. The least important function will be designated with the number 4.

Technical Assistance Function Review and Comment Function (e. g., A-95 Review) Planning and Studies Function Special Services Function (direct administration of programs, etc.)

3, With regard to regional or multi-county and multi-municipal concerns,

would you say that the emphasis of your work activities should be:

0
all regional

0
mostly regional

D
half local half regional

D
mostly local

0
all local

A- 59
..

4. Does this agree with what your activities currently are?

Yes -----
Comments:

No-----

5. Listed below are the client groups an APDC might serve. Please

rank the groups according to the extent that the resources of your

APDC should be allocated in serving them. Assign the rank of

.!_to that group you feel should receive the largest allocation of

your APDC's resources, assign the rank of~ to that group

you feel should receive the next largest allocation of resources, etc.

Local municipal governments
Local county governments
State agencies

Desired allocation of APDC resources

Comments

Local school districts
Private enterprise
Civic groups

Public districts & authorities
Other (please list)

A- 60

6. Does the above agree with your APDC's current allocation of

resources? Comments:

Yes -----

No ----

7. Also, please indicate your view of how knowledgeable each group is with respect to the APDC 's work activities.

Client knowledge of the APDC

no

little

moderate good deal of

knowledge knowledge knowledge knowledge

D

D

D

D

Local county

D

0

governments

State agencies

D

0

Local school

0

0

districts

0 Private enterprise

0

Civic groups

0

0

Public districts

0

D

& authorities

Other (please list)

0

0

0

0

D

0

0

0

D

0

0

0

D

D

0

0

8. Do you keep your clients informed of any changes in APDC purposes or functions? If so, what means do you employ to do this?

A- 61

QUESTION AREA II APDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 1. What program area(s) should the APDC be involved in that it is not now providing?
2. Are there goals and objectives for each of the program areas? --are they written? --does the APDC staff know what these goals and objectives are and do they understand them? --do the APDC Board members know what these goals and objectives are and understand them?
3. How are the goals and objectives mentioned above established? Is there an established procedure? Who is involved?
A- 62

4. How involved are your client groups in this process? If not, why not?

5, Are your program goals ranked according to priority? Who is

involved in this procedure? Yes -----

No -----

6, Have these prioritized goals been reviewed in termb of how they relate to other local and area-wide efforts of a similar nature? (Coordination)

A- 63

7.

What factors usually bring about changes in program, goals and

objectives?

--available funding
D
great influence --local needs
0
great influence --local government requests
0
great influence --other (identify)
0
great influence

0
moderate influence
D
moderate influence
0
moderate influence
D
moderate influence

D
little influence
D
little influence
0
little influence
D
little influence

8.

Are you able to measure progress toward achievement of your pro-

gram goals and objectives:

Yes -----
If so, how?

No -----

A- 64

9. Are time tables established for each of the program goals?

Yes -----

No -----

10. Are these adjusted periodically to meet with increases and decreases in resources? Explain briefly.

11. For each program is there an established list of performance guidelines? Are these checked periodically?

12. If so, are these performance guidelines checked periodically?

Yes -----

No -----

13. When goals are established for each program are measures of

evaluation (effectiveness) established?

Yes

No -----

14~ Are these quantifiable measures (when possible)?

Yes

No -----

A- 65

15. How often do you evaluate and adjust the APDC goals?

16. With respect to APDC programs, would you say the APDC Board

of Directors is:
D
well informed

0
moderately informed

0
poorly informed

17. With respect to APDC programs, would you say that the local

governments in your APDC region are:

O
well informed

0
moderately
informed

0
poorly
informed

A- 66

QUESTION AREA I I I APDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

1. Do you perceive any negative feelings toward the APDC from your

client contacts in local government?

Yes -----
If so, why?

No -----

2. Are there any sources of conflict which you see between clients and

the APDC? (e. g., political, personal, A-95 Review, financial, etc.)

Yes -----

No -----

If so, identify and explain.

3. Are your relationships with, and responsibilities to, Federal agencies

adequately and satisfactorily defined?

Yes -----

No -----

A- 67

4. What changes, if any, would you suggest?

5. Are your relationships with and responsibilities to the State of

Georgia adequately defined?

Yes -----

No -----

6. What changes, if any, would you suggest?

A- 68

7. How do you involve your clients in your program of work? --identifying needs --setting goals --setting priorities --plan implementation --other
8. Are there member local governments which are not adequately represented on your APDC Board? (e. g., vacant posts, Board members not attending, etc. )
9. If so, is there any way that you can change this situation? How?
A- 69

10. In general, what factors limit the full realization of the APDC purpose, functions, programs of work, etc.? (e. g., legal constraints, federal funding, etc. )
11. Do conflicts arise because of inter -relationships between the APDC Board of Directors and other Advisory boards and commissions with overlapping lines of authority and jurisdiction (e. g. , comprehensive health boards, aging, etc.)?
A-70
L

12. Do all member local governments pay their share of the APDC funding on time?
13. If not, can this be changed?
A-71

QUESTION AREA IV APDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 1. Is your present staff adequate to carry out the overall purpose and functions of your APDC? 2. If not, what types of positions do you need filled?
3. What is the role of the Board Chairman?
4. What should it be?
A- 72
I I
I I

5. In general, how interested are Board members in the operation

o of the APDC?
very interested

0
somewhat
interested

0
not very interested

6. Usually, what percent of the total Board attend meetings?

D
1OOo/o - 90o/o

0
90o/o - 70o/o

0
70% - 40o/o

0
less than
40o/o

7. How much influence does the Board have on the program of work

of the APDC (e. g., priority setting,

0

0

0

total control

much influence

some influence

etc.)?

0
little
influence

D
no
influence

8. How much influence does the Board have on the actual management

of the APDC?
D
much influence

0
some
influence

D
little
influence

D
no influence

9. How is the Board of value to the effectiveness of the APDC?

A-13

10. What changes would increase or improve the value of the Board to the APDC?
11. What changes would increase or improve the value of the Board to its representative government?

A-74

I
I
..L:

J

12. What is a Board member's primary responsibility?

13. Do you involve your staff in goal setting and decision-making?

Yes -----

No ____

14. How often are they consulted?

0
consulted frequently

0
consulted adequately

0
consulted seldom

0
never consulted

15. In general, is staff morale a problem?

0
often

0
sometimes

D
rarely

D
never

16. Who usually determines which projects will be undertaken by the staff?

17. How much autonomy would you say project directors have in executing

projects and related activities?

D
too much

0
enough to properly do the job
A-75

D
too little

QUESTION AREA VI APDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

1. Have you established guidelines to determine which agencies

(public and private) are eligible to receive technical assistance

from the APDC?

Yes -----
Comments:

No -----

2. Are there established guidelines to determine the types of pro-

grams which staff members may or may not give assistance to?

Yes -----
Comments:

No -----

A- 76

3. Which area of technical assistance capability are you weakest in? Does the APDC need a new staff position to meet this deficiency?
4. Are most of your clients satisfied with the amount and quality of assistance which you have given them?
5. Does your APDC have an explicit procedure and paper processing system for A-95?
A- 77

6. Are most of your clients satisfied with this system?

7.

What rating would you give present federal and state regulations

for A-95 reviews?

CLARITY
o
incomprehensible

0
comprehensible

0
very clear

RESTRICTIVENESS
D
overly

0
moderate

0
needs more firmness

TIME ALLOWED BY REGULATIONS

D
never enough

D
seldom enough

0
usually enough

D
always enough

A-78

8. Although, in general, the APDCs have no authority for implementation, they are concerned about helping clients with their technical assistance to implement their plans. With this in mind, how effective is the APDC in getting formal plans and studies implemented in the following areas?

Very Effective

1. Aging

D

z. Housing

0

3. Criminal Justice

0

4. Industrial Development

D

5. Manpower Training

0

6. Comprehensive Health

0

D 7. Governmental Management (e. g.,

budgeting, personnel training)

8. Local Planning (e. g., land use,

D

zoning, water and sewer)

9. Annual Development Plan

0

10. Education

0

11. Natural Resources

D

1Z. Agricultural Development

D

13. Forestry

0

14. Fire Protection

D

15. Solid Waste Disposal

D

16. Transportation

0

17. Recreation 18. Child Care

D
D

19. Other

D

Effective
D D D D 0 0
D
D 0 0 0 0 D D D
D 0
0
D

Ineffective
0 D D D 0
D
0 D 0
D D
D
D
D 0
D D
0 0

Comments

A- 79

QUESTION AREA VII APDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR l. Does the APDC have an established policy for determining the kinds of Grants and Projects which .it will directly administer? For example, does the APDC have a policy regarding service delivery which has the potential for coming into conflict with the private sphere or other public operations?
2. Are specific performance measures and effectiveness criteria established at the onset of the administration of any service grant?
A-80 ,,
I l\'_

3. Are these measures of performance and effectiveness periodically checked?
4. Are specific objectives established for each project within the service delivery realm?
5. Is the targeted clientele group staisfied with the quantity and quality of services delivered? A- 81

6. In your opinion, should the APDC be involved in providing direct

administration of services to communities?

Yes -----
Explain:

No -----

A-82

APDC BOARD MEMBERS
INTER VIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
prepared by ICAD, University of Georgia, for the Department of Community Development June, 1975 A- 83

APDC BOARD MEMBERS

1. Name: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2. Age:__ under 30 30-45
46-60
over 60

3. Local Government Affiliation:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4. Public Position/Title:

5. AElpepcotiendte-d -_ _ -_-

6. Business Affiliation:

7. Business Position/Title:

8. Length of Time as an APDC Board Member:

9. APDC Committees You Currently Serve On:

10. APDC Committees You Have Served On In the Past:

A- 84

QUESTION AREA I APDC BOARD MEMBERS
1. What is the overall purpose of your APDC as you understand it to be?

2. Below you will find listed a number of functions which might charac-

terize different APDCs. After looking the list over, indicate in the

column on the left the relative importance that each function should

have for the APDC. Do this by recording a 11 1" next to the function

which should be most important, a "2" beside the next most important,

etc. The least important function will be designated with the number

"4".

Technical Assistance Function Review and Comment Function (e. g . A-95 Review) Planning and Studies Function Special Services Function (direct administration of programs, etc. )

3. With regard to regional or multi-county and multi-municipal concerns.

would you say that the emphasis of the APDC should be:

0
all regional

0
mostly regional

0
half local half regional

0
mostly local

0
all local

A- 85

4. Does this agree with what the APDC is currently doing?

Yes -----
Comments:

No -----

5. Listed below are the client groups an APDC might serve. Please

rank the groups according to the extent of the resources you think

should be allocated to them. Assign the rank of.!:_ to that group

you feel should receive the largest allocation of APDC resources,

assign the rank of~ to that group you feel should receive the next

largest allocation of resources, etc.
lDesired allocation of
APDC resources Local municipal
governments Local county
governments , State agencies

Comments

Local school districts
Private

Public districts & authorities
Other ( lease list

A- 86

...

6. Does the above agree with the APDC' s current allocation of

resources?

Yes ----
Comments:

No ----

7. Also, please indicate your view of how knowledgeable each group

is with respect to the APDC.

Local municipal governments

no
knowledge
D

Client knowledge of APDC

little

moderate good deal of

knowledge knowledge knowledge

D

D

D

Local county

0

0

0

0

governments

State agencies

0

0

0

0

Local school

D

D

D

D

districts

0 Private enterprise

0

D

D

Civic groups

D

D

D

0

Public districts

0

0

0

0

& authorities

Other (please list)

0

0

0

0

A- 87

QUESTION AREA II APDC BOARD MEMBERS

1. In previous questions we have asked about the major purpose(s) and functions of the APDC. Below you will find a list of general program areas in which APDCs are involved. In the columns on the right please indicate how knowledgeable or informed you are concerning each program area by checking the appropriate box on each line.

Well

Moderately Poorly

Informed Informed Informed

1. Aging 2. Housing 3. Criminal Justice

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4. Industrial Development 5. Manpower Training 6. Comprehensive Health

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0 7. Governmental Management (e. g.,

0

0

budgeting, personnel training)

8. Local Planning (land use,

0

0

0

zoning, water, sewer, etc.)

9. Annual Development Plan

0

0

0

1 o. Education

0

D

0

11. Natural Resources

0

0

0

12. Agricultural Development

0

0

0

13. Forestry 14. Fire Protection 15. Solid Waste Disposal

0

0

0

D

D

D

0

0

0

16. Transportation 17. Recreation 18. Child Care

D

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

19. Other

0

0

0

A- 88

Comments

2. What additional program areas should the APDC be involved in? 3. What program areas (if any) should be dropped by the APDC?
A- 89

4. In terms of service to your community how useful have the following APDC programs been?

l. Aging 2. Housing 3. Criminal Justice

Very Useful
D D D

4. Industrial Development

0

5. Manpower Training

D

6. Comprehensive Health

0

D 7. Governmental Management (e. g.,

budgeting, personnel training)

8. Local Planning (land use,

D

zoning, water, sewer, etc.)

9. Annual Development Plan

D

1o. Education

0

ll. Natural Resources

0

12. Agricultural Development

0

13. Forestry

D

14. Fire Protection

0

15. Solid Waste Disposal

D

16. Transportation

0

17. Recreation

D

18. Child Care

0

19. Other

D

Somewhat Useful
D D D D 0 D D 0 0 0 0 D D 0 0 0 0 0 0

Not Useful
D D
D 0 D 0
0
D 0 D 0 0 0 D D 0 0 D 0

Comments

A-90

QUESTION AREA III APDC BOARD MEMBERS 1. In general, is the local government which you represent satisfied with the performance of the APDC?
2. What areas of APDC performance are they most pleased with?
3. What areas do they feel need improvement?
A- 91

4. Are there any sources of conflict which you see between the APDC

and member local governments?

Yes -----

No -----

If so, identify and explain:

5. Does the government which you represent frequently use you to

communicate with the APDC their needs, goals, etc.?

D
Frequently

0
Sometimes

D
Rarely

D
Never

6. If they do, please cite some examples.

A-92

7. Do you report regularly to the officials of the local government

which you represent the proceedings and activities of the APDC?

D
Frequently

D
Sometimes

0
Rarely

0
Never

A-93

QUESTION AREA IV APDC BOARD MEMBERS
1. How often do you attend Board meetings?

0

0

never miss usually

a meeting attend

0
sometimes attend

D
rarely attend

0
never attend

2. Are APDC Board meetings useful to:

a. you as a Board member b. your local government c. the APDC staff

very
useful
D D D

somewhat
useful
D D D

not
useful
D
D D

3. How much influence do you, as a Board member, have on

APDC policy?

D

D

A great

deal of

influence

0

0

0 No influence

4. How much does the Board influence the program of work of the

APDC (e. g., priority setting, etc.)?

0

0

A great

deal of

influence

D

D

D No influence

A- 94

5. In your capacity as a Board member, approximately how much time (in hours) do you spend a month on APDC business? Please do not include travel time, time related to your normal business routine or time spent at monthly Board meetings in your estimate. Hours Comments:
6. If you are an elected or appointed public official, how much time a month do you spend in your public job on APDC business? Hours Comments:
A-95

7. What changes would increase or improve the value of the Board to the APDC?
8. What changes would increase or improve the value of the Board to its representative governments?

l

A- 96

wiil .._

jP
9. As a Board member, what do you perceive your primary responsibilities to be?

10. As a representative of a local government and a member of the

APDC Board, do you find any points of conflict to your allegiance

and loyalties? If so, how do you resolve these conflicts?

Yes

No

Comments:

11. Has the importance or value to you personally of the APDC changed

since you became associated with the organization? If so, in

what sense?

Yes -----

No

Comments:

A-97

12. In your opinion, why do Board members oftentimes fail to attend monthly Board meetings?

13.

Do you actively solicit the views and opinions of key people in

the member communities you represent regarding APDC pro-

grams and goals?

0
always

0
sometimes

0
seldom

0
never

A-98

QUESTION AREA VII APDC BOARD MEMBERS

1. Does the APDC provide any direct services to your community?

Yes 0

No 0

0 Don't know

2. If so, what are they?

3. Would you say that the (name of service being delivered)

--------------------- is satisfactorily completing its task(s)?

0
strongly agree

D
agree

D
disagree

0
strongly disagree

0
don't know

A- 99

4. What major problems do you see with the (name of service being delivered) -------------------------------------------as it presently operates?
5. What changes (if any) would you suggest?

6. In your opinion, should the APDC be involved in providing

direct service to communities?

Yes 0

No 0

Explain:

A- 100

PUBLIC OFFICIALS
INTER VIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
prepared by !CAD, University of Georgia, for the Department of Community Development June, 1975 A-101

PUBLIC (LOCAL) OFFICIALS--APDC CLIENTELE
l. Name: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2. Age: __ under 30 30-45 46-60 over 60
3. Local Government Affiliation:
4. Public Position/Title: ------------------------- Elected: --------
Appointed:
5. Length of Time in Public Service: --------------------
6. Business (Private) Affiliation:
7. Business Position/Title: 8. How long have you been involved or acquainted with the APDC?

9. Have you ever served on the APDC Board, staff, or committees?

Yes ------
Comments:

No ------

A -102

QUESTION AREA I PUBLIC (LOCAL) OFFICIALS (ELECTED AND APPOINTED)
CLIENTELE GROUPS
1. What is the overall purpose of your APDC as you understand it to be?

2. Below you will find listed a number of functions which might charac-

terize different APDCs. After looking the list over, indicate in the

column on the left the relative importance that each function should

have for the APDC. Do this by recording a "1" next to the function

which should be most important, a "2" beside the next most important,

etc. The .i.east important function will be designated with the number

"4".

Technical Assistance Function Review and Comment Function (e. g., A-95 Review) Planning and Studies Function Special Services Function (direct administration of programs, etc. )

3. With regard to regional or multi-county and multi-municipal concerns,

would you say that the emphasis of the APDC should be:

0
all regional

D
mostly regional

D
half local half regional

D
mostly local

0
all local

A-103

4. Does this agree with what the APDC is currently doing?

Yes ----
Comments:

No -----

5. How knowledgeable are you about the work of the APDC?

D
no
knowledge

0
very little knowledge

0
moderate knowledge

0
good deal of knowledge

Comments:

6. How knowledgeable, in your opinion, is the APDC of your local government's problems and needs?

D
no knowledge
Comments:

0
very little knowledge

0
moderate knowledge

0
good deal of knowledge

A- 104

QUESTION AREA II PUBLIC (LOCAL) OFFICIALS (ELECTED AND APPOINTED)
CLIENTELE GROUPS
1. In previous questions we have asked about the major purpose(s) and functions of the APDC. Below you will find a list of general program
areas in which APDCs are involved. In the columns on the right please indicate how knowledgeable or informed you are concerning
each program area by checking the appropriate box on each line.

Well

Moderately Poorly

Informed Informed Informed

1. Aging 2. Housing 3. Criminal Justice

0

D

D

0

0

D

0

0

D

4. Industrial Development
s. Manpower Training
6. Comperhensive Health

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

7. Governmental Management (e. g., D

0

0

budgeting, personnel training)

8. Local Planning (land use,

0

0

D

zoning, water, sewer, etc.)

9. Annual Development Plan

0

0

0

10. Education

0

0

0

11. Natural Resources

0

0

0

12. Agricultural Development

D

0

0

13. Forestry 14. Fire Protection 15. Solid Waste Disposal

0

0

D

D

D

D

D

D

0

16. Transportation 17. Recreation 18. Child Care
19. Other

0

D

D

0

D

D

D

0

0

D

0

D

A-105

Comments

2. What additional program areas should the APDC be involved in? 3. What program areas (if any) should be dropped by the APDC?
A- 106

4. In terms of service to your community how useful have the following APDC programs been?

1. Aging 2. Housing 3. Criminal Justice

Very Useful
0 0 D

4. Industrial Development

0

5. Manpower Training

0

6. Comprehensive Health

D

7. Governmental Management (e. g. , D

budgeting, personnel training)

8. Local Planning (land use,

D

zoning, water, sewer, etc.)

9. Annual Development Plan

0

10. Education

0

11. Natural Resources

0

12. Agricultural Development

0

13. Forestry

D

14. Fire Protection

0

15. Solid Waste Disposal

0

16. Transportation

0

17. Recreation

0

18. Child Care

0

19. Other

0

Somewhat Useful
D 0 D 0 0 0 D D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Not Useful
0 0 D 0 0 D D 0 0 D D 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0

Comments

A- 107

5. How much influence do you or your organization have on the

program and activities of the APDC?

D
none

0
little

0
moderate

0
great

6.

Can you measure the amount of progress your local government

has made as a result of APDC assistance?

Yes 0

No 0

Explain:

A- 108

QUESTION AREA III PUBLIC (LOCAL) OFFICIALS (ELECTED AND APPOINTED)
CLIENTELE GROUPS

1. Generally speaking, would you say in carrying out your own

local government 1s function that the APDC is:

0
extremely useful

D
moderately useful

0
slightly useful

0
not useful at all

2. As you know, the APDC is composed of the APDC board mem-

bers, the executive director, and the staff. In dealing with

the APDC about its program resources and your own local

governments' needs, what percentage of contacts are likely to

be with: (Write in percents totalling 100%)

a board member

_ _ _ _%

the Executive Director staff member other

- - - - -%
- - - - -% - - - - -%

3.

To what extent do APDC plans and programs influence the work

activities, policies and budget of your local government?

D
a great deal

D
mild

of influence influence

D
very little influence

D
no influence

D
don't know

A- 109

4. Plans which are prepared by the APDC for your local govern-

ment are implemented:

0
never

0
sometimes

Please cite examples:

0
usually

0
always

0
don't know

5. In dealing with the internal affairs of your local government, is

the APDC:

D
overly aggressive

D
mildly aggressive

D
just right

0
not agressive enough

6. Often the APDC is designated as the agency to do planning for

state and federal programs which enable your local government

to receive funds. Would you say that the role of the APDC in

influencing funding decisions is:

D
too great

D
too little

0
just right

0
don 1 t know

A- 110

7. What changes, if any, would you suggest in the current relationships between local governments, APDCs, and the federal government?

8. Do you know the APDC board member who represents your local

government?
Yes D

No 0

9. Do you or your associates get regular reports from the APDC

board member?
Yes 0

NoD

10. Are you generally satisfied with the way he/ she is doing his/her job?

Yes 0

No 0

0 No Comment

A- 111

--
ll. How could this be improved?

12. Are you kept informed of any changes in APDC activities?

Yes 0

NoD

13. If so, how is this done?

A-112
'I
I , ,I.

QUESTION AREA V LOCAL CLIENTELE GROUPS (PLANNING COMMISSION)
1. In terms of developing plans and studies for this area, what role do you view the APDC as playing in conjunction with your own work?

2.

Do you see any areas where the work of your planners and the

APDC planners would come into conflict with each other?

3. Have there been attempts made at coordinating the work between

your planning agency and that of the APDC? Would you say that

those attempts were successful?

Yes ----
If not, why not?

No _ _ __

A- 113

4.

Are there agreements (formal or informal) which govern your

relationship with the APDC planning unit? Are these agreements

0
too constrictive

0
just right

0
not
strong enough

5.

Do you attempt to prevent duplication of planning and study efforts

with the APDC?

Yes -----

No -----

6.

Do you have an information exchange agreement with the APDC?

7.

If yes, are you satisfied with the manner in which it has worked?

What improvements would you suggest?

A- 114

,

8.

If no, would you consider it a worthwhile endeavor to enter

into an information exchange agreement?

A-115

QUESTION AREA VI PUBLIC (LOCAL) OFFICIALS (ELECTED AND APPOINTED)
CLIENTELE GROUPS

1. How often do you call on the APDC for assistance in carrying out

certain activities and programs?

D
frequently

0
occasionally

0
never

2. Indicate the extent to which you were satisfied with the amount of

assistance provided to your local government by the APDC.

D

D

0

D

very

satisfied

little

not

satisfied

satisfied

If not satisfied, why?

3. Indicate the extent to which you were satisfied with the quality of

assistance provided to your local government by the APDC.

D
very satisfied

0
satisfied

D
little
satisfied

0
not satisfied

If not satisfied, why?

A- 116

---

4. To what extent are you satisfied with the APDC' s method of handling

A-95 Review?

0
very satisfied

D
satisfied

D
little satisfied

D
not satisfied

0
no opinion

5. If not satisfied, why?

A- 117

PUBLIC INTEREST OROUPS
INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
prepared by ICAD, University of Georgia, for the Department of Community Development June, 1975 A- 119

PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS
1. Name:------------------ 2. Age: __under 30 30-45 46-60 over 60
3. Group or Agency you represent:

4. Local Government Affiliation: 5. Business (Private) Affiliation:
6. Business Position Title:
7. How long have you been involved or acquainted with the APDC?

8. Have you ever served on the APDC Board, staff, or committees?

Yes -----
Comments:

No -----

A- 120

QUESTION AREA I PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS 1. What is the overall purpose of the APDC as you understand it to be?
2. Below you will find listed a number of functions which might characterize different APDCs. After looking the list over, indicate in the column on the left the relative importance that each function should
have for the APDC. Do this by recording a .!_ next to the function
which should be most important, a~ beside the next most important, etc. The least important function will be designated with the number
4.
Technical Assistance Function Review and Comment Function (e. g., A-95 Review) Planning and Studies Function Special Services Function (direct administration of programs, etc.)
A- 121

3. Has your agency/organization been in contact or received any service

from the APDC over the past twelve months?

Yes ____

No _ _ __

If "yes, 11 indicate the type of service provided and/or cite examples

of contact made over the past twelve months.

A -122


4. What programs should receive more emphasis and assistance from the APDC?

5. Have these programs made any significant impact on the region?

Yes -----
If so, in what way?

No ----

A-123

6. Is the APDC weak in any Program Area?

Yes -----
If so, which ones?

No -----

7. Should the APDC give greater attention to any of these areas? If so, which ones and in what way?

A-124

QUESTION AREA II PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS

l. In previous questions, we have asked about the major purpose( s) and

functions of the APDC. Below you will find a list of general program

areas in which APDCs are involved. In the columns on the right,

please indicate how knowledgeable or informed you are concerning

each program area by checking the appropriate box on each line.

Well

Moderately Poorly

Informed Informed Informed

Comments

1. Aging 2. Housing 3. Criminal Justice

0

0

0

D

D

0

0

D

D

4. Industrial Development 5. Manpower Training 6. Comprehensive Health

0

0

D

0

0

0

D

D

D

0 7. Governmental Management (e. g.,

D

D

budgeting, personnel training)

8. Local Planning (land use,

D

0

D

zoning, water, sewer, etc. )

9. Annual Development Plan

0

0

0

10. Education

0

0

D

11, Natural Resources

D

D

D

12. Agricultural Development

D

D

D

13, Forestry 14. Fire Protection 15. Solid Waste Disposal

D

0

D

D

D

D

0

0

0

16. Transportation 17. Recreation 18. Child Care

0

0

0

D

0

0

D

D

D

19. Other

D

D

D

A-125

QUESTION AREA III PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS

1. Does any conflict or friction exist between your agency I organization

and the AP DC?

Yes ----

No ----

2. If so, why?

3. What does the APDC need to do to reduce conflict?

I
;1,

A- 126

l~ '

APPENDIX 3 CHARTS CORRELATING QUESTIONS FROM THE
DIFFEREN"f QUESTIONNAIRES
A - 127

1,1
i1', L _ _ _ _ _ _ __

QUESTION AREA I (PURPOSE AND FUNCTIONS)
COMPARABLE QUESTIONS

Purpose

Functions

Work

Emphasis

Current

Emphasis

Resource

Allocation

+> Current

(,)
..v.....

Allocation

.g Client

U) Knowledge

APDC-Client

Knowledge

Questionnaires

v

..>.... +:>:s

J.i
0 +>
(,)

"0

(,)
v>:

v ..J....i.

~Cl

.<.+..-..j
I'll +>
U)

J.i
l"d 0
r:Q

1*

1

1

2

2

2

3

3

3

4

4

4

5

5

5

6

6

6

7

7

7

..I.l.l
(.,.)......l.".d.
;..... (,)
,.0 ......
::s::::
P-iO 1 2 3 4

+>

. Ill

..(...,...).. ,.::0s

v k v
+>

P-i.:l

1

2

6 4,7

5

6

3

* The numbers indicate comparably numbered questions within each
questionnaire.
A -129

QUESTION AREA II (APDC PROGRAMS) COMPARABLE QUESTIONS

QUESTIONNAIRES

4)

....>:..:..s..

Jot
..0...
t)

"0

t) 4)

4)
~

..J.o..t

~Cl

'4-4
'.4.r.-o.4.
U)

Jroot
0 p'::l

Client Program Knowledge

16, 17* 19,20

1

Additional

Programs

1

2

Program

Utility

4

Are there

program goals

2

Client Involvement

1' 2' 3

lgoals)

4

6' 8, 9

Goals Prioritized

5,6

7

Changes in

Goals

7

11

Measure Progress

{Goals)

8

12

Time Tables

for Goals

9

17

Re-evaluate and

Adjust Goals
......, Performance

..0
::s

Guidelines

U) Measures of

10, 15 11, 12

18 13,14

Effectiveness

13, 14 15, 16

Programs to be

Dropped

3

..C..l.l u ro
f""'' ...... ...... t)
..0 ......
::s:t:
P-iO 1 2 4 5
6
3

.....

rn

....t....)...

<!)
Jot

..:0:s ..4..).

P-i.S

1

* The numbers indicate comparably numbered questions within each
questionnaire.
A-130

QUESTION AREA III (EXTERNAL INFLUENCES) COMPARABLE QUEST IONS

QUESTIONNAIRES

Client

Satisfaction

APDC-Client

Conflict

ro APDC- Federal

~

Relationship

<.... APDC -State

u

Relationship

:Q0) Board-Client

~

Representation

Board-Client

Communication

Client Involvement

(Activities)

1 *
2,12,13 3,4, 5,6
8
7

1 2 3,4, 5,6

1' 2, 3 4

..t.D... u ro
....0~... .1.1u."".".1 ::;~
P-..0
1 5,6 7

1,2,3

8,10,11

7

9

12, 13

!
''
* The numbers indicate comparably numbered questions within each questionnaire.
A -131

QUESTION AREA IV (INTERNAL INFLUENCES) COMPARABLE QUESTIONS

Staff Size

Q)
....>._.... .."0_".'
::; (,)
(,) Q)
Q><) .."..".' ~Cl
1, 2 1<

QUESTIONNAIRES

........
..C..l,l

'"C
"C"ll'
0

U)

CQ

1,2

-Ill
(,) Cll
......r-C r"'f (,)
..0 ......
::;:::::1
~0

Staff DecisionMaking
Morale

13, 14 3,4

15

5

Project

16

6

Assignments

Staff Autonomv

17

7

Board

6

Attendance

Influence of

7

Board

Value of Board to APDC

9

12

Value of Board

11

to Governments

Board Members'

12(3,4)

Responsibilities

Interest of

5

Board

1' 12 4 7 8 9
11

.._.
-Ill
..(..,.). Q)
..:0:; .."Q_".)'
~.s

* The numbers indicate comparably numbered questions within each
each questionnaire.
A -132

QUESTION AREA V (PLANNING AND STUDIES FUNCTION)
COMPARABLE QUESTIONS

Attempts at Local

.. Coordination Cooperative

1, 7

u

A12"reements

Q,)

:0 Roles of APDC

~

& Local Plan

2

'

..t.i..l -~ -~
..... l)
,.D ......
;::.1~
P-.0
3 4,6 l1 2

QUESTION AREA VI (TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND REVIEW)
COMPARABLE QUESTIONS

Q,)

....>.......
;::.1

1-1
..0...
l)

l) Q,)

Q,)
><

..1..-.1.

P::IO

QUESTIONNAIRES

.......... ..C..l.l

'tj
1-1 Cll 0

U)

CQ

..t.i.l.

....l...)....
,.D

..C...l.l
....l....)...

;::.1'-H

P-.0

.....

. til

...l...).... ..c
;::.1
Pi

Q,)
1-1
..sQ.:.,:.)
H

T.A. Eligibility Guidelines

l 12*

l

1'i:

.. Client Satisfaction

.l) Quantity of

Q,..,)..,
..0

T.A .

4

3

2

3 2

;::.1
U)

A-96 Review

51 6 > 7

4

415

Process

* The numbers indicate comparably numbered questions within each
questionnaire.
A -133

APPENDIX 4 ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES OF WORK PROGRAMS
A-135

'~.
I , I
! I I I
I, II
L__ _ _ _ __

AGI NG
(I L L U S T R A T I 0 N S)
A-137

AGING
Ultimate Objective Improve the physical, mental, and social well being of the elderly in the area to enable them to remain in their own communities.

I
I PUBLIC INFORMATION/SUPPORT
I Intermediate Objective Promote public awareness of needs of the elderly and gain support to meet these needs.
I
Immediate Objective Establish Co.unty Councils on Aging in 2 additional counties participating in the area-wide aging program.
I

I
I
TRANSPORTATION
Intermediate Objective Increase and improve transportation services for the elderly in the area.
I
Immediate Objective Establish accurate transportation routing procedures in four county programs.
I

I
FUNDING
Intermediate Objective Maintain eligibility at an area-wide planning agency for the elderly in order to obtain continued funding for services (e.g., health, nutrition, transportation, etc.) for the elderly.
I
Immediate Objective Develop area-wide aging continuation plan and applications for funding under Title III and Title VII of the Older A
I

ACTI VI Tl ES
I

ACT IV ITI ES
I

ACT IV ITI ES
I

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
I
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
l
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
I
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

A-139

AGING P U B L I C I N F 0 R MA T I 0 N I S U P P 0 R T
Ultimate Objective Improve the physical, mental, and social well being of the elderly in the area to enable them to remain in their own communities.
Intermediate Objective Promote public awareness of needs of the elderly and gain support to meet these needs.
Immediate Objective Establish County Councils on Aging in 2 additional counties participating in the area-wide aging program.
v
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Identify potential support. 2. Obtain support from local governmental officials. 3. Make individual contacts with potential supporters and
develop strategy. 4. Implement strategy. 5. Organize Council. 6. Provide on-going technical assistance and support.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Establishment of County Councils on Aging in 2 additional
counties.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Number of persons participating in the newly established
Councils as compared with numbers participating in counties which do not have established Councils.
I I I
A-140

AGING T RANS P 0 RT AT I 0 N
Ultimate Objective Improve the physical, mental, and social well being of the elderly in the area to enable them to remain in their own communities.
Intermediate Objective Increase and improve transportation services for the elderly in the area.
Immediate Objective Establish accurate transportation routing procedures in four county programs.
~
"'
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Plot locations of persons 60 and over living in each
county. 2. Survey and evaluate existing routing procedures in each
county. 3. Prepare draft operating manua 1.
4. Present draft manual to certain staff for input and
comment. 5. Revise manual as needed. 6. Publicize and implement manual. ]. Provide technical assistance and monitor. 8. Evaluate and modify as needed.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Establishment of transportation routing procedures in
four counties.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Increase in the number of elderly who utilize transpor-
tation services. 2. Decrease in the per unit cost of transportation services
for the elderly.
A-141

A GI NG F UND I NG
Ultimate Objective Improve the physical, mental, and social well being of the elderly in the area to enable them to remain in their own communities.

Intermediate Objective Maintain eligibility at an area-wide planning agency for the elderly in order to obtain continued funding for services (e.g., health, nutrition, transportation, etc.) for the elderly.

Immediate Objective Develop area-wide aging continuation plan and applications for funding under Title III and Title VII of the Older Americans Act.

v
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES
1. Compile data for Title I I I and Title VII. 2. Secure technical assistance for Title Ill and Title VII.
3. Secure committee input. 4. Secure input for local elected officials. 5. Prepare draft of planning and administration, coordination,
and service delivery for Title Ill and Title VII. 6. Prepare summary for Title Ill and Title VII. ]. Publicity and public hearing for Title Ill and Title VII. 8. Revision and preparation of final plan for Title Ill and
Title VII. 9. Print Title Ill and Title VII. 10. Area-wide Advisory Committee approval for Title I I I and
Title VII. 11. APDC Board approval of summary of Title Ill and Title VI I
and final plan for Title II I and Title VII. 12. Submission for Title I II and Title VII.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
1. Preparation of area-wide Aging Continuation Plan. 2. Submission of grant applications for Title Ill and Title
VII funds.

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

1. Continued designation as area-wide planning agency for the

elderly.

2. Increased grant funds to maintain and expand services to the elderly.
3. Increased amount and variety of services to the elderly as compared with previous year,e.g., new nutrition program in

j

a county and an increase in the number of participants in

established programs.

CR I MI NAL J US T I CE
(I L L U S T R A T I 0 N S)
A-143

, I

I

I

I II
, II

I

,

I

.'

I

I .



I

,

I

CRIMINAL J U S T I C E
Ultimate ObJ.ectives 1. Reduce the rate of crime in the region. 2. Improve the administration of justice in the region.

J
I
LAW ENFORCEMENT

_I
COURTS

Intermediate ObJ.ectives 1. Increase the clearance rate of
cases reported in those law enforcement agencies which have a minimum of 8 full-time, sworn officers. 2. Provide 24-hour centralized dispatching service on a county wide basis.

Intermediate ObJ.ective Improve criminal court administration procedures and processes by reducing the average time for the adjudication process.
I

I I

Immediate ObJ.ective Assist three law enforcement agencies in developing qualified investigative capabilities in the region during FY 76.

Immediate ObJ.ective Provide planning assistance or facilitate the obtaining of planning assistance for the development and proposal of alternatives in achievjng a centralized dispatching service on a county wide basis in one county in the region during FY 76.

Immediate Objective Assist two courts in reducing the average time for the adjudication process in the region during FY 76.

ACTIVITIES PERFORMANCE MEASURES EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

ACTIVITIES

ACTIVITIES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES
A-145

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

CR I MI NA1 J US T I C E L AW E N F 0 R C E ME NT
Ultimate Objectives 1. Reduce the rate of crime in the region. 2. Improve the administration of justice in the region.
Intermediate Objective Increase the clearance rate of cases reported in those law enforcement agencies which have a minimum of eight full-time, sworn officers.
Immediate Objective Assist three law enforcement agencies in developing qualified investigative capabilities in the region during FY 76.
1
ACTIVITIES 1. Prepare proposals (formal or informal) outlining feasible
alternatives for developing investigative capability. 2. Make presentation to local governments. 3. Based on selected alternatives, provide technical assist-
ance (e.g., explore funding sources, training aspects).
4. Assist in implementation.
5. Monitor and evaluate.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of law enforcement agencies which develop inves-
tigative capability. 2. Number of proposals prepared.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Clearance rate change in those agencies developing inves-
tigative capability. 2. Ratio of number of proposals implemented to number of
proposals prepared.
A-146

CRIMINAL JUSTICE
C0 URT S
Ultimate Objectives 1. Reduce the rate of crime in the region. 2. Improve the administration of justice in the region.
Intermediate Objective Improve criminal court administration procedures by reducing the average time for the adjudication process.
Immediate Objective Assist two courts in reducing the average time for the adjudication process in the region during FY 76.
ACTIVITIES 1. Prepare proposals (formal or informal) outlining
feasible alternatives for assisting two courts in the adjudication process. 2. Make presentations to local governments. 3. Based on selected alternative, provide technical assistance (e.g., explore funding sources). 4. Assist in implementation. 5. Monitor and evaluate. PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of proposals prepared. 2. Number of courts implementing proposals. EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Change in average adjudication time in the courts receiving grants.
A-147

CRIMINAL J U S T I C E
L A W E N F 0 R C E ME NT
Ultimate Objective 1. Reduce the rate of crime in the region. 2. Improve the administration of justice in the region.
Intermediate Objective Provide 24-hour centralized dispatching service on a county wide basis.
Immediate Objective Provide planning assistance or facilitate the obtaining of planning assistance for the development and proposal of alternatives in achieving a centralized dispatching service on a county wide basis in one county in the region during FY 76.
1
ACTIVITIES 1. Prepare proposal for a centralized dispatching service. 2. Make presentations to appropriate officials and con-
cerned citizens' groups. 3. Provide technical assistance in regard to funding and
implementation. 4. Monitor and evaluate.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of presentations made.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Proportion of county participating in project (0 if not
implemented, 100% if all cities within the county as well as the county participates). 2. Number of other counties expressing interest in developing similar services.
A-148

E C0 N0 MI C DEVE L0 P ME NT
(I L L U S T R A T I 0 N S)
A-149

i

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Ultimate Objectives 1. Increase the median income of area residents. 2. Increase the tax base derived from economic
activiti es.

MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT
Intermediate Objective Provide increased opportunity for skills upgrading for area residents.

I I
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Intermediate Objective Improve the local competitive advantage of area business establishments.

I
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
Intermediate Objective Increase the number of job opportunities for area residents by 5%.

I

I

Immediate Objective Assist the Board of Education to expand area vocational technical school in order to increase its enrollemnt by 10% before the end of FY 76.

Immediate Objective Complete downtown revitalization studies in five of the eight county seats under 5,000 population by the end of FY 76.

Immediate Objective Prepare plans for locating new industrial sites in each of three counties by the end of FY 76.

Immediate Objective Assist four communities to expand their sewer and water systems in order to encourage the expansion of existing industries and to attract new industry.

ACTI VI Tl ES

ACTIV ITl ES

ACTI'JJTI.ES

ACTIVITIES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

A -151

E C 0 N 0 M I C DEVELOPMENT
MA N P 0 WE R D E V E L 0 P ME N T
Ultimate Objectives 1. Increase the median income of area residents. 2. Increase the tax base derived from economic activities.
I
Intermediate Objective Provide increased opportunity for skills upgrading for area residents.
I
Immediate Objective Assist the Board of Education to expand area vocational technical school in order to increase its enrollment by 10% before the end of FY 76.
l
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Analyze area manpower needs and labor force charac-
teristics. 2. Prepare grant applications for needed manpower develop-
ment programs and training facilities, e.g., vocational technical school expansion. 3. Assist Area Manpower Planning Council in application for an appropriation of Comprehensive Employment and Training Act funds.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Ratio of number of people trained to total untrained
target population. 2. Number of new courses and/or programs for skills up-
grading. 3. Number of new or expanded vocational training schools.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Number of promotions. 2. Number of people placed in new jobs after training. 3. Percent of salary increase of persons who received
training as compared to salary received before upgrading skills.
A-152

--
E C 0 N0 MI C DE V E L 0 P ME N T C 0 MME R C I A L D E V E L 0 P ME N T
Ultimate Objectives 1. Increase the median income of area residents. 2. Increase the tax base derived from economic activities.
I
I
Intermediate Objective Improve the local competitive advantage of area business establishments.
I J
Immediate Objective Complete downtown revitalization studies in five of the eight county seats under 5,000 population by the end of FY 76.
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Prepare revitalization plans for business areas. 2. Assist in forming local organizations (e.g., Downtown
Councils) representing business interests for mutual promotion and development effort.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of businesses assisted. 2. Ratio of number of revitalization plans implemented
to number of plans prepared. 3. Number of local business organizations assisted in
formation.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Increase in reta i 1 gross income in commercia 1 areas
where plans and assistance were involved. 2. Increased profits in areas assisted as compared with
similar businesses in areas not assisted. 3. Number of new jobs created through expansion of com-
mercial businesses.
A-153

E C 0 N0 MI C D E V E L 0 P ME N T N D U S T R I A L D E V E L 0 P ME NT
Ultimate Objectives 1. Increase the median income of area residents. 2. Increase the tax base derived from economic activities.
I
Intermediate Objective Increase the number of job opportunities for area residents by 5%.
I
Immediate Objective Assist four communities to expand their sewer and water systems in order to encourage the expansion of existing industries and to attract new industry.
l
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Assist in planning and obtaining grants for the
development of industrial sites and for improving facilities which are serving existing sites.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of communities assisted. 2. Number of applications prepared.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Number of grants received to expand and/or improve
water and sewer systems. 2. Number of industrial sites initiated or improved. 3. Number of new jobs created through new industry or
through expansion of existing industries. 4. Percent of increase of job opportunities for area
residents.
A-154

E C 0 N 0 MI C D E V E L 0 P ME NT NDU S T R I A L D E V E L 0 P ME NT
Ultimate Objectives 1. Increase the median income of area residents. 2. Increase the tax base derived from economic activities.
I
Intermediate Objective Increase the number of job opportunities for area residents by 5%.
I
Immediate Objective Prepare plans for locating new industrial sites in each of three counties in the area by the end of FY 76.
1
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Provide data for prospects (i.e., county economic pro-
fi 1es). 2. Conduct ten industrial feasibility studies to deter-
mine the best types of industries to locate in the area.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of reports prepared for industrial prospects. 2. Number of industrial sites initiated or improved. 3. Number of promotional assistance reports prepared for
local development organizations.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Number of new industries attracted by local groups
where assistance was provided as opposed to number of new industries attracted by local groups where assistance was not provided. 2. Number of new jobs created through new industry or through expansion of existing industries. 3. Percent of increase of job opportunities for area residents.
A-155

I
:!
I
j

' I I
G0 VE RNME NT AL MANAGEME NT
(I L L U S T R A T I 0 N S)
A-157

i
l

GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Ultimate Objective More effectively and efficiently deliver services to the citizens of the region.

I MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE

I TRAINING

Intermediate Objective Improve the administrative and operational techniques of local government on an area-wide basis.

Intermediate Objective Improve management and operational skills of governmental officials and employees.

Immediate Objective Assist in reducing duplication of services and overlap in two counties by the end of FY 76.

I
Immediate Objective Introduce and coordinate computer services for local government administrative functions in four counties by the end of FY 76.

I
Immediate Objective Assist two counties and two municipalities to develop sound budget systerns by the end of FY 76.

Immediate Objective Provide opportunity for training governmental officials and employees in at least three subject areas.

ACTIVITIES

ACTIVITIES

ACTIVITIES

ACTIVITIES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECT! VENESS MEASURES

A-159

'lTI
GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT
T RA I N I NG
Ultimate Obiective More effectively and efficiently deliver services to the citizens of the region.
Intermediate Obiective Improve management and operational skills of governmental officials and employees.
Immediate Obiective Provide opportunity for training governmental officials and employees in at least three subject areas.
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Conduct survey to determine training needs and
desires of government officials and employees. 2. Coordinate and arrange training programs for
governmental officials and employees.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of training programs arranged and coordinated 2. Number of governments assisted through training. 3. Number of persons trained.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Increase in the number of persons participating in
training programs as compared with number of persons who participated in training programs the previous year. 2. Percentage of persons who attended training sessions who evaluated the sessions as excellent or good. 3. Ratio of people trained to total number in target group.
A-160

GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT T RA I N I NG
Ultimate Objective More effectively and efficiently deliver services to the citizens of the region.
Intermediate Objective Improve management and operational skills of governmental officials and employees.
Immediate Objective Assist two counties and two municipalities to develop sound budget systems by the end of FY 76.
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Conduct systems study of current budget operations. 2. Prov;de assistance in taking corrective action where
necessary.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of governments assisted. 2. Number of governments establishing and adopting new
or revised budget systems.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Number of governments using budget to set millage
rates. 2. Decrease in departmental spending through adherence
to approved budget appropriations.
3. Increase in cash flow which reduces interest expense
on borrowed money.
4. Ease in compiling monthly reports for City Council and
County Commissioners.
5. Decrease in audit costs.
A-161

GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMTNT
MA N A G E ME N T A S S I S T A N C E
Ultimate Objective More effectively and efficiently deliver services to the citizens of the region
Intermediate Objective Improve the administrative and operational techniques of local government on an area-wide basis.
Immediate Objective Assist in reducing duplication of services and overlap in two counties by the end of FY 76.
l
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Conduct study to determine extent of duplication of
services and overlap. 2. Identify operational areas where it is feasible to
consolidate governmental services.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of studies completed. 2. Number of studies adopted and implemented as compared
with number of studies conducted.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Number of services consolidated. 2. Monetary saving and per unit cost for services as com-
pared with per unit cost for non-consolidated services.
A-162
J

GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT
MA N A G E ME N T A S S I S T A N C E
Ultimate Objective More effectively and efficiently deliver services to the citizens of the region.
Intermediate Objective Improve the administrative and operational techniques of local government on an area-wide basis.
Immediate Objective Introduce and coordinate computer services for local government administrative functions in four counties by the end of FY 76.
l
PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES 1. Conduct feasibility study for the development and utili-
zation of computer applications. 2. Assist in development of computer system.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Number of studies completed. 2. Number of studies implemented as compared to number of
studies prepared.
3. Number of Computer Delivery Systems.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Decrease in time to complete individual programs over
previous years. 2. Decrease in number of personnel necessary to accomplish
program.
3. Decrease in amount of funds expended to accomplish pro-
gram.
4. Decrease in ratio of errors per measurement of data com-
pi led.
A-163

RE CREAT I 0 N
(I L L U S T R A T I 0 N S)
A-165

~

-

I

I

J

RECREATI 0 N
Ultimate Objective Adequately meet the recreational and leisure time needs of the citizens of the region.

I
RECREATION FACI Ll Tl ES
Intermediate Objectives 1. Increase the number of persons
using, and the per capita use of recreation facilities. 2. Increase the number of recreation facilities in the region.

1 _l
RECREATION AREAS
Intermediate Objective Increase the amount of open space, recreation space, and park land in the area.

I
Immediate Objective Assist five counties and twelve municipalities in the region to determine what and how many recreational facilities are needed to serve the people and where these facilities should be.

I
I
Immediate Objective Provide technical assistance to those local governments requesting it, e.g., applications for funding assistance and facility design.

I
Immediate Objective Assist three counties and four municipalities develop a comprehensive plan for open space and recreation lands.

I
l
Immediate Objective Provide technical assistance to local governments requesting it, as for example, applications for funding assistance and park design.

I

l

j

J

ACTIV ITl ES

ACTIVITIES

ACTIV ITl ES

ACTIVITIES

I
PERFORMANCE MEASURES

I
PERFORMANCE MEASURES

I
PERFORMANCE MEASURES

I
PERFORMANCE MEASURES

I

I

I

I

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES

EFFECT! VENESS MEASURES

A -167

RE CREAT I 0 N RECREAT I 0 N F A C I L I T I E S

Ultimate Objective Adequately meet the recreational and leisure time needs of the citizens of the region.

I
I

Intermediate Objectives 1. Increase the number of persons using, and the per
capita use of recreation facilities. 2. Increase the number of recreation facilities in the
region.

I

I

I

Immediate Objective Assist five counties and twelve mun~c~palities in the region to determine what and how many recreational facilities are needed to serve the people and where people and where these facilities should be.

Immediate Objective Provide technical assistance to those local governments requesting it, e.g.' applications for funding assistance and facility design.

l
ACTIVITIES
1. Inventory existing recreation facilities by type.
2. Inventory proposed recreational development.
3. Compare existing and proposed recrea-
tional facilities with appropriate standards (e.g., community, state, national) to determine local and area needs. 4. Develop a sketch plan of existing, proposed, and needed recreational facilities.

l
ACTIVITIES
1. Secure appropriate forms. 2. Assist in the acquisition of site plan,
photographs, service area, and so forth. 3. Review funding requirements with local
governments, as well as funding capacity to insure a match in funds.
4. Assist in preparation of funding assist-
ance applications.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
1. Number of local governments assisted. 2. Number of sketch plans developed or revised. 3. Number of proposals written.

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES
1. Number of proposals funded. 2. Number of facilities built. 3. Percent of increase in use. 4. Percent of increase in number of cities and counties
now meeting standards. 5. Percent excess or shortage by facility type in each
city or county on basis of appropriate standards.
'I
I

A-168

RE CREAT I 0 N RE CREAT I 0 N AREAS

Ultimate Obiective Adequately meet the recreational and leisure time needs of the citizens of the region.

I
Intermediate Objective Increase the amount of open space, recreation space, and park land in the area.

I
l
Immediate Objective Assist three counties and four municipalities develop a comprehensive plan for open space and recreation lands.

1
Immediate Obiective Provide technical assistance to local governments requesting it, as for example, applications for funding assistance and park design.

l
ACT IV ITI ES

l
ACTIVITIES

1. Develop an open space and park land-use plan.
2. Devise land acquisition schedule.

1. Secure appropriate forms. 2. Assist in the acquisition of site plan,
photographs, service area, and so forth. 3. Review funding requirements with local
governments as well as funding capacity to insure a match in funds. 4. Assist in preparation of funding assistance applications.
l

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

1. Number of local governments assisted. 2. Number of proposals written. 3. Number of plans developed.

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES
1. Number of proposals funded. 2. Amount of open space acquired. 3. Amount of park land acquired. 4. Amount of recreation land acquired. 5. Percent of excess or shortage by type of area for each
county or city.

A-169

APPENDIX 5 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FOR USE IN THE APDC EVALUATION PROCESS
A- 171

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FOR USE IN THE APDC EVALUATION PROCESS
prepared by ICAD, University of Georgia, for the Department of Community Development June, 1975 A-173

!
L

---~-~-~------
Demographic Data for Use in the APDC Evaluation Process Each APDC differs in the client population it serves. Not
only are there differences in geography, topography, climate and land uses among APDC regions, but there are considerable differences in population size, density, distribution, composition, and in racial, social, and economic characteristics. The best available summary of the differences to be found among the populations served by the APDCs is the data published from the decennial censuses. Since the 196 0 censes, data have been published in tables and on computer tapes that may be easily used by the APDCs.
Published census data are available for each county and municipality wii:c:!.in the region and may be combined to provide a composite profile of an APDC. These data are useful in identifying present and future needs or problem areas within APDCs and, consequently, may be used also to help establish program objectives and priorities. More important, from the standpoint of evaluation, these census data are useful for establishing a baseline and, when measured at subsequent points in time, for indicating trends that compare regional changes with APDC objectives.
Thus the management and use of these data are important to the development of the evaluation process within the )\PDC as well as to insure that the evaluation results are viewed in the particular context of the individual APDC.
A-17 5

Following is a partial list of population characteristics, and a brief explanation of their usefulness for identifying objectives, as baseline data and showing subsequent change, regional profiles, and some of the evident program areas they apply to.
By no means comprehensive, these data m2.y be used in conjunction with other information from the widely used census on housing, and supplementary studies conducted by the APDCs and state agencies to specify more clearly the planning objectives and priorities of APDCs. The uses and applications are varied depending on the needs of a particular APDC and the constraints imposed by grant programs. In measuring long-term effectiveness of APDCs and other agencies dealing with specific problems, data repeated in subsequent censuses may become even more reliable indicators of change.
A-176

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ITEMS

USE FOR BASELINE AND/OR REGIO~AL PROFILE
(PROGRAM APPLICATION)

PART 1: GENERAL
POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS*
Ages, by single years and five year groups
Ages, by sex and race

May be used in differentiating needs of APDCs; establishing trends in population growth, decline and distribution within region; changes in population composition, such as proportion of elderly, labor force (present and potential), dependent youth population. Age differences over two or more time periods, e. g., 1960 and 1970, reflect patterns of net migration within the region. These data can be used in conjunction with other items specified below, such as school enrollment, employment status, etc. (Child Development, Aging and Nutrition)

PART 2: SOCIAL
CHARACTERISTICs**
State of birth
Residence in 1965, by selected classes of migrants Year moved into present house

Shows proportion of citizens who are migrants; may be used as an indicator of population stability and change in the region (e. g. , a region with a large proportion of migrants may indicate a constant turnover in population and a greater receptivity to other changes needed or taking place in a community). Indicates the number and proportion of population, five years of age and over living in the same house in 1965, those moving from other counties within the state, the number coming from outside the state and different sections of the country. Indicator of change in population due to migration, and potential turnover in housing market. (Housing Coordination, Local Development, Planning)

* These data are contained in the U.S. Bureau of
the Census publication General Population Characteristics Georgia PC( 1) - B 12 for Georgia, for 1960 and 1970.
>:<>:< These data are contained in the U.S. Bureau of the Census publication General Social and Economic Characteristics PC( 1) - C 12 for Georgia, for 1960 and 1970.
A-177

School enrollment
Years of school completed

Useful in programs related to industrial demands in employment. Level of education is highly correlated with income levels in a community. Areas with low proportions completing high school education and comparatively low proportions of enrollment in school in teen age years, tend to be more economically depressed and less attractive to certain types of industrial development. These data may be used to demonstrate specific needs related to educational and vocational training programs. (Personnel Management and Training Assistance)

Fertility and family characteristics

These data show differential fertility patterns by indicating the number of children ever born per 1, 000 women between ages 35 and 44 years, ever married. They reflect considerable differences among areas showing counties with high birth patterns (more than three children per woman) versus those with low fertility patterns. May indicate the need for specific programs and activities related to health needs, as well as child care facilities and educational programs related to fertility control. (Health, Child Development and Health Care)

Family composition

The distribution of children in family groups are included in these data. The tabular presentation shows the number of families with children in specific age categories and the number of children living in homes with both parents. These data are particularly useful in identifying the probable proportions of multi-problem families in a community and in identifying the needs of such families. They also may be used in conjunction with such other information as the proportion of families with incomes under the poverty level in order to estimate eligibility for public housing and aid to families with dependent children. (Planning, Aging and Nutrition, Child Development, Housing)

PART 3: ECONOMIC
CHARACTERISTICS**

Although now somewhat dated by economic occurrences since the 1970 census, these data are still useful in establishing profiles of communities at the time of the 1970 census. They indicate differences in communities for the percent of

A-178

J

Employment status
Occupation of employed persons
Place of work

the total males and females, blacks and other races, who were in the labor force whether employed or unemployed, for ages 16 years and over, and for ages 16 to 21 years old. For those not in the labor forces these data show the number who were inmates of institutions in each county, and the number enrolled in school. Other related useful information is the number of women in the labor force with children under six years of age, and those in the school age categories 6 to 17 years. By comparing these data
over time periods, 1960, 1970, and 1980, etc.,
these data show profile changes in the labor force composition for each county and are the best indicator of long term trends available. Short term trends and events must be studied through other supplementary data. (Public Employment Program: Planning, Management, Training Assistance; Industrial and Economic Development, Criminal Justice)
The census also provides data on the occupations of employed persons for counties. These are particularly useful in manpower planning and training programs, as more than forty occupational classifications are reported for each county. Relating these data to population size and density, planners can estimate occupational areas of oversupply and shortages for geographic regions. This baseline information can be useful in identifying objectives and measuring results of manpower and vocational training programs. Included in county census tables, too, are the last occupational experiences of unemployed persons, which may be used to establish job needs and potential. (Personnel/Management,Training Assistance)
This item is particularly useful as an indicator of the proportions and willingness of persons residing in one county to work in another county. It is particularly useful in transportation planning and in planned growth extending from centers of commercial and industrial activity. (Planning: Management and Technical Assistance; Industrial and Economic Development)

A-179

ll I . I

Income levels and poverty status

Perhaps no other item differentiates one county or area from another better than mean income levels and distribution of family income levels. The 1970 census shows the number of families with incomes broken into fifteen income categories, the median and mean incomes for each county, the number of families with female heads, their mean income, and the percapita income of each county. Additional information shows the type and source of income from families, be it from wages and salaries, selfemployment, social security, public welfare or other sources. These data are particularly useful in showing regional or county profiles, for indications of dependency and showing critically depressed areas. There is considerable other information related to income levels in the proportion of families in each county living under designated levels of poverty as of 1969, the mean number of children in these families, and the number with female heads. These data in subsequent censuses will be particularly useful when related to efforts of APDCs to attract industries, new sources of income to areas, and the relative success in eliminating poverty of families living in an area. (Public Employment, Criminal Justice Planning and Technical Assistance, Child Development, Health Care)

A-180