What s s All This Talk About Social Capital? Talk About Social Capital? Presenters. Format for the Session. By Jody Horntvedt Scott Chazdon

Transcription

1 What s s All This April 9, April 30 and May 21, :30 a.m. CST Presenters: By Jody Horntvedt Scott Chazdon SLIDE 2 Presenters University of Minnesota Extension Center for Community Vitality Leadership and Civic Engagement Scott Chazdon Evaluation and Research Specialist 466 Coffey Hall, 1420 Eckles Avenue St. Paul, MN (612) (612) fax schazdon@umn.edu Jody Horntvedt Extension Associate Professor and Regional Educator rd Street NE, Suite 102 Roseau, MN (218) , (218) fax hornt001@umn.edu Format for the Session SLIDE 3 We ve designed it to be more presentational than conversational, with Opportunities for participant input via polls and learning activities Opportunities for question and answer built in at various times - with time at the end for your specific questions Participants encouraged to send questions to the chat pod throughout the session Focused on building critical thinking skills and moving toward program application

2 Quick Check-in SLIDE 4 Did you check in at the website for our supplemental materials from Session One? Did you find the suggested reading items for this session? Measuring Social Capital (Chaskin) Social Capital (Sirianni and Friedland, Civic Practices Network) Comparison of Social Capital in Rural and Urban Settings (Debertin) Please MUTE your phone line when not speaking. And, please remember to share your name/state when you are engaged in conversation! Sessions SLIDE 5 Session 1: (April 9) Understanding Social Capital Session 2: (April 30) Assessing Social Capital Session 3: (May 21) Building Social Capital Session Two Objectives SLIDE 6 As a result of this session, you will deepen your understanding of The concept of social capital based on our theoretical model The six components of the University of Minnesota Extension framework for understanding social capital. How the University of Minnesota Extension measures each of the six components of social capital. The steps in the University of Minnesota Extension community assessment process. The practical issues that arise when assessing social capital.

3 Our Work in Minnesota around Social Capital SLIDE 7 It began with some questions Literature Search: (August 2002, initial search and continues still in 2009!) Development of Survey Tool: (February 2003 November 2006) Phase I: (January 2004 February 2005) Phase II: (November 2004 June 2006) Reflection and Redesign: (July present) Phase III: (November ) Our current work Introduction to Assessing Social Capital SLIDE 8 Lots of surveys out there Social capital sometimes assessed through the use of secondary sources Our community assessment process is intended to be participatory (building as we measure) However, it is NOT participatory action research. The Minnesota Social Capital Model/Framework SLIDE 9

4 The Minnesota Social Capital Model/Framework SLIDE 10 &RPPXQLW\6RFLDO&DSLWDO0RGHO Regents of the University of Minnesota All rights reserved. We Look at 6 Scales SLIDE 11 Bonding Trust Bonding Engagement Bridging Trust Bridging Engagement Linking Trust Linking Engagement A Closer Look SLIDE 12 %ULGJLQJ7UXVW $GXOWV <RXWK The Whole Picture /LQNLQJ7UXVW $GXOWV <RXWK %ULGJLQJ(QJDJHPHQW $GXOWV <RXWK /LQNLQJ(QJDJHPHQW $GXOWV <RXWK %RQGLQJ(QJDJHPHQW $GXOWV <RXWK %RQGLQJ7UXVW $GXOWV <RXWK

5 About the Scores SLIDE 13 Scores are from 0 to = everybody in the community had the lowest possible responses 100 = everybody in community had the highest possible responses 50 = a good benchmark to use. The further above or below 50 the score is, the more it is an indicator of areas of strength or challenge for the community Again, the scores are intended as starting points for talking about social capital in the community A Closer Look SLIDE 14 Independent Variables Demographic Characteristic Percent female School District Population 48% Sample 74% Percent minority Percent age % 76% 11% 76% Percent who earn > $75,000 (household) 15% 34% Percent homeowners 80% 82% Percent with high school education or less 54% 23% A Closer Look SLIDE 15 The Seventh Scale (Self-Efficacy) 1. I believe I can make a difference strengthening social clubs or groups. 2. I believe I can make a difference helping newcomers get involved in groups or organizations. 3. I believe I can make a difference connecting my organization(s) with other groups. 4. I believe I can make a difference helping community institutions (like schools, hospitals, city government) be more responsive to people s needs. 5. I believe I can make a difference helping institutions outside the community (like schools, hospitals, government in other communities, regional or state agencies) be more responsive to people s needs.

6 Our 8-Step Community Assessment Process SLIDE Team Formation 2. Community Planning 3. Training Volunteers 4. Data Collection and Analysis 5. Community Awareness 6. Data Presentation 7. Community Meetings 8. Community Action SLIDE 17 Step 1: Team Formation SLIDE 18 Step 2: Community Planning Define Community Select Survey Methodologies Develop Outreach Plan Identify Volunteers Determine Promotional Strategies

7 SLIDE 19 Step 3: Training Volunteers Step 3: Training Agenda SLIDE 20 Step 4: Data Collection and Analysis SLIDE 21

8 Step 4: Our Survey SLIDE 22 Measuring Bonding SLIDE 23 Bonding networks are close ties that help people get by. These connections are usually with family, friends, and neighbors. &RPPXQLW\6RFLDO&DSLWDO0RGHO Regents of the University of Minnesota All rights reserved. Measuring Bonding SLIDE 24 Bonding TRUST Sample Survey Items To what degree do you trust your immediate neighbors? To what degree do you trust people you work with? To what degree do you trust people at your church or place of worship?

9 Measuring Bonding SLIDE 25 Differences in bonding TRUST among adults Gender Bonding trust not significantly different among women and men. Age Age Age Age Age Age 60 or older Length of Less than five years residence in Five to 19 years.62.1 community 20 or more years High school diploma or less 51.9 Education level Associate s degree or some college Bachelor s degree or beyond Low income (less than $25,000) 54.3 Household Moderate income ($25,000 to $44,999) income Middle income ($45,000 to $74,999).66.2 High income ($75,000 or more).66.1 Measuring Bonding SLIDE 26 Bonding ENGAGEMENT Sample Survey Items If you need some extra help, how often could you count on someone in the community (other than a family member) to help with daily tasks like grocery shopping, house cleaning, cooking, telephoning, giving you a ride? About how often do you and people in your community do favors for each other? By favors, we mean such things as watching each other s children, helping with shopping, lending garden or house tools, and other small acts of kindness. Measuring Bonding SLIDE 27 Differences in bonding ENGAGEMENT among adults Average score: 51.3

10 Measuring Bridging SLIDE 28 Bridging networks are weaker ties that can help people get ahead and gain opportunities. &RPPXQLW\6RFLDO&DSLWDO0RGHO Regents of the University of Minnesota All rights reserved. Measuring Bridging SLIDE 29 Bridging TRUST Sample Survey Items To what degree do you trust people from other cultural or ethnic groups? To what degree do you trust people of other religious beliefs? To what degree do you trust people new to the community? Measuring Bridging SLIDE 30 Differences in bridging TRUST among adults Average score: 46.4

11 Measuring Bridging SLIDE 31 Bridging ENGAGEMENT Sample Survey Items In the past month, how often have you had contact with people who have a different religion than you? In the past month, how often have you had contact with people of a different race or ethnicity than you? In the past month, how often have you had contact with people much poorer than you? Measuring Bridging SLIDE 32 Differences in bridging ENGAGEMENT among adults Bridging engagement not significantly different among Gender women and men. Bridging engagement not significantly different among Age age groups. Length of Bridging engagement not significantly different among residence in people with different lengths of residence in Waseca. community High school diploma or less 52.5 Education level Associate s degree or some college.63.0 Bachelor s degree or beyond.64.7 Low income (less than $25,000) 58.4 Household Moderate income ($25,000 to $44,999) 56.6 income Middle income ($45,000 to $74,999).63.1 High income ($75,000 or more).65.4 Measuring Linking SLIDE 33 Linking networks are links to organizations and systems that can help people gain resources and bring about change. &RPPXQLW\6RFLDO&DSLWDO0RGHO Regents of the University of Minnesota All rights reserved.

12 Measuring Linking SLIDE 34 Linking TRUST Sample Survey Items To what degree do you trust local business people? To what degree do you trust people in law enforcement? To what degree do you trust local government? To what degree do you trust educational organizations in your community? Measuring Linking SLIDE 35 Differences in linking TRUST among adults Average score: 57.2 Measuring Linking SLIDE 36 Linking ENGAGEMENT Sample Survey Items How many times in the past twelve months have you attended any public meeting in which there was a discussion of school or town affairs? How many times in the past twelve months have you joined together with others in your community to address an issue? How many times in the past twelve months have you tried to get your local government to pay attention to something that concerned you?

13 Measuring Linking SLIDE 37 Differences in linking ENGAGEMENT among adults Linking engagement was not significantly different among women and Gender men in Waseca. Age Age Age Age Age Age 60 or older Length of Less than five years residence in Five to 19 years.49.9 community 20 or more years 54.2 High school diploma or less Education Associate s degree or some college.48.6 level Bachelor s degree or beyond.55.1 Low income (less than $25,000).34.5 Household Moderate income ($25,000 to $44,999).48.1 income Middle income ($45,000 to $74,999) High income ($75,000 or more) 56.4 SLIDE 38 Step 5: Community Awareness Step 5: Examples SLIDE 39

14 SLIDE 40 Step 6: Data Presentation Step 6: Example SLIDE 41 Differences among income groups in the community Average score Bonding Trust* Bonding Bridging Trust Bridging Linking Trust Engagement* Engagement* Low income (less than $25,000 per year, N=39) Moderate income ($25,000 to $49,999 per year, N=61) Middle income ($50,000 to $74,999 per year, N=71) High income ($75,000 per year or more, N=85) Linking Engagement* Step 6: Example SLIDE 42 Differences between men and women in the community Average score Bonding Trust Bonding Bridging Trust* Bridging Linking Trust Linking Engagement Engagement Engagement Adult Females (N=199) Adult Males (N=69)

15 SLIDE 43 Step 7: Community Meetings SLIDE 44 Step 8: Community Action Questions? Comments! SLIDE 45 About our 8-step process About the survey tool and data analysis About the suggested readings

16 For More Information SLIDE 46 Additional Resources We ve provided three resources for you on the NCRCRD Core Competencies site: H ƒ6 xx yt 4 p tyrr htfw6f t fw Qp pfƒhsqp ƒ & H ƒ6 xx yt 4 p tyrr htfw6f t fwr ƒ p S w ƒp tpˆh Vf phf4 p tyrr htfw6f t fw'qp w fyiby trs q ƒ4h t y ƒp ƒ Community of Practice opportunity Watch for an invitation to a site where we can share our thoughts and stories about social capital. Contact us We re look forward to discussing social capital concepts with you in the future! Getting Ready for Session 3 SLIDE 47 Check it Out Harvard s Saguaro Seminar is filled with information about social capital. Check out research specific to your interests at this site: Read Articles We ve provided some articles on the NCRCRD site: 6TJOH$PNNVOJUZ$BQJUBMTUP%FWFMPQ"TTFUTGPS1PTJUJWF$PNNVOJUZ$IBOHF &NFSZ'FZBOE'MPSB$%1SBDUJDF 4PDJBM$BQJUBM#VJMEJOH5PPMLJU 4BOEFSBOE-PXOFZ4BHVBSP4FNJOBS Think about it What is Extension s role in helping communities understand, assess and build social capital? Think about it SLIDE 48 The county extension system was an important effort to develop social capital in the past, and in some states new efforts are underway to revitalize this mission. Extension agents are coming to realize the limits of service and expert approaches, and coming to rethink their role as catalysts of new community partnerships. Thus, they bring institutional actors together in health services, link church groups and seniors groups, convene self help networks, and provide training so that community volunteers can continue projects without depending on the county agents. They bring together local businesses and banks to provide resources and meeting space for citizen problem solving groups and low income women s empowerment networks. They help develop the educational materials that civic partners can use in local groundwater protection projects, and engage in the kinds of "public issues education that develops community deliberative capacities. These efforts draw upon concepts of "citizen politics" and other traditions within community organizing, as well as older traditions within Extension. Sirianni and Friedland, Civic Practices Network: