UNE Invasive - Species - Handbook - 2017 - Web

COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT
FOR COLLECTIVE
ACTION
A HANDBOOK FOR PRACTITIONERS

CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
PART 1: PLANNING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Keys to success. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Building trust. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Clarify, define and analyse the issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Engagement goals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Stakeholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Building an effective communication plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
PART 2: IMPLEMENTING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Framing the issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Facilitation – core values and dimensions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Facilitation dilemas and tools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Meeting management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Managing controversial issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Alignment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
PART 3: EVALUATING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Evaluating your community engagement efforts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Four phases of evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Primary types of evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Evaluating inputs, outputs, outcomes and impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Collecting evaluation information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Participatory evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Telling the evaluation story. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
FINAL THOUGHTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
RESOURCE LIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
APPENDIX Decision making tools for facilitators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Material in this handbook is drawn from online learning tools
developed by extension staff at Pennsylvania State University in
collaboration with the University of New England (Australia). This
collaboration was supported by the Invasive Animals Cooperative
Research Centre, Australia.
Online tools and learning modules can be viewed at the following

sites (current December 2017):
PestSmart connect: https://www.pestsmart.org.au
Penn State Community Engagement Toolbox:
http://aese.psu.edu/research/centers/cecd/engagement-toolbox
The project team included (in alphabetical order): Ted Alter, Aaron
Driver, Paloma Frumento, Tanya Howard, Bill Shuffstall, Lyndal
Thompson, Walt Whitmer. Editorial assistance provided by Denise
Palmer. The team thank all of our industry, government and community
collaborators who have provided feedback, resources and support to
this work.
Cite this work as:

Alter, Driver, Frumento, Howard, Shufstall and Whitmer (2017)
Community engagement for collective action: a handbook for
practitioners. Invasive Animals CRC, Australia.
We would like to thank the International Association for Public

Participation (iap2) for granting permission to reproduce their
‘Spectrum of Participation’ graphic. Find out more about the
Association at www.iap2.org
Designed and typeset by compu-vision
Cover image: Wild dog Facilitator Dave Worsley at work with community
members. Image supplied by the Invasive Animals CRC.
INTRODUCTION
Across Australia and the world, governments, industry bodies seek to build social capital
and community members are struggling to tackle serious and strengthen community
relationships and trust. Others
and complex environmental and social issues. Growing are designed to address specific
economic inequality, increasing population pressure and the challenges or issues, by unlocking
the social resources that emerge
unpredictable impacts of climate change are all issues that
when individual citizens think and
have both global and local dimensions. act collectively.
Regardless of the issue under
consideration, the practice of
Policy interventions are often incorporating community values community engagement is a
based on assumptions of both into decisions can increase growing one. This handbook brings
scientific and social values. the likelihood of community together key theories and practices
However, when faced with acceptance and community-led of community engagement to
difficult decisions in complex action. assist practitioners develop their
contexts, better decisions and Effective community own engagement plans, put them
more effective action are likely to engagement seeks to engage a into practice and learn how to
result from combining specialised broad range of stakeholders to improve through evaluation of
knowledge with community values achieve long-term and sustainable these efforts. The handbook also
and local knowledge. outcomes to complex problems. encourages practitioners to
This recognition has led to Community engagement efforts develop the skill of ‘reflective
calls for increased community come in many shapes and sizes learning’ and a range of ‘practice
engagement, as policy makers and may be designed to meet tips’ are identified throughout to
and practitioners realise that a number of goals. Many efforts strengthen this practice.
PRACTICE TIP
1. A tension between what 4. Resolution and insight that
THE REFLECTIVE you see taking place in your is often described as an
PRACTITIONER engagement effort and what “aha!” moment when the
you would expect to be concern is resolved.
‘Reflexive learning’ is the happening based on 5. Considering your personal
process of considering, previous experience. perspectives with past and
contemplating and deliberating 2. Identification or clarification present experiences and
on an issue, topic or experience of the source(s) of the how these might impact
that results in a change in your differences. your relationships and work
perspective and understanding. 3. Openness to new in the future.
There are six basic components information from internal 6. Deciding whether to act
of reflexive learning: and external sources and on the outcome of the
perspectives. reflective process.
(Source: Boyd and Fales 1983, Reflective Learning: Key to Learning from Experience.
Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 2, Spring 1983 99-117.)
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | i

PART 1
PLANNING
COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT
This handbook is designed for practitioners who want to
plan, implement and evaluate a community engagement
process. The handbook introduces key concepts, skills,
tools, and strategies required to bring stakeholders together
to develop and implement projects that more effectively
address the issues they are facing.
DEFINITION COMMUNITY + ENGAGEMENT

‘Community engagement’ is the The word ‘community’ is a broad with associated implications
process of working collaboratively term used to define groups for inclusiveness that ensure
with groups of people affiliated of people, whether they are consideration is made of the
by geographic proximity, special stakeholders, interest groups, diversity of interests, values and
concern, community concern or citizen groups. A community perspectives that exist within any
or similar situations to address may be a geographic location community.
the issues affecting them. It is (community of place), a community Citizens are ‘engaged’ when
a powerful vehicle for bringing of similar interest or concern, or a they play a meaningful role in
about environmental, social community of affiliation or identity the deliberations, discussions,
and behavioural changes to such as an industry or sporting decision-making and/or
improve collective well-being. club. implementation of the projects or
It often involves partnerships The linking of the term programs that affect them.
and coalitions that help mobilise ‘community’ to ‘engagement’
resources and serve as catalysts serves to broaden the scope,
for changing policies, programs, shifting the focus from the
and practices. individual to the collective,
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | 3

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
MATTERS BECAUSE IT:
• Increases the likelihood that projects or solutions will be supported.

Citizens who participate in authentic and transparent engagement
processes are more likely to make a significant commitment to help
make the projects happen.
• Creates more effective solutions by drawing on the local knowledge

of a diverse group of stakeholders to find solutions that are practical
and effective.
• Improves citizens’ knowledge and skills in problem solving.

Participants learn about the issues in-depth. Greater knowledge
allows them to see multiple sides of the problem. Citizens can
increase their communication and decision-making skills.
• Empowers and integrates people from different backgrounds. When

people from different parts of the community work together, they
often find that they share some common ground.
• Creates local networks of community members. The more people who

know what is going on and who are willing to work toward a goal,
the more likely a community is to be successful in reaching its goals.
• Creates opportunities for raising and discussing concerns. Regular,

on-going interactions allow people to express concerns before
problems become too big or get out of control.
• Increases trust in community organizations and governance.

Working together improves communication and understanding.
Knowing what government, community citizens and leaders, and
organisations can and cannot do may reduce future conflict.
Source: Bassler, Brasier, Fogle and Taverno (2008) ‘Developing Effective Citizen
Engagement: A How-to Guide for Community Leaders.’ Center for Rural America, 2008.
http://www.rural.palegislature.us/Effective_Citizen_Engagement.pdf
4 | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION

KEYS TO SUCCESS
Communities are different. They have different histories,

leaders, power structures, priorities, cultures and mix
of citizens. Because of these differences, there is really
no single model or recipe for undertaking community
engagement efforts. Successful community engagement
efforts are driven by practitioners who are guided by core
values and guiding principles.
CORE VALUES GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Core values for best practice These values are Community development is
community engagement include: demonstrated by: an integral part of successful
community engagement. The
• The belief that those who are • Seeking out and facilitating following principles are essential
affected by a decision have the involvement of those to community development:
a right to be involved in the potentially affected by or
decision-making process. interested in a decision. • Increasing citizens’
• The promise that the • Inviting input from participants knowledge about their
community’s contribution will in designing the process. community and/or the issue
influence the decision or the • Providing participants with they are seeking to address.
outcome. the information they need to • Encouraging citizens to co-
• A commitment to aim for participate in a meaningful create additional knowledge
sustainable decisions way. and understanding.
by recognising and • Communicating to participants • Using that knowledge to
communicating the needs and how their input affected the improve the community
interests of all participants, final decision or outcome. or address the identified
including decision makers. problem.
• Creating ongoing future
opportunities for citizens to
engage each other.
• Ensuring that these
opportunities and effective
communications becomes
a regular and on-going
component of the process.

BEST PRACTICES
A number of organisations and scholars have identified best practices that

are followed by effective community engagement practitioners. In practice,
these principles, and others, are applied in a variety of ways depending on
the community or issue.
1. Careful Planning and Preparation. Through adequate and inclusive

planning ensure that the design, organisation, and convening of the
process serve both a clearly defined purpose and the needs of the
participants.
2. Inclusion and Demographic Diversity. Equitably incorporate diverse

people, voices, ideas, and information to lay the groundwork for quality
outcomes and democratic legitimacy.
3. Collaboration and Shared Purpose. Support and encourage

participants, government and community institutions, and others to
work together to advance the common good.
4. Openness and Learning. Help all involved listen to each other, explore
new ideas unconstrained by predetermined assumptions, learn and
apply information in ways that generate new options, and rigorously
evaluate community engagement activities for effectiveness.
5. Transparency and Trust. Be clear and open about the process and
goals, and provide a public record of the organizers, sponsors,
outcomes, views and ideas expressed.
6. Impact and Action. Ensure each engagement effort has real potential to
make a difference, and that participants are aware of that potential.
7. Sustained Engagement and Participatory Culture. Promote a culture of

participation with programs and institutions that support ongoing quality
community engagement.
Source: National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation (NCDD), International Association
for Public Participation (IAP2), and the Co-Intelligence Institute, 2009. “Core Principles for
Public Engagement.” http://ncdd.org/rc/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/PEPfinal-expanded.pdf

BUILDING
TRUST
While there are a number of keys to building trust within any

group, it’s important to realise that the intention to create an
authentic and transparent process should permeate every
aspect of your engagement program.
Effective communication. and honest about the role

This includes before, and influence citizens will
throughout, and following have in either the decision-
your formal engagement making or implementation of PRACTICE TIP
efforts. The more citizens solutions. Many community
and communities understand engagement efforts fail in
the process, the goals and this regard. Building trust is a core
intended outcomes, have objective for best practice
access to the information they Share information widely. engagement. Effective
need to make an informed Effective engagement and community engagement
decision (including each trust requires that everyone efforts employ a range
other’s perspectives), and involved is working from a of tools and strategies
their role(s) and stake in the common understanding of that ensure community
process and issue, the more the issue and each other’s’ members and stakeholders
trust your engagement efforts perspectives. If participants or can actively participate and
will engender. residents feel that information contribute meaningfully
is only shared with some to the process. Effective
Respect. While this sounds members or does not do engagement facilitators
obvious, it is absolutely justice to all perspectives on place a premium on
essential that the tone, an issue, you are very unlikely fostering and enhancing
content, and facilitation of to be able to create the trust trust as a critical element
your engagement efforts you need for effective or in long-term, sustainable
genuinely respects the input sustainable engagement. engagement and effective
of all participants or members governance.
– even if it’s sometimes Engage stakeholders in
difficult. meaningful ways. Although
closely related to respect,
Transparency of processes. stakeholders will show greater
Your engagement efforts trust in the engagement
should be clear and well- efforts that account for their
understood by all stake perspectives, recognise their
holders, devoid of ‘hidden’ or contributions, and make use
alternative agendas (personal, of their skills.
political, or informational),

FACTORS THAT ERODE TRUST
Several factors contribute to a decline in trust – many of which highlight issues that an
effective engagement process can be designed to anticipate and/or address. These include:
• Perceptions of bias of those convening or facilitating the process or in the information

available
• Limited engagement with, or understanding of the processes and expectations of
engagement
• Political polarisation and reliance on pre-conceived perceptions
• Increased distance between professionals and citizens as governance processes and
activities become increasingly specialised and complex.
(Adapted from Matthews, “Connections 2008: Focus on Communities”, Kettering Foundation,
2008 https://www.kettering.org/wp-content/uploads/Connections_2008.pdf).
CLARIFY, DEFINE AND

ANALYSE THE ISSUE
Community engagement often requires problem-solving skills. Clarifying the problem is an
important step to ensure that engagement efforts result in more sustainable solutions and
avoid adding to the problem through unintended consequences.
CLARIFY THE PROBLEM

PRACTICE TIP
Begin by identifying the problem example, if you are working to
Taking the time to carefully and listing those things you know increase participation in a
define the issue is critical to about the problem. For example if collective pest control effort, it
your long-term engagement you are trying to address “a lack of would be useful to know:
success. While there are landholders participating in • How many people are actively
few ‘magic formulas’ it’s collective control efforts”, list all the participating?
important to make the information you know about the • Who are the community
appropriate distinction problem. Expand on what is known members that are absent?
between the problem and about the problem by asking other • Why are they absent?
its root causes. This will help people what they think about this
you design your process. problem. Information is critical Think about the additional
when defining a problem. For information that would help you

better understand the problem you DEFINE the problem. This is especially
are working on. Collect several important if different groups
THE PROBLEM
types of information about the or people with a history of
problem from a number of sources The information collected and bad relations or competing
including other organisations generated when clarifying the interests need to work to
working on the problem, news problem will help you draft a together to solve the problem.
articles, scientific publications, problem statement, which is a
government reports, conversations comprehensive definition of the
with local leaders, people that are problem. ANALYSE THE
impacted by the problem, and Well written problem statements
ROOT CAUSE
the general public. What you hear follow two general principles:
or read will fall into one of the OF THE PROBLEM
following categories: 1. They define the problem in The next step in defining the issue
terms of needs, not solutions. or problem is to better understand
• Facts (there are a fixed If you define the problem in the basic reasons behind the
number of people who always terms of possible solutions, problem or issue you are trying to
participate) you are closing the door to address. These underlying reasons
• Inferences (people who don’t other, possibly more effective are defined as root causes.
participate are uninformed solutions. A problem defined Taking action without identifying
about the collective effort) as “There are community what factors contribute to the
• Speculation (if they had better members who have yet to problem can result in misdirected
information they would join be engaged in our collective efforts and wasted time and
the effort) effort” leaves more space for resources. By working with the
• Opinion (some people just possible solutions than “We community to thoroughly study
don’t want to take action need to send out fines for the cause of the problem, you can
because they are lazy). non-participation” or “We have build ownership, understand it
to set up a website.” better, and generate motivation to
deal with it.
2. They define the problem to
reflect everyone’s perspective
and avoid assigning blame for
PROBLEM OBVIOUS UNDERLYING POSSIBLE

STATEMENT REASONS REASONS ACTIONS
Root Cause Corrective action

Cause
Problem Cause Root Cause Corrective action

Cause
This flow chart illustrates the steps of problem clarification, definition and analysis.

PRACTICE TIP
THE ‘BUT WHY?’ TECHNIQUE

The “but why?” technique is one method used to identify the root
causes underlying issues. This technique examines the problem
by asking questions to identify the cause of the problem. Start by
reading each problem and cause and asking “but why?” Continue
asking the “but why?” question until you reach the root of the
problem. This technique will help uncover the individual and social
factors that are causing the problem:
• Individual factors could provide targets of change for your

initiative, such as levels of knowledge, awareness, attitudes, and
behaviour.
• Do people need more knowledge about the issue, problem or

project?
• Do certain segments of the population need to learn skills to

decrease the impact of the issue or problem?
• Social factors can also be identified. For example, it could help

determine why a certain neighbourhood seems to have a higher
rate of a specific problem. These social causes divide into three
main sub-groups:
• Cultural factors, such as customs, beliefs, and values;
• Economic factors, such as money, land, and resources;
• Political factors, such as decision-making power.
The ‘but why?’ technique is best used within a group setting to

brainstorm possible causes of the problem or issue. This group
should be comprised of people who are affected by the problem
and people who are in a position to contribute to solutions to the
problem or issue. The broader the representation in the group, the
more likely the true root causes will be identified.

ENGAGEMENT GOALS
Engagement goals reflect the reason for engaging citizens

and communities. This section introduces the five primary PRACTICE TIP
engagement goals: informing, consulting, involving,
collaborating, and empowering. Understanding these goals
helps you assess the level(s)
of engagement that’s most
appropriate for the issue you
IAP2’s PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SPECTRUM are working on. It is
important to recognise the
Public has increasing impact on decision link between the
engagement goal and the
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower promise that is inherent in
these goals, to avoid
The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) has designed the ‘Spectrum breaking trust and under
of Public Participation’ which is useful for defining the public’s role in a participation
mining the success of the
process. In essence, the public has increasing impact on the decision-making process as
the engagement goal moves up the spectrum. engagement effort overall.
Source: http://www.iap2.org/?page=pillars
INFORM information sessions etc. to elicit opinions, perspectives,

• Public meetings – ideas, underlying values, solutions,
Informing is the simplest and where limited input from or priorities. Regardless of the
most common engagement goal. stakeholders is allowed approach, you should strive to gain
Informing is generally one-way and • Public hearings – where as much feedback from affected
primarily involves communicating information is provided and citizens and stakeholders as
information about an issue, an opportunity exists to possible.
decision, or process to citizens. voice concern but little or no Tools for consulting include
Informing stakeholders, by itself, is discussion or dialogue occurs both formal and informal strategies:
not effective engagement because • Print, electronic media and
it does not allow the exchange social media communication • Talking to a range of
of ideas, discussion, dialogue or – newspaper, radio, TV, email, community members – e.g.
deliberation. etc. Interviews, focus groups,
online forums, community
Tools used to inform citizens meetings.
include: CONSULT • Systematically collecting
• Fact Sheets – printed relevant information –
materials that are widely The second level of engagement e.g. Surveys, workshops,
distributed in print and is community consultation – document review,
electronically. creating a mechanism to gather brainstorming activities.
• Websites – increases your input on the issue, problem, or
ability to reach a wide range process that is under consideration.
of stakeholders Depending on the issue, the
• Open houses – presentations, objective(s) for this goal may be

public policy and for electoral involved in or affected by
PRACTICE TIP issues. Members of a random the issue. The task force can
sample are polled, and participate in a community
then some members of the project in a variety of ways
When you are collecting sample are invited to gather including identifying the
information about the issue to discuss the issues after issue, collecting information,
of concern, it can be helpful they have examined balanced brainstorming solutions/
to keep a record of your briefing materials. alternatives, creating an action
personal and professional plan, and implementing the
reaction to what you are action plan.
hearing. This is part of a
COLLABORATE
‘reflective practice’ that • Electronic methods –
helps you avoid bias and Collaborate is the fourth goal Increasing numbers of
encourages the capacity for on the engagement spectrum. businesses, households, and
critical thinking about the Collaboration goals indicate organisations have access to
problem. you will partner with the public the internet and email. Online
in each aspect of the decision access allows you to engage
being considered, including the a larger portion of the public
INVOLVE development of alternatives and in discussions concerning
the identification of a preferred community issues, through
Involve goals reflect a commitment solution. Tools designed to help discussion forums, online polls
to work directly with the public you achieve collaboration include: and Q&A sessions.
throughout the process to ensure
that public issues and concerns • Study circles –can be used to
are consistently understood and foster collaboration through EMPOWER
considered. Some tools to involve exploration, deliberation
citizens are: and collective action. Study Empowerment refers to placing
circles bring together people either the decision-making
• Citizen panels – focus of various socioeconomic authority or the responsibility for
primarily on the decision- classes and ethnicities to implementing a particular solution
making process and are engage in dialogue and in the hands of stakeholders
generally conducted within deliberation in order to participating in the engagement
small groups. The panels brainstorm potential solutions process.
are usually conducted over for the issue at hand. The
the span of several days and series of dialogues take place • A ‘Citizen Jury’ is one tool
include randomly selected over time and are meant to that can be used to attain this
participants. The participants spur the entire group to reach goal through a process that
on the panel generally a collective decision and seek brings together a microcosm
deliberate a specific issue and to have action taken on the of the public, having them
present recommendations on decision. attend hearings where
how to address the issue. they learn about the issue,
• Community task force – can sessions where the jury
• Deliberative polling – be used to engage citizens members deliberate about
combines deliberation in in discussion on a particular what they learned during
small group discussions with issue. The group should be the hearings and finally
scientific random sampling to relatively small and consist issue recommendations for
provide public consultation for of local volunteers who are addressing the issue.

STAKEHOLDERS
Engagement processes revolve around stakeholders.

Stakeholders are identified as individuals or groups that a) Can
influence the outcome of a project, program or initiative, and
PRACTICE TIP
b) Who will be affected by the project, program or initiative.
These are only some of the

possible tools you might use
to achieve your engagement
goals. There are many
excellent resources which
can help you find the IDENTIFYING AND ANALYSING STAKEHOLDERS
best tool for your need
(check our resource list Identifying stakeholders is a project or initiative
for suggestions). Most critical aspect of a community • How best to communicate
importantly, these tools can engagement process. with each of the stakeholder
be adapted to suit the scale Stakeholders are more than groups
of the engagement effort or potential funders and official • Barriers that might limit
target community. decision-makers. Stakeholders are stakeholder’s participation.
also the groups and individuals
that are affected by the project or STEP 1
issue that is being addressed.
Stakeholders that can
It is best to be as inclusive as
possible when identifying stake affect the outcome
holders. Consider government Start by identifying the stakeholder
officials, decision makers, funders, groups (formal and non-formal)
non-profit organisations, civic and individuals that can affect the
organisations, consultants, implementation of the project or
business leaders, citizens and may influence possible solutions.
residents. Pay special attention to Include local decision makers,
those who may be under- government agencies, non-
represented but are impacted by profits and activist organisations.
the issue or project such as Identify groups, organisations
minority groups, women, youth, and individuals that may oppose
seniors, immigrants, and low- the project or initiative as well as
income residents. Information those that will likely support the
gathered should include: project or initiative. If at all possible
identify an individual that has a
• The name of individual leadership role in each stake
stakeholders and stakeholder holder group. It is good practice
groups to include individuals on this
• Key individuals that represent list that aren’t affiliated with any
stakeholder groups particular organisation but who
• How the stakeholders might have influence and power to affect
affect or be affected by the outcome of the project or initiative.

STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4
Stakeholders affected by Matching stakeholders to Communicating with
the outcome engagement goals stakeholders
Identify stakeholder groups and Matching stakeholders to It is good practice to develop
individuals that could be positively engagement goals is necessary a communication strategy
or negatively impacted by the to ensure you are involving for your engagement efforts.
project or issue being addressed. stakeholders appropriately. Communication methods used
For example, a wild dog control • Inform: one-way throughout the engagement
project would affect current communication primarily process range from mass
residents and property owners in designed to provide communication to one-on-
the neighbourhood. The project information about an issue one communication. The
would reduce wild dog numbers • Consult: gather input, communication strategy should
and be of benefit for livestock opinions, and ideas on the include the following information:
farmers, but some residents may issue or process from the • The method(s) of
be concerned that domestic dogs stakeholders communication that will be
would be at risk. Resident and • Involve: include stakeholder’s use to communicate with
non-resident property owners may opinions and ideas into the stakeholders
be influenced by concerns about proposed solutions • A communication calendar
the humane treatment of animals. • Collaborate: engage • The type(s) of information to
Or a local government may decide stakeholders in complex be communicated
to withhold permits for baiting. problem-solving processes • An evaluation plan to
Special attention should be through dialogue and document what worked and
paid to stakeholders that may deliberation what did not so you can
be under-represented but will • Empower: foster decision- improve.
still be impacted by the issue or making authority or
project. These stakeholders might responsibility for implementing
include minority groups, women, a solution to stakeholders
youth, seniors, immigrants, and
low-income residents. It is also
important to identify how each
stakeholder or stakeholder group
might be affected by the project
or initiative. If at all possible
identify individuals that represent
or have a leadership role in each
stakeholder group.

BUILDING AN EFFECTIVE
COMMUNICATION PLAN
An effective, on-going, and well-planned communications plan

is critical to ensuring you maintain the relationships, information
flows, and momentum you are establishing within your
engagement efforts. The major steps are outlined as follows.
DETERMINE YOUR IDENTIFY YOUR DEVELOP YOUR

GOALS AND PURPOSES TARGET AUDIENCE MESSAGE
Communication objectives should Identifying your target audiences is Messages are the statements
be clearly defined, detailed, a critical step in your overall that will convey critical pieces of
achievable, and measurable. communication efforts. It is information. Underlying themes
You will also want to distinguish important to remember that you and key talking points will help
between internal and external are likely to have a number of guide what information you
communications objectives. different audiences – each of want to relay. They also deliver
Questions to consider include: whom may prefer different types important information about
of information and likely have the issue and compel target
• What is the overall goal you differing preferences for how they audiences to think, feel, or act. You
want to achieve? receive that information. You will will be well-served to craft your
• What are the tangible also want to consider the positions messages based on the interest
outcomes you hope to and interests of your audience and of audiences, ensure they are
achieve? how that may affect your plans. concise and understandable, and
• Why do you want to Questions to consider include: be sure they summarise the main
communicate with the things that important to you about
audience? Are you hoping • What are the prior knowledge your project. It is also important
to inform, persuade, levels, attitudes, and to ensure that everyone in your
create action or increase behaviours of each audience organisation is providing the same
involvement? as it relates to your project? set of messages. Questions you
• What are the barriers to may want to consider include:
communication for each
stakeholder group? • What are the most critical
• What are some of the major pieces of information about
characteristics (e.g. education, your program and processes?
internet access/comfort, How will they affect the
geographic location, available audience?
time, etc.) of each audience? • What specific responses do
How will you use these you want from your audience
characteristics to help guide – simply to be more informed,
your communication efforts? to take specific action, or to
get more involved?

DECIDE WHICH IMPLEMENT YOUR EVALUATE YOUR
METHODS ARE THE PLAN EFFECTIVENESS
MOST EFFECTIVE Now that you have identified Ideally you should assess
There are countless methods and your goals, target audiences, the effectiveness of your
venues for communicating your messages, and delivery methods communication strategy to make
messages. Selection of the most it’s now time to implement your improvements or adjust strategies.
effective method(s) will depend on plan. Determine when to launch Questions to consider include:
the types of information you want your communication and other
to convey, what your audiences key dates and deadlines. Contact • What are the strengths
most want to know, and how they those who will help you get your and weaknesses of your
are likely to prefer to access your message out. Ensure that all those communication efforts to
information. Accordingly your involved know their role in the date?
‘communication channels’ are project. Questions you may want • Are you reaching those you
very likely to be different for each to consider include: had intended? Are they
audience. Questions you may want responding in ways you had
to consider include • What timing and frequency hoped? Why or why not?
of your messages will be • Have their perspectives
• Where does your audience most effective and for whom? or perceptions of your
usually get their information Will this differ for different organization or the issues you
from? methods or audiences? are working changed?
• Through what delivery • Who will be responsible within • Are changes to your strategy
methods is your audience your organisation for ensuring required either now or in the
most likely to give you messages are developed and near future?
attention? delivered in a timely, effective,
• Will you need to tailor your and professional manner? (See part 2 for more detail about
messages differently for • Have you allocated, and evaluation)
different media? can you acquire adequate
• Do you have the experience resources (e.g. financial, time,
and skills to deliver your or expertise) to ensure your
messages effectively? efforts are successful?

PART 2 PRACTICE TIP
IMPLEMENTING A frame focuses attention

on a particular way of
seeing the ‘problem’. When
COMMUNITY we ‘frame’ a picture, we

impose boundaries that
might limit our ability to
ENGAGEMENT see other possibilities.

Although ‘framing’ may
exclude alternative
viewpoints, ‘re-framing’
can be used to invite
Taking the time to carefully frame the issue for discussion different interpretations.
Understanding the power
in community engagement efforts is critical to successful of framing is useful for
community engagement. How the issue is framed sets the practitioners who seek to
tone for the effort, establishes the range and depth of the understand the issue from a
range of perspectives.
dialogue that will be fostered, and will greatly influence the
outcome of the entire effort.
problem-solving environment GOALS OF YOUR

in which your discussions take
FRAMING EFFORT
place – while creating as little
conflict as possible. Differing In general, you want to frame
perspectives are the key building discussions in such a way as to:
blocks of your long-term success; • Move beyond debate and
the engagement goal, however, ‘yes’ or ‘no’ opinions
FRAMING THE ISSUE:
is to use these differences • Identify common concerns
MOVE FROM productively toward a solution and and values about the issue
POSITIONS TO not allow them to erode trust or • Guide the discussion toward
INTERESTS relationships. options (or solutions) that
meet these concerns and
Reframing can bring diverse values
interests to the table as well as INVITE SOLUTIONS • Avoid presupposing one
focus discussions on a particular particular solution
issue to move people away from As a general rule, your framing • Focus on “how can we
presupposed positions and toward and its subsequent discussion accomplish X while also
a common set of interests. questions should focus on “How accomplishing Y”?
can we….?” rather than “Should • Assess ‘advantages/
AVOID INVITING we…?” types of questions. disadvantages’ and/or
Avoid ‘yes/no’ dichotomous ‘benefits/risks’
CONFLICT questions because they can stop • Assist participants to come
How the issue or problem is dialogue and getting to common to terms with choices as they
framed will greatly influence the understandings. ‘work through’ an issue.

GETTING SPECIFIC
Once you have a solid grasp on the complexities of the issue and the values and priorities of your participants,
your issue frame should be shaped to draw out ‘win/win’ perspectives related to: How can we do X while also
accomplishing Y (and perhaps Z as well!)? This allows you to recognise the range of legitimate interests around the
issue while also seeking a solution.
Some examples of how to re-frame challenging issues include:
• Should unconventional gas • Should the country support an • Should landholders be forced
development be banned or agricultural land preservation to undertake invasive species
fostered? program? control?
Reframed – How can we Reframed – What are our Reframed – How can
balance the economic benefits best and most cost-effective we increase landholder
of natural gas development options for preserving cooperation while minimising
while protecting our vital agricultural land in the legal interventions?
environmental assets? country?
FACILITATION – CORE VALUES

AND DIMENSIONS
A facilitator provides leadership by establishing processes
that maximise the opportunity for participant input and the co- PRACTICE TIP
creation of knowledge within the group. A facilitator provides
the methods and means that enable groups and individuals Facilitators need to
to explore issues and craft solutions to complex issues facing balance time, the degree
of uncertainty surrounding
their community, without necessarily being a subject matter the issue or project and the
expert. maturity of the organisation
or group to find the best
possible tool that will
enable participants to make
Rather than being a player, a helps affected community effective decisions and
community engagement facilitator members define and reach their reach lasting agreements
acts more like a referee. The goals by working together. and commitments.
facilitator watches the action Community engagement Facilitator training is a
during meetings and between facilitators focus on three core useful way to build your
meetings. They help participants dimensions: confidence and skills and
and stakeholders communicate 1. The substance or content of is recommended for those
with each other and the community the issue or project working directly with
at large. They help work through 2. Stakeholder relationships affected communities.
conflicts surrounding the problem. 3. The processes that shape the
Most importantly, the facilitator engagement effort.

CORE VALUES DIMENSIONS OF
FACILITATION
Effective facilitation is grounded by core values that set the stage for active
participation of participants. These core values provide the community
engagement practitioner with the foundation for, and a guide to, best
practice facilitation.
Process
Relationships
• Foster free and informed • Foster compassion and
choice. Participants’ input, respect. All participants
decision making, and deserve to be heard and
Substance
trust are all enhanced make their contribution to
in an environment free make to both the process and
of manipulation, power outcome. Achieving this may
imbalances, or coercion. Be be the most difficult aspect of
honest about how decisions a facilitator’s job, especially
will be made and how in circumstances where Community engagement facilitators
participant input will be taken individual participants don’t focus on three dimensions: the
into account and used to adhere to this critical core substance or content surrounding
make the final decision(s) value. the issue or project; relationships
about the solution or project • Insist on valid information. between stakeholders; and the
being considered. Be careful Valid, relevant, and up-to- processes that structure the
to maintain commitment to date information, free of real engagement effort.
this principle throughout the or perceived bias, is an
entire process. essential ingredient for best Content is the substance of
• Take responsibility. All practice facilitation. This the issue being discussed. This
participants should be aware enables participants to base includes defining the problem, its
of and take responsibility discussions and decisions on causes, the relevant information on
for the success of the pertinent facts, rather than all sides of the issue; the ‘technical’
overall effort—both the perceptions or opinions that aspects of the issue, the relevant
processes and outcomes. can diminish both the quality jurisdictions, the regulations
Facilitators need to create an of relationships and the and authorities involved; the
environment that encourages effectiveness of discussions. alternatives and consequences of
everyone to take an active the choices to be made and the
role in all aspects of the resulting decisions.
process.
Relationships refer to fostering,
at every opportunity possible, a
solid foundation of trust, common
understanding and vision, and
inter-relationships with all those
The table looks at the distinctions between content and process.
involved in the engagement
Content (the ‘what’) Process (the ‘how’) process. Building relationships
is an important ‘soft’ skill that
Topics for discussion Discussion methods and meeting procedures
facilitators need to take into
Tasks to be accomplished How relationships are maintained account. This involves ensuring all
Problems being addressed Tool being used interests are respected and given
Decisions being made Ground rules and norms due consideration, communication
is effective and on-going, and
Agenda items Group dynamics
group processes and conflict are
Goals Visioning managed effectively.

Process concerns are focused
on how your engagement effort PRACTICE TIP
is structured to ensure you
reach your engagement goals.
Process includes the discussion The facilitator is often seen
methods, procedures, meeting as the meeting leader, and in
format, and facilitation techniques. fact does provide process
Process also includes the style leadership. However, the
of the interaction (e.g. group facilitator should stay as
discussion or panel discussion), neutral as possible on
the group dynamics and the content. The goal is to
time and location of the event. actively manage the process
Facilitators pay attention to in order to foster the
process concerns to ensure co-creation of knowledge
all participants contribute to and a group-centred
the outcome of the meeting or exploration of ideas and
activity. solutions.
Community engagement
facilitators commonly have a
deep understanding about the
issue or problem around which
they are facilitating. The facilitator
will likely have an opinion about
the decision or direction the
group should take to address a
problem. Effective facilitators use
their understanding of the issue,
meeting purpose and expected
outcomes along with process
skills and tools, to help the groups
they are working with engage in
effective dialogue, understand the
information and decisions they are
considering and develop plans for
group action.

FACILITATION IDEA GENERATION TOOLS
DILEMMAS AND TOOLS
Effective engagement efforts often require lots of meetings.

These meetings have many different goals including building
relationships, sharing information, exploring options, solutions,
values and perspectives. Having a set of idea-generation and
idea-narrowing tools in your facilitation ‘toolkit’ (your back
pocket) will help you utilise everyone’s time as efficiently as
possible – and ensure that you’ve gathered the full range of
relevant ideas from your participants.
SYMPTOMS, Symptom #3 – The group always

CAUSES AND CURES seems to run out of time just PRACTICE TIP
when important decisions come
OF POOR DECISIONS to the table. In this case time isn’t
monitored or managed effectively Some idea generation tools
Poor quality decisions can be or there is no detailed agenda for facilitators include:
avoided through effective planning developed for ensuring enough • Brain storming
and facilitation. time is allowed for decision- • Visioning
making • Force field analysis
Symptom #1 – Aimless, drifting, • Root cause analysis
and random discussions. The Symptom #4 – When an important
Some idea narrowing tools
same topic is repeatedly covered item is on the table members get
for facilitators include:
with little or no resolution. This heated and argumentative. Few
• Decision grids
is usually caused by no (or an members are listening and most
• Ranking processes
inadequate) plan or process for are pushing their own agenda or
approaching a decision. perspective. Often in these cases A detailed list of these tools and
a few members are dominating, how to use them is included in the
appendix.
Symptom #2 – The group uses unconcerned that others are
voting on important items where silent. This is an issue of poorly
total buy-in is important but uses developed group interaction skills
consensus to decide trivial matters. and behavioural expectations and consequences, or the solutions.
This generally occurs when the requires strong facilitation. This is caused by a failure to
group hasn’t fully considered that check assumptions along the way.
range of decision making tools Symptom #5 – After a lengthy Ensuring that probing questions
available to them to determine discussion it becomes apparent are asked to discern underlying
the most effective for its current that everyone is operating on a values and assumption is the best
circumstances. slightly different set of assumptions way to address this concern. These
about the problem, its implications, could be related to the situation
the range of alternatives and as well as the organisation or the

person. Checking in with the group OPTION 2 Benefits: Systematic, objective,
to clarify or validate underlying participative, feels like a win
assumptions on a regular basis is a
One person decides Challenges: Limits dialogue,
critical part of any discussion. This occurs when the group influenced choices, real priorities
decides that it best serves them to may not surface
Symptom #6 – In spite of the fact have one person decide on behalf Uses: To sort or prioritise a long list
that the discussions have come to of the group. While this may sound of options.
little or no resolution, no one takes undemocratic, it can be useful
action to maintain momentum in some circumstances. It can OPTION 5
and keep things on track. This lead to faster decisions and more
can often be solved by someone efficient resolution for many issues
Majority vote
checking in with the group or particularly if this person has been This involves asking members to
calling a ‘time out’ to take stock diligent about gathering advice choose the option they favour
and regroup. and input. once clear choices have been
identified. The quality of voting is
Benefits: Can be fast, clear always enhanced if there has been
accountability adequate time to consider all ideas
Challenges: Lack of input, low buy- and considerations prior to voting.
in, no synergy
Uses: When one person is the Benefits: Fast, high quality if paired
expert or an individual is willing with dialogue, clear outcome
and capable of taking on this role. Challenges: May be too fast,
winners and losers, limited
OPTION 3 dialogue as possibility, influenced
choices
Compromise Uses: Trivial matter, when there
DECISION-MAKING This is often appropriate when are clear options, if division in the
there are two or more distinct group is okay with everyone.
OPTIONS
options and members are strongly
As a facilitator, you have at least polarised. A middle position is then
six distinct decision making sought that can incorporate ideas OPTION 6
methods available to you. Each from both sides.
has benefits and challenges.
Consensus Building
Benefits: Good discussion, creates This involves everyone clearly
OPTION 1 a solution understanding the situation or
Challenges: Can be adversarial, problem, analysing all relevant
Spontaneous Agreement win/lose, divides the group facts and perspectives and then
This happens only occasionally Uses: When positions are jointly developing solutions that
when there is a solution that is polarised and consensus is represent the whole group’s best
favoured by everyone and there is improbable. thinking about the optimal decision.
complete agreement among
participants. Usually happens more OPTION 4 Benefits: Collaborative, systematic,
or less automatically and issues participative, discussion oriented,
are relatively trivial.
Multi-voting encourages commitment
This is a priority setting tool that Challenges: Takes time, requires
Benefits: Fast, easy, unifying is useful for making decisions good data and member skills
Challenges: Too fast, lack of when the groups has a lengthy Uses: Important issues, when total
discussion set of options and needs to rank buy-in matters.
Best used: When full discussion order those options based on an
isn’t critical, trivial issues. established set of criteria.

PRACTICE TIP
WORKING TOWARDS CONSENSUS

In addition to being the first choice in many decision-making environments,
facilitators are constantly building consensus in almost everything they do.
Consensus means reaching unanimous agreement on a particular course of
action or decisions.
Getting to consensus might require:

• Summarising a complex set of ideas to the satisfaction of group members
• Getting everyone’s input into clearly identified goals and objectives
• Assessing underlying values and perspectives of all group members
• Asking clarifying questions to explore all ideas, concerns, and options
• Gathering input related to all data and information relevant to the
discussion and decision to be made
• Linking member’s ideas together so that their perspectives are
incorporated in discussions and decisions
• Agreeing upon a decision making method for use in the final decision.
• Regardless of whether consensus is being used formally to reach a
decision on a specific issue, or informally as an ongoing facilitation
technique, you’ll know your group is working consensually when:
• Lots of ideas are being shared
• People’s feelings and values are openly explored
• Everyone is heard and respected
• There’s active listening and paraphrasing to clarify ideas and ideas are
built on by other members
• No one is trying to push pre-determined solutions – instead there is an
open and objective question for new options and solutions
• When the final decision is reached, people feel satisfied that they were
part of the decision
• Everyone feels adequately consulted and involved to the extent that even
when the final decision isn’t the one they would have chosen on their
own, they can readily accept it.

FACILITATION:
MEETING MANAGEMENT
Meeting preparation is a key element of productive meetings.

Below are three steps to consider to ensure the meetings you
facilitate throughout your engagement process are productive
and participants feel their time has been well spent.
BUILDING AN AGENDA
PRACTICE TIP
A well thought-out agenda is an
important tool for a successful
meeting. The agenda should state The agenda is a guide to help keep both the facilitator and
the meeting’s objective or purpose participants on task.
and include an outline of the
topics to be discussed during the The agenda should include the following:
meeting. • A short, simple statement of the meeting purpose or objective
Tougher topics should either • A list of topics to be discussed and the names of individuals
be placed at the beginning or the who will be responsible for presenting or leading discussion for
end of the agenda. Depending each topic
on the group dynamic, attendees • A brief statement about why each topic is being discussed and
may feel refreshed and eager its importance to those attending
to participate in the beginning; • The time allotted for each topic
at the end, members may be • Basic information relevant to the topic and other necessary
tired and unwilling to participate. background information
Conversely, in the beginning, • Important deadlines and dates to highlight what needs to be
some attendees may be timid done and the subsequent timeline.
and uncomfortable about sharing • Key questions for attendees to consider before the meeting to
with the group. Determine how help guide facilitation.
your group interacts before
you finalise your agenda to
avoid either of these barriers to
participation. Begin and end with PRACTICE TIP
a “unifying note” or summary so
the group starts and ends feeling
as if they are a part of an effective It can be helpful to develop two separate agendas: one for the
discussion with a clear purpose. facilitator that is in depth and detailed, and another outline version
for participants to refer to during the meeting. A copy of the
outline agenda should be sent to participants before the meeting,
and copies should be available as a hand out prior to starting the
meeting.

MEETING LOGISTICS PREPARING TO FACILITATE A MEETING
It is the facilitator’s responsibility Before the meeting, run through ‘break the ice’ and allow
to prepare for the meeting. these questions: each member to become
Preparation includes: comfortable with the group?
Have you clearly defined • Have you considered the
• Contacting members and the meeting purposes and organisational context
stakeholders a few days prior objectives? within the group and how
to the meeting to remind them might it affect the success
of the meeting time, date, and Determine your own role of your meeting?
location. during the meeting. Consider • Are there power
• Determining if the facility is how your role might affect your imbalances in the group
suitable for everyone: facilitation. Will you be the: you will need to anticipate?
• Are there ramps or elevators • Facilitator but not a
to ease access for physically member of the group? Determine discussion methods
challenged individuals? • Facilitator and a leader or and a style of interaction you
• Are there any physical barriers member of the group? will utilise.
to entry at the location? • Will it be run by a leader
• Ensure arrangements are Identify who will fill the only, or is it wholly
made for refreshments, pens, following roles during the discussion based?
pencils, name tags, extra meeting: • Do you have a strategy to
copies of the agenda, etc. • Registration and/or promote discussion and
• Do you need meeting aids attendance recorder deliberation rather than
such as a white board or easel • Note taker debate?
in the room? • Arrange for equipment
• Is there a computer, a • Arrange for refreshments Use a variety of media,
projector, and a screen • Time keeper graphics, types of discussion,
available if needed? Do you etc. Remember, everyone
know how to use it properly? Determine and arrange works differently and some
If not, make sure to contact for the appropriate room will not benefit from a wholly
someone to help you set it up set-up. Classroom style discussion-based meeting.
or teach you to use it before may be appropriate if the • Have you considered
the meeting. purpose of the meeting is to using a variety of media
• Issue the invitation – identify present information. Seating in your facilitation to
your target audience. participants around tables guide discussion and
• If you intend to advertise or in a circle will be more deliberation? (e.g. flip
the meeting, how will you appropriate if the participants charts, projected note-
communicate with prospective need to engage in discussion. taking, videos, handouts,
participants? Consider emails, etc.)
posts on blogs, posters in Consider the nature and
local community centers, makeup of the group as Identify the decision-making
newspaper ads, or any a whole and its members method you intend to use
method that is likely to attract individually. during the meeting. These
the attention of your target • Are there certain positions may include but are not
audience. that members have that limited to: majority rule,
may act as a barrier to consensus, leader-driven,
participation? How will you or consensus. You will want
mitigate these? to make this clear at the
• Have you considered a beginning of the meeting
team-building exercise to to ensure everyone is

working from the same set of FACILITATING THE PRACTICE TIP
expectations.
MEETING –
• If the group is expected
to make a decision during A CHECKLIST
the meeting, identify a FOR SUCCESS Discussion and
decision-making method. deliberation focuses on
The facilitator’s job during the collaborating to improve
Develop a ‘work plan’ so that meeting is to promote discussion, and understand the
decisions made during the ensure an amiable environment position of others in order
meeting will be implemented and manage any tension between to develop a solution to a
by identified individuals participants in order to help problem. Debate focuses
before the next meeting, achieve the meeting purpose or on the differences between
or whatever deadline is the group’s goal. beliefs and values which
chosen. Make sure to include The following checklist will help can cause controversy
this in a follow-up email to you facilitate effective communi and unwillingness to
remind participants of their cation and active participation of participate.
commitments prior to the next meeting participants.
meeting
• Do you have a “work plan” Review#1 – Review the Ground rules – Establish
to implement decisions agenda with the participants at ground rules that respect
made during the meeting? the beginning of the meeting individual rights and
• Have you identified and ask if any items are responsibilities. This builds
individuals that are willing missing. Participants should trust among participants and
to take action from the already be aware of what is on leads to a cohesive group
meeting? the agenda, as you should discussion.
have already sent it out prior to
Review the agenda with a the meeting. Remember to Agenda – Summarise how the
critical eye to ensure all topics bring extra copies with you agenda items are important to
are in-line with the meeting for those who forgot theirs or meeting important dates and
purpose and objectives. for new members of the group. deadlines
• Restate decisions, issues,
or disagreements that took Attendance – Take
place at the last meeting attendance of participants that
to better enable group are present, if appropriate.
members to work towards a This way, members of the
solution. group who attend all meetings
and participate can voice their
Review#2 – Review the opinion and can be
meeting purpose and recognised for their service
objectives and seek and dedication.
agreement from the
participants on the objectives. Recognition – Recognise all
This helps focus the meeting, participants serving as note
improves efficiency, and taker, time keeper, etc.
creates a concrete measure
of success.

PRACTICE TIP
AFTER THE MEETING PRACTICE TIP
After the meeting, the facilitator is
responsible for recapping the • Remember to focus on
Realistically, a solution may events and decisions of the issues and interests, not
not be achievable during meeting. Completing the following positions or personalities
the first few meetings. The tasks within a week or two of the of individual attendees
facilitator must be patient meeting ensures the actions taken • Encourage participation
and active during the at the meeting are recorded and from all members and
entirety of the meeting to that participants are able to attendees during the
guide participants towards effectively participate in future entire meeting. If you
a long-term and viable meetings. notice someone is not
solution.
participating, make sure
For example: to ask for their opinion if
• Send a recap email to they are willing to speak.
Reflection – Take notes on participants thanking them for • Stay neutral during the
feelings, ideas, thoughts, attending the meeting. discussion.
solutions, decisions, questions, • Send a thank-you note or • Make careful
and observations that are email to any guest speakers observations and
observed throughout the soon after your meeting pay attention to what
meeting. concludes attendees are saying.
• These notes are in addition • Make sure everyone
to those taken by the Consider: in the group is on the
“secretary” (if you have one) • Did we accomplish the goals same page, understands
and document your own and objectives we set for the their roles, and is
thoughts and insights about meeting? following along with
the process of the meeting. • What can I do to improve for the discussion and the
the next meeting? overall engagement
Feedback – Encourage • What worked well? What process.
feedback on: the agenda, the didn’t work well? • Respect time boundaries
discussion topics during the • What remains to be completed set forth in the agenda
meeting, the plan for each for the next meeting? for individual topics
participant between meetings, and do not overrun the
deadlines, etc. meeting.
• Clarify how decisions are
Review#3 – Review all made, the outcomes of
decisions made during the the meeting and the next
meeting, any tasks that need steps.
to be accomplished before the
next meeting, and the people
responsible for the tasks prior
to ending the meeting.

MANAGING
CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
Understanding and managing conflict surrounding public

issues is a challenge that most community engagement
efforts encounter at one time or another. However, not
all conflict is detrimental to community engagement.
Creative or productive disagreement, managed effectively,
can contribute to better long-term outcomes. The key is to
manage it in ways that are productive and above all else,
foster trust and build relationships.
PRACTICE TIP
There are a number of

WHY DO DIFFICULT ISSUES ARISE? other reasons why conflict
may negative impact on
Conflict may have any number of origins. It is helpful to think about the engagement efforts. Some
‘behind the scenes’ factors that may be affecting your engagement efforts: of these include when:
• Faulty or inconsistent • Poorly defined responsibilities • Participants are taken

communications – between and authority –the cause by surprise about an
leaders and citizens as and/or the responsibility issue or process
well as within communities for solutions is not well • The stakes, either real
themselves. understood or agreed upon. or perceived, are high
• Competition for resources – • Need for recognition – • An adversarial tone is
either real or perceived (e.g. all community members set by those leading the
fear that one group’s gain appreciate being recognised effort – and spreads to
means another’s loss). as valuable and legitimate the affected community
• Value clashes – community contributors. This is often • It’s what people are
members view issues through overlooked in community used to – they have not
the lens of their particular engagement. been trained or had
experiences and values – • Power or status differences – experience with other
affecting their perceptions of can frequently be the source forms of dialogue and
the problem and any potential of conflict and may or may not the development of
solutions. be immediately obvious. solutions
• Acceptance of change – • Unresolved prior conflict • Participants feel
everyone ‘comes to the table’ or lack of trust – legacy there are no better
with variable levels of comfort considerations that you may alternatives to resolving
with change regardless of the have to consider. the conflict or being
merits or circumstances of the heard.
issue.

PLANNING FOR AND DIAGNOSING DIFFICULT ISSUES:
MANAGING DIFFICULT THE DECISION CYCLE
ISSUES The best time to address a challenging situation is in the early stages
Effectively managing difficult when it may still be possible to establish some common ground in either
issues requires assessing both the understanding of the issue or other’s perspectives.
current conditions ‘on the ground’,
as well as designing processes • Concern – this is the earliest to take shape and alternative
that effectively address the stage of the assessment solutions and ideas begin
technical, social, and economic and generally when the to emerge. This can be a
realities that may affect outcomes. discussions are just beginning. critical point in any conflict
Effectively assessing the Interventions at this stage cycle. Effective facilitation
situation is a key step in your of cycle might include and fostering a respectful
planning process. At the most listening, helping clarify discussion of the merits of
general level, you will want to the nature of the issue and proposed solutions is key at
ask a number of questions to providing technical and other this stage.
understand the ‘lay of the land’. information.
These might include: • Consequences – this is often
• What is the level of interest or • Involvement – this is when where a ‘deeper dive’ into the
concern? community members are implications and consequences
• Who, and how many, may be starting to get involved with of proposed solutions occurs.
affected by the outcomes of the issue or are considering What are the long and short
this process? purposefully addressing it. It term costs and benefits of
• Who are the relevant is useful to identify the level each of the main solutions that
authorities and decision- at which people are currently have been identified?
makers? involved with the issue. Are
• Are the relevant authorities they starting to form opinions • Choice – this is generally
committed to good-faith or are they still assessing the where the process is
implementation of the problem? At this stage, assess approaching decision time
outcomes? what additional information and where ideally the issue
• Do you have all the relevant might be useful. has been effectively explored
information you need? from as many perspectives
• Issues – this is where as possible. Effective
The following outline details, perspectives and ‘sides’ are decision-making processes
more specifically, the stages many starting to emerge. At this are critical at this stage to
issues generally go through. point you may want to provide avoid alienating one or more
Being able to diagnose where additional information, assess stakeholder groups.
your stakeholders are in relation the degree of conflict, or
to the issue at hand helps you investigate underlying values • Implementation –this occurs
understand what intervention or other community or issue when it’s time to take action.
options are most likely to be dynamics are at play. You will At this point it is critical
effective at that particular point. also start identifying potential to ensure that everyone
solutions that are consistent understands the process and
with the values and reasoning behind the decision
perspectives being aired, and what steps will take place
while allowing space for any to implement it.
alternative views to emerge. • Evaluation – the process has
determined what success
• Alternatives – this stage of the looks like and how to measure
process is generally where it. More on this in Part 3 of
the range of solutions begins the handbook.

ALIGNMENT PRACTICE TIP
A good engagement plan

will help you connect your
engagement goals with the
processes, procedures and
A critical element in any effective engagement effort communications that you
will use. Engagement plans
is ensuring that the processes, procedures and also help you communicate
communications are all aligning and are consistent with the with internal and external
engagement goals. Community engagement efforts can stakeholders, which
increases the likelihood of
falter because tensions between internal and external forces gaining important ‘buy in’
within either key organisations or community groups have from all of those with a stake
not been adequately considered. in the process.
INTERNAL ALIGNMENT Is everyone within your And if not, how will you justify
organisation – and more and communicate these
The first, and perhaps most broadly across your decisions, both internally and
obvious aspect of alignment engagement team – externally?
relates to the procedures, policies, supportive of, and fully
and communications within your understanding of the goals,
organisation. If your group, intentions, processes, and
organisation or government agency promises of your engagement PRACTICE TIP
is undertaking a community effort? Are you all speaking
engagement effort, the following from the same page? If not,
questions should be explored: what can you do to address If you are promising that
this before it’s too late? The the input you gather in your
Are there policies, limitations last thing you want is for engagement efforts will
on your authority or control, participants or members be incorporated into the
or internal decision-making of the community getting actions and decisions that
procedures that you need to mixed signals from your follow, are there internal
consider before beginning organisation. reasons or limitations to
your engagement efforts? this promise? If there ARE
How do these alter the overall How can you best internal limitations, you need
goals, issue identification, incorporate the input and to recognise them early on
discussion questions, deliberations into policies, and be transparent about
processes or promises you procedures, or activities? these from the outset. Better
make to those participating in Are there adjustments you to investigate these issues
your engagement effort? can make to accommodate rather than be blindsided
this new information? What by them later on, as this
strategies will you use to will diminish the trust and
ensure you able to keep the relationships you’ve been so
promises you’ve made to the carefully developing.
participants and members?

EXTERNAL ALIGNMENT
External alignment refers to the Are there policies, Can all your stakeholders
alignment of the engagement regulations, incentives, speak consistently and
goals and promises with the and power struggles within effectively to the need,
policies, procedures, and your community that clearly goals, and intentions of your
communications of your external exacerbate the challenge or engagement effort?
partners or stakeholders. If one issue you are attempting to
or more key stakeholders are resolve? If so, what can be Are there adjustments in
not likely to support an emerging done to alter this environment policies or procedures that
solution to the issue, you may want before your engagement your stakeholders are willing
to recalibrate either the processes efforts begin? If not, how to consider to ensure both an
and/or goals of your engagement might you need to revise the effective engagement process
effort. Questions to consider goals or processes of your and a realistic solution based
include: engagement program? on new information or input?
Are all partner organisations Are these external

or those that can influence stakeholders willing to
the outcome of your efforts consider the new information
on the same page with your and collaborations your
engagement efforts? engagement efforts are
designed to create?

PART 3
EVALUATING
COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT
After many late nights of hard work, more planning meetings
than you care to remember, and many pots of coffee, your
community engagement effort has finally gotten off the
ground. Congratulations! You have every reason to be proud
of yourself and you should probably take a bit of a breather
to avoid burnout. Don’t rest on your laurels too long, though
– your next step is to monitor the effort’s progress. If your
community engagement is working perfectly in every way,
you deserve the satisfaction of knowing that.
Here are a few reasons why you • Most importantly, it will help types of evaluation, the best
should develop an evaluation plan: improve your engagement practices for developing your
practice. overall strategy and the potential
• It guides you through each uses for the data and information
step of the process of you collect.
evaluation. WHEN SHOULD Effective evaluation is not
• It helps you decide what sort only an “event” that occurs at
YOU DEVELOP AN
of information you and your the end of a project, but is an
stakeholders really need. EVALUATION PLAN? ongoing process which helps
• It keeps you from wasting time As soon as possible! The best time decision-makers better understand
gathering information that isn’t to do this is before you begin your the project; how it is impacting
needed. community engagement effort. participants, partner agencies
• It helps you identify the After that, you can do it anytime, and the community; and how it is
best possible methods and but the earlier you develop a plan being influenced by both internal
strategies for getting the and begin to implement it, the better and external factors. Evaluation
needed information. your effort will be, and the greater should not be conducted simply
• It helps you come up with the outcomes will be at the end. to prove that a project worked,
a reasonable and realistic This section is designed to but also to improve the way it
timeline for evaluation. introduce you to the different worked. Evaluation is not only an

accountability measuring stick - Reinforce purposes and - Improve educational or
imposed on projects, but also a goals of the program communication materials
management and learning tool - Stimulate dialogue and raise - Decide where to allocate
for engagement efforts, projects, awareness about community future resources.
funders, and practitioners. or project related issues. • Determine the effects of the
• Improve how things are done program on –
Evaluation can be used to: - Refine plans for introducing - Skills development of
• Gain insight a new practice participants
- Assess needs and wants - Determine the extent to - Changes in behaviour over
of stakeholders and which project plans were time.
participants successful
PRACTICE TIP
Your evaluation strategies, if they are to be successful, must be directly tied to the goals of your community
engagement efforts.
• I f your community engagement effort is designed to address a specific issue, then your evaluation goal
will be to assess the issue-specific outcomes that have occurred as a result of your program efforts.
Examples might include decreasing the number of feral pigs in an area, increasing in the acres of
farmland preserved, or decreasing the levels of sediment in a river.
• If your goal is to enhance local community participation or involvement, your evaluation goals might
consider how well the program reached the intended audience, involved residents in decision-making,
empowered them to implement strategies on their own, or simply increased community understanding
and knowledge about the issue.
In either case, deciding ahead of time what’s important to your project – and to your stakeholders – is a
critical first step.

FOUR PHASES OF EVALUATION
PLANNING IMPLEMENTATION and impacts and summarise
the overall performance of your
The most important considerations This is the carrying out of your program.
during the planning phase of your evaluation plan. Although it may
engagement evaluation are vary considerably from project to REPORTING AND
prioritising short and long-term project, you will likely concentrate
COMMUNICATION
goals, identifying your target on formative and process
audience(s), determining methods evaluation strategies at this point In order to tell your story
for collecting data determining in your efforts. effectively, it’s critical for you
what (if any) role your participants to consider what you want to
or stakeholders will have in the communicate about the results or
COMPLETION
development process and processes of your project, which
assessing the feasibility your Upon completion of your program, audiences are most important to
potential methods for your target or the intermediate steps along the communicate with and what are
audience(s). way, your evaluation efforts should the most appropriate methods for
be designed to examine outcomes reaching these audiences.
PRIMARY TYPES OF EVALUATION

Regardless of the community • Process evaluation to 1. Outcome evaluation of
engagement strategy or determine whether a program the observable conditions
intervention, you will likely have was well designed and of a specific population,
three primary goals driving your implemented. organisational attribute,
evaluation effort: • Developmental evaluation or social condition that a
to respond to unanticipated program is expected to
1. To inform the development of events and changes that have changed. Outcome
your activities and programs occur during the program that evaluation tends to focus on
(formative evaluation) have not been considered or conditions or behaviours that
2. To improve upon the process built into the original process the program was expected
and success for future efforts measures. to affect most directly and
(process evaluation) immediately.
3. To assess the outcomes and Summative evaluation informs 2. Impact evaluation examines
impacts of your activities judgments about whether the the program’s long-term
and programs (summative program worked (i. e. whether goals. Summative, outcome,
evaluation). the goals and objectives were and impact evaluation are
met). This includes clearly stating appropriate to conduct when
Formative evaluation is designed the criteria and evidence being the program either has been
to provide information to guide used to make these judgments. completed or has been
program improvement during the Summative strategies also include: ongoing for a substantial
implementation phase, and period of time.
includes:

THREE LEVELS OF EVALUATION
There are three levels of evaluation that are especially relevant to many community-based
projects and engagement efforts. Together, they maximise our collective understanding and
ability to strengthen individual and organisation engagement efforts.
PROJECT-LEVEL EVALUATION
Project-level evaluation focuses on a specific initiative. The project leader, with appropriate
staff and input from participants and other relevant stakeholders, determines the critical
evaluation questions, decides whether to use an internal evaluator or hire an external
consultant and conducts and guides the project-level evaluation. While these measures
can be a combination of both formative and summative metrics, the focus here is on the
specific project or initiative. The primary goal of project-level evaluation is to improve and
strengthen the overall project and engagement effort. Ultimately, project-level evaluation
can be defined as the consistent, ongoing collection and analysis of information for use in
decision making.
ORGANISATION-BASED EVALUATION
Organisation-based (or internal) evaluations are geared primarily toward answering the
questions: How are we (as an organisation) engaging our stakeholders? What impact have
our efforts had on the issue(s) we are seeking to address? What can we learn from these
experiences to improve our engagement strategies and techniques? Evaluation efforts
addressing these questions reflect on all the engagement efforts in the organisation to
assess impact, and gain valuable information for improvement.
CLUSTER EVALUATION
Cluster evaluation is a means of determining how well a collection of projects, often across
multiple organisations, fulfils the objective of effective engagement. The primary purpose
for grouping similar projects together in “clusters” is to bring about more systemic change
than would be possible in a single project or in a series of unrelated projects. For instance,
evaluation efforts that assess the cross-project impact of changes in trust, relationships,
or participant behaviour may be instructive for funders, practitioners and host agencies or
organisations – and hopefully lead to sustained positive change at the community level.
Adapted from W.K. Kellogg Foundation’s Evaluation Handbook.

www.wkkf.org/resource-directory/resource/2010/w-k-kellogg-foundation-evaluation-handbook

PRACTICE TIP
A key element in your evaluation efforts is 1. What is it you most want to change and how
establishing baseline data, generally referred to as can you measure that change? In general this
‘benchmarking’. This is particularly important if your should come directly from your program goals
intention is to measure change in either the short- and objectives. Be as specific as possible.
or the long-term. If your evaluation efforts are
meant to tell you how much the ‘needle moved,’ 2. What do you know (or what can you document)
benchmarking tells you where that needle is now. about the current state of conditions? This
Two questions can help you benchmark your could be a wide range of individual, social,
efforts: economic, or environmental conditions.
EVALUATING INPUTS, OUTPUTS,

OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS
• Inputs are those things • Outcomes are the overall Increasingly, these distinctions are
that you do as a group or benefits or changes on the important to funders of all types
organisation to achieve your participants you witnessed – (i.e. public, stakeholders, funders,
goals. Examples include in the short and intermediate etc.) and are crucial for assessing
staff time, grant-writing, web terms. Did people change change. Knowing the differences,
development, mailings, survey behaviour or attitudes? Did and being able to speak to them
development, conducting they acquire new knowledge is critical to assessing your impact,
meetings or other events, of skills? Outcomes can be telling your story effectively,
and evaluation. Inputs can formative and/or summative and gathering data for program
be formative or process evaluation measures. improvement.
evaluation measures.
• Impacts are the overall effect
• Outputs are the results of or influence of your program
your inputs and activities. How or intervention. These are
many people participated? the long term effects on the
Did you reach your intended social, environmental, or
audience? How many sessions economic conditions you
were delivered? What are sought to address. Impacts
the tangible products (e.g. can be summative evaluation
fact sheets, curriculum etc.) measures.
Outputs can be formative,
process and summative
evaluation measures.

PRACTICE TIP
CHOOSING WHAT TO MEASURE

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of evaluating any program or intervention is deciding what to measure and
how.
The SMART framework provides a simple guide.
Specific – What exactly do you want to do? Can you measure it?
Measurable – Can you measure whether or not you have achieved the objective?
Achievable – Is the objective achievable? Can you get it done in the time you have available, within your
budget and within the prevailing political/institutional climate? Can you measure it?
Relevant – Will achieving this objective contribute to the delivery of your overall aim and support your/your
funders’/your community’s goals? Can you measure it?
Time-bound – When do you want to achieve this objective and/or when do you think you will be able to
achieve this objective?
THE LOGIC MODEL

Perhaps the most widely used showing the intended relationships otherwise) of the program.
tool for concisely linking activities, between investments, actions At its most basic, a logic model
resources and short- and long- and results. They help to design maps the logical relationships
term outcomes is the logic results-based programs and collect between inputs, outputs and
model. Logic models are graphic the data to answer important outcomes (impact).
representations of a program questions about the success (or
LOGIC MODEL
INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES – IMPACT
Program Short Medium Long

investments Activities Participation term term term
What is invested What we do Who we reach What results
Logic models require that each of these components be specifically identified and tied to the evaluation metrics
and methods that can measure them. A simplified example might be:
Inputs Outputs Outcome metrics

Activities Participants Short term Medium term Long term
Staff time Community meetings Demographics, Changes in trust, Changes in behaviour, Decrease in
Money to identify problem diversity of knowledge, networks, trust, invasive species
and explore options; participants, # of skills, awareness, relationships, number numbers, increased
# of meetings participants, etc. process community lead external funding to
Location of meetings satisfaction etc. activities occurring, etc. support efforts, etc.

INDICATORS AND METRICS
INDICATORS for how long said or done when the concept is

• Changes in participant expressed. It is also important to
Indicators translate general behaviour remember that in the course of an
concepts into specific, measurable • Changes in community evaluation, indicators may need to
parts. Indicators should address conditions or norms be modified or new ones adopted.
the criteria that will be used • Changes in the environment Measuring program
to judge the program or the (e.g., new programs, policies, performance by tracking indicators
engagement efforts. They reflect or practices) is only one part of evaluation, and
the aspects of the program shouldn’t be used as a basis for
that are most meaningful to Indicators can be broad-based decision making in isolation. There
monitor. Several indicators are and don’t need to focus only on a are perils to using performance
usually needed to track the program’s long-term goals. They indicators as a substitute for a full
implementation and effects of a can also address other factors that evaluation process. For example,
community engagement program influence program effectiveness, an indicator, such as a rising
or intervention. such as service quality, community number of pest species, may be
capacity, or inter-organisational falsely assumed to reflect a failing
Indicators might include: relations. Indicators for these and program when it may actually be
• The participation rate similar concepts can be created due to changing environmental
• How many people were by systematically identifying and conditions that are beyond the
exposed to the program, and then tracking markers of what is program’s control.
PRACTICE TIP
BALANCED SCORECARD
One way to develop multiple indicators is to create a ‘balanced scorecard’, which contains indicators that
are carefully selected to complement one another. According to this strategy, program processes and effects
are viewed from multiple perspectives using small groups of related indicators.
For example, a balanced scorecard might include indicators of how the program is being delivered; what
participants think of the program; what effects are observed; what goals were attained; and what changes
are occurring in the environment around the program.
Remember that your choice of metrics or indicators can, and in many cases should, be developed in
concert with participants in your engagement efforts. This can provide important insight regarding what’s
most important to measure from their perspective as well as enhance ‘buy-in’ and connection between the
project and your target audience.
Source: University of Wisconsin “Developing a Logic Model: Teaching And Training Guide”.
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/pdf/lmcourseall.pdf

FORMATIVE EVALUATION SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
METRICS METRICS
Examples might include: • Policy/decision influence

• Representativeness • Adequate time to develop solutions or
• Inclusivity regulations
• Participation rate • Reduction of legal challenges
• Identification of common goals • Agency or organization responsiveness
• Fairness • Trust
• Satisfaction • Social, economic, environmental impact
• Effectiveness (process and methods) • Participants’ values/opinions
• Transparency • Conflict resolution
• Incorporation of values and beliefs into • Volunteer time and effort
discussion • Effectiveness and cost effectiveness
• Trust • Savings or resources generated
• Communication • Effect on planning process
• Continuity.
(Adapted from Rowe, Gene, and Lynn J. Frewer. “Evaluation public-participation exercises: a research agenda.”
Science, technology & human values 29, no. 4 (204): 512-556.).
COLLECTING EVALUATION INFORMATION

There are a range of options COLLECTING SHORT- if you have established
for gathering the engagement benchmark data
evaluation data you need. When
TERM METRICS • Retrospective survey –
developing methods for collecting Measuring short-term changes. generally immediately
your data, consider two important What changes in attitudes, after a program (or series
questions: knowledge, skills, or intentions of programs) but also asks
can be documented? Common respondents to reflect
How suitable is each method collection methods include: or assess their situation,
to your intended audience? knowledge, skills, attitudes
• Post program survey – or behaviours prior to the
What information is the most immediately after one or program(s).
critical and how can you a series of projects have • Pre/post survey–identical
make it easy to collect this concluded. This is easy and surveys done before and after
data? useful but is only reliable the program or intervention.

• During – collecting COLLECTING MEDIUM- COLLECTING LONG-
information at multiple times
throughout the course of a
TERM METRICS TERM METRICS
program. Can be either formal Measuring intermediate changes. Measuring long-term impacts and
and non-formal. What behaviours actually changed outcomes. What have been the
• Skill application/assessment/ after a specified length of time? long term and sustained changes
demonstration/discussion – Common methods include: stemming from your engagement
applicable especially (but not program? Common methods
solely) for skill development. • Follow-up surveys include:
• Focus groups and other group
techniques • Secondary data sources
• Logging behaviours and • Surveys
behavioural change • Focus groups
• Monitoring of completion of • Interviews
follow-up activities • Impact assessments
• Observation • Document review and
• Case studies. collection (media reports,
printed publications, etc.)
PARTICIPATORY EVALUATION
Community-based participatory about what they need and what which they would determine
research enlists those who they think will help. success. Incorporating these
are most affected by an issue At another level, academic or considerations creates another
– typically in collaboration or other researchers recruit or hire powerful community engagement
partnership with others who have members of an affected group – opportunity.
evaluation skills – to conduct often because they are familiar
evaluation on and analyse that with and known by the community
issue or project, with the goal of – to collect data. In this case, the MOST SIGNIFICANT
devising (or revising) strategies to collectors may or may not also
address it. help to analyse the information
CHANGE
In other words, community-based that they have gathered. Most Significant Change (MSC) is
participatory research adds A third level of participatory a story-based method designed
to, or replaces academic and research sees academic, to contribute to summative
other professional research with government, or other professionals evaluation. This method
research done by community recruiting members of an affected represents a radical departure
members, so that research results group as partners in a research from traditional, positivist
both comes from and goes directly project. The community members approaches to evaluation in that it
back to the people who need become colleagues, participating is a bottom-up, rather than top-
them most and can make the in the conception and design down, process with no pre-defined
best use of them. of the project, the metrics to be indicators. It is useful as part of a
There are several levels of assessed, data collection, and data strategy for evaluating programs
participatory research. At one analysis. that address complex problems
end of the spectrum is academic The essence of this approach that may have unexpected
or government research that is respecting the fact that outcomes, and those that have
gathers information directly participants are likely to have a broad range of funders and
from community members. The project metrics that are important stakeholder groups.
community members may (or may to them, and recognising that The process begins when those
not) be asked for their opinions these are the measures by managing the program, along with

selected stakeholders, identify the THEORY OF CHANGE key assumptions, and allows
desired change(s). Then, stories participants to clarify the rationale
of significant change are collected Theory of Change evaluations or logic behind the causal
at the field level from affected aim to reveal hidden dynamics relationships depicted.
community members and other that may influence program Once the outcomes framework
stakeholders. development and implementation. has been finalised, participants
These stories are oriented In a facilitated group setting, identify and locate existing
around a question along the lines participants identify long-term and proposed interventions,
of: “During the last month, in outcomes, typically by first connecting them directly to
your opinion, what was the most developing a clearly defined desired outcomes. They also
significant change that took place problem statement and then identify gaps where interventions
in the program?” considering what conditions will may be necessary. This results in a
Stories can be collected in a solve the problem. strategy, or series of coordinated
variety of ways: by field staff in Once consensus has been interventions. Then participants
the course of their work, through reached regarding a problem identify indicators for each
interview and note-taking, during statement and the long-term outcome, and prioritise a subset
group discussion, or be written by outcome, participants begin of indicators to track as the
stakeholders themselves. Stories the process of “backward interventions are implemented.
are filtered up systematically mapping” – or working backward Finally, participants complete
through the organisational from the long-term outcome to a quality review – assessing
hierarchy. At each level, construct a causal pathway. This the plausibility, feasibility, and
participants are asked to consider is represented visually by vertical testability of their framework – and
which significant change, among chains of outcomes connected write a narrative that summarises
those captured, was the most to one another by arrows, with their theory of change and
significant of all. At every level, the long-term outcome at the positions their interventions in this
discussions are recorded for the top and early outcomes at the context.
purpose of transparency. These bottom. The process illuminates
discussions serve as feedback for
program managers, field staff and
primary users.
MSC is useful as both a form PRACTICE TIP
of evaluation and as platform
for organisational learning.
The process for selecting
stories generates dialogue and THE REFLECTIVE PRACTITIONER
deliberation regarding program
goals and organisational values. Both MSC and Theory of Change are forms of reflexive evaluation,
Because this process is an open in that they stimulate a critical examination of things typically taken
one, it is possible for stakeholders for granted – goals, values and understandings of cause and effect.
at all levels to understand how Both approaches reveal and question foundational systems for
these goals and values are being making meaning. These systems of thought form the thread that
defined. connects (or fails to connect) individuals, groups, and institutions.
Moreover, they influence action and thus produce observable and
measurable outcomes.
MSC, Theory of Change, and other forms of reflexive evaluation
provide a platform for overcoming path dependency (business
as usual), and seeking new directions. They build individual and
organisational capacity for ongoing learning and adaptation, even as
conditions change.

TELLING THE
EVALUATION STORY
To tell the story effectively, consider what you want to

communicate about the results or processes of your project,
which audiences are most important to communicate with,
and what are the most appropriate methods for reaching
these audiences.
Each type of stakeholder will have The project team may want to use WHEN ARE FEEDBACK
a different perspective about evaluation results to guide them
AND REPORTS
what they want to learn from the in decisions about their programs,
evaluation. Every group is unique, and where they are putting their NEEDED?
and you may find that there efforts. Whenever you feel it’s appropriate.
are other sorts of stakeholders Of course, you will provide
to consider within your own Researchers will most likely feedback and reports at the end
organisation. The easiest way to be interested in understanding of the evaluation, but you should
shape your communications is to whether any improvements also provide periodic feedback
ask each stakeholder what they in the issue were a result of and reports throughout the
want to know from the evaluation. your engagement programs or duration of the project or initiative.
initiatives; they may also want to In particular, since you should
Grant makers and funders, for study the overall structure of your provide feedback and reports
example, will usually want to know group or initiative to identify the at meetings of your steering
how many people were reached conditions under which success (or committee or overall coalition, find
and served by the initiative, as well otherwise) may result. out ahead of time how often they’d
as whether the initiative had the like updates. Funding partners will
community-level impact it intended want to know how the evaluation
to have. is going as well.
PRACTICE TIP WHEN SHOULD

EVALUATION END?
Evaluation should take up about 10% to 15% of your total budget. Evaluation should end shortly after
That may sound like a lot, but remember that evaluation is an the project is complete – usually
essential tool for improving and communication about your initiative. when the final report is due. Don’t
When considering how to balance costs and benefits, ask yourself wait too long after the project
the following questions: has been completed to finish up
your evaluation – it’s best to do
• What do you need to know? this while everything is still fresh
• What is required by the community? in your mind and you can still get
• What is required by the funding bodies? access to any information you
might need.

WHAT SORT OF • Differences in the behaviours
of key individuals: Find PRACTICE TIP
PRODUCTS SHOULD
out how your efforts have
YOU EXPECT TO changed targeted behaviours.
GET OUT OF THE An effective evaluation
plan will ensure the most
EVALUATION? • Differences in conditions in
the community: Find out what effective use of limited
The main product you’ll want to has changed. Is the public resources. An evaluation
come up with is a report that you aware of your efforts? Do they plan should anticipate the
can share with everyone involved. support you? What steps are scope, relevance, and costs
This report should include: they taking to help achieve of evaluation as early in the
the goals? engagement process as
• Effects expected by possible.
shareholders: Find out what You’ll probably also include specific An evaluation plan
key people want to know. tools (i.e. brief reports summarising provides an outline of the
Be sure to address any data), annual reports, quarterly overall goals and strategies.
information that you know or monthly reports from the It summarises what you
they’re going to want to hear monitoring system, and anything are going to do, why you
about. else that is mutually agreed upon are doing it, how you will
between the organisation and the undertake the process and
evaluation team. how you will monitor your
success. It helps tell the
story of the process to a
range of different audiences.

FINAL
THOUGHTS
A good community engagement plan is valuable whether
your project or issue is small or large, but is especially
important if the initiative you are focusing on is a complex
or difficult project or issue that impacts a large number of
stakeholders.
An engagement plan will improve The steps outlined in this

your ability to: handbook will help you develop a
plan for a successful engagement
• Inform citizens and effort. These include:
stakeholders about the project
• Gather input from citizens 1. Defining the issue or problem
and stakeholders regarding and frame the issue in a way
their opinions and support for, that stakeholders can discuss
and assessment of, various alternatives, solutions and
actions, goals, and priorities consequences.
• Ensure that citizens and 2. Identifying your stakeholders
stakeholders concerns, 3. Matching your stakeholders to
aspirations and ideas for engagement goals
addressing your specific issue 4. Identifying the face-to-face
or problem are understood and on-line engagement
and considered tools you will use to engage
• Identify alternatives, stakeholders and citizens
consequences and preferred 5. Developing a communication
solutions plan for your engagement
• Identify and engage effort
stakeholder groups, leaders 6. Developing a plan to evaluate
and citizens that influence your engagement efforts.
decision-making
• Identify solutions that better fit The Resource list provides
the local context additional sources of information
• Recruit and keep stakeholders about engagement. We encourage
involved throughout the you to access these for more
initiative. detail about specific processes or
theories that have been mentioned
in this handbook.
We wish you all the best
with your ongoing community
engagement practice.

RESOURCES
Material in this handbook is drawn from online learning Additional recommended resources
tools developed by extension staff at Pennsylvania
State University in collaboration with the University of Aslin & Brown (2004). Towards Whole of Community
New England (Australia). Engagement: A Practical Toolkit, Department of
Online tools and learning modules can be viewed at Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Bureau of Rural
the following sites (current December 2017): Studies, Murray-Darling Basin Commission.
PestSmart connect: https://www.pestsmart.org.au/ Bens, Ingrid (2011). Facilitating with Ease: A Step by
Penn State Community Engagement Toolbox: Step Guidebook, John Wiley & Sons.
http://aese.psu.edu/research/centers/cecd/ Blind, P. (2007) Building Trust in Government in the
engagement-toolbox Twenty-First Century: Review of Literature and
Emerging Issues. UNDESA, 7th Global Forum on
Reinventing, Vienna, Austria.
References cited in this handbook Hyman, P. (n.d) Widening Public Involvement in
Bassler, Brasier, Fogle, & Taverno (2008). Developing Dialogue: Up-scaling Public Involvement Processes.
Effective Citizen Engagement: A How-to Guide Sciencewise Expert Resource Centre.
for Community Leaders. Center for Rural America. IAP2 Australasia (2005). The United Nations (Brisbane)
http://www.rural.palegislature.us/Effective_Citizen_ Declaration on Community Engagement.
Engagement.pdf Kellogg Foundation (n.d) Creating Spaces for
Centres for Disease Control and Prevention and Change: Working toward a “story of now” in civic
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease engagement. W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
Registry Committee on Community Engagement Kruger, Stenekes, Clarke & Carr (2013). Biosecurity
(2011). Principles of Community Engagement: engagement guidelines: Principles and practical
Second Edition. Agency for Toxic Substances advice for involving communities. ABARES.
and Disease Registry. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ Madden, F. & McQuinn, B. (2014) Conservation’s
communityengagement/pdf/PCE_Report_508_ blind spot: The case for conflict transformation in
FINAL.pdf wildlife conservation. Biological Conservation, 178, 97-
International Association for Public Participation 106. [Open access.]
(IAP2)(2009). IAP2 Core Values. http://www.iap2. Peavey, F. (2011) Strategic Questioning Manual.
org/?page=pillars Association of Higher Education, 2011.
Kellog Foundation (2010), Evaluation Handbook. Pratt, J. (2001) A Guidebook for Issue Framing.
http://www.wkkf.org/resource-directory/resource/2010/w-k- Framing Issues for Public Deliberation: A Curriculum
kellogg-foundation-evaluation-handbook Guide for Workshops, Kettering Foundation.
Matthews, D. (2008) Connections 2008: Focus Singletary, Ball & Rebori (2000) Managing Natural
on Communities, Kettering Foundation. https:// Resource Disputes: A Comprehensive Guide to
www.kettering.org/wp-content/uploads/ Achieving Collaborative Agreements, University of
Connections_2008.pdf). Nevada Extension Bulletin, EB-00-04.
National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation Thompson, Stenekes, Kruger, & Carr
(NCDD), International Association for Public (2009). Engaging in Biosecurity: Literature review of
Participation (IAP2), and the Co-Intelligence Institute Community Engagement Approaches ABARES.
(2009). Core Principles for Public Engagement. Victorian government (2015) Public Participation in
http://ncdd.org/rc/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/ Government Decision-making: Better practice guide,
PEPfinal-expanded.pdf Victorian Auditor-General’s Office.
Rowe & Frewer (2004) Evaluation of public- What is a citizen’s jury? New Democracy
participation exercises: a research agenda. Science, Foundation, Australia.
technology & human values 29, no. 4 (204): 512-556. Working Group for Community Health and
Development (2017) Community Tool Box, University of
Kansas.

APPENDIX
Idea generation and narrowing tools for facilitators
Tool Description How to do it When it’s useful

Brain mapping – Graphic way to display 1. Write the action in the entire circle To break down a problem
idea generation the analysis of different 2. Place the consequences of that action and analyse subsequent
parts of a situation and in circles attached to that circle consequences
the consequences of a
3. As those consequences have other To help map out the
particular decision
consequences and so on, add those complexity of a given choice
circles and address the steps
necessary to address those
issues
Brainstorming – Combines individual 1. Allow time for each member to write When additional time is
idea generation thinking and group ideas down on their own necessary to generate to think
idea time, encouraging 2. Ask each person to read one idea about issues
participation from all from their list When introverted or dominant
3. After one or two rounds of collecting members are in the group
ideas on a flip chart open up the list
A variation for this process
for broader discussion.
includes having participants
4. Once list is complete ask members pass their list to another
to add any additional ideas that have person to provide anonymity
come to mind
Sticky note Individuals write single 1. Give each member sticky notes and When members need to
brainstorming – ideas on large sticky markers and ask them to write down move around
idea generation notes which are then one idea per note
placed on the wall When people want some
2. Have them place sticky notes on the
Ideas are then grouped distance or anonymity from
wall
by similar themes certain ideas
3. Have members read other’s ideas
and begin to collectively group similar When you want to have the
themes as appropriate ability to quickly move ideas
around into effective groups
Visioning – idea Highly participatory 1. Follow similar steps as brainstorming When you need to get
generation approach to goal setting detailed above. initial ideas and goals and a
that asks participants shared vision of the future
to consider what
their community or
organisation will look
like in some future point
(usually 2-5 years)
Force field Structured method for 1. Once you have identified a topic, When you need to identify
analysis – idea looking at two opposing situation, or project ask participants to all the factors at play in a
generation forces list two ideas under two categories – situation so that barriers and
a) forces that help us and problems can be overcome
b) forces that hinder us

Tool Description How to do it When it’s useful
Gap analysis – A method of identifying 1. Identify the present state When a group needs to
idea generation blocks to achieving 2. Identify the future state or desired understand the gap between
desired goals vision where they are now and
where they want to be
3. Have participants Identify what’s
missing, what it will take to realise the
future scenario
Root cause Sometimes referred to as 1. Explain the differences between When you need to delve
analysis – idea the Fishbone method. A causes and effects below symptoms
generation systematic analysis of root 2. Once the main effect or problem is
causes of an issue rather identified place this at the ‘head’ of
than it’s symptoms. the fish.
3. All possible causes and their causes
are identified as the ‘ribs’ of the fish
4. Have participants identify solutions to
each of the causes
Decision grid – Quantitative method for 1. Ask members to identify 3-5 criteria When you need to bring
narrowing ideas scoring solution choices by which a decision should be based objectivity and criteria to
against an agreed upon 2. Each option or solution (placed in bear in a decision or priority
set of criteria the rows with criteria as the column setting
headers) is then evaluated based
on the extent to which it meets each
criteria (e.g. 1=does not meet criteria,
2=somewhat meets criteria, 3=good at
meeting criteria)
3. Scores are then totalled both down
columns and across rows. Highest
row scores will determine overall best
choice
Nominal group Method to objectively 1. Each person individually rank orders When you need to manage
process – assess each individual’s his or her preference for identified strong personalities or value
narrowing ranked preference of solution choices (first choice = 1, differences. Avoids getting
choices choices and to then second choice = 2, etc) into endless debates
combine into overall 2. Individual ranks are recorded (usually
picture of group’s Provides objective
on a flip chart) in a grid with choices
priorities evaluation and discussion.
in the column headings and people
May however gloss over
listed in the rows
important considerations or
3. Facilitator asks each member to perspective if not effectively
discuss the reasoning behind their addressed
choice.
4. Members are then offered the
opportunity to revise individual
rankings
5. Scores are then totalled for each
column. Lowest number identifies
group’s overall highest priority

NOTES

NOTES

NOTES

UNE Invasive - Species - Handbook - 2017 - Web

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNE Invasive - Species - Handbook - 2017 - Web

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNE Invasive - Species - Handbook - 2017 - Web

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COMMUNITY

A HANDBOOK FOR PRACTITIONERS

PART 1: PLANNING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

PART 2: IMPLEMENTING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

PART 3: EVALUATING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

APPENDIX Decision making tools for facilitators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Online tools and learning modules can be viewed at the following

Cite this work as:

We would like to thank the International Association for Public

Designed and typeset by compu-vision

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | i

DEFINITION COMMUNITY + ENGAGEMENT

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | 3

• Increases the likelihood that projects or solutions will be supported.

• Creates more effective solutions by drawing on the local knowledge

• Improves citizens’ knowledge and skills in problem solving.

• Empowers and integrates people from different backgrounds. When

• Creates local networks of community members. The more people who

• Creates opportunities for raising and discussing concerns. Regular,

• Increases trust in community organizations and governance.

4 | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION

Communities are different. They have different histories,

CORE VALUES GUIDING PRINCIPLES

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | 5

A number of organisations and scholars have identified best practices that

1. Careful Planning and Preparation. Through adequate and inclusive

2. Inclusion and Demographic Diversity. Equitably incorporate diverse

3. Collaboration and Shared Purpose. Support and encourage

7. Sustained Engagement and Participatory Culture. Promote a culture of

6 | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION

While there are a number of keys to building trust within any

Effective communication. and honest about the role

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | 7

• Perceptions of bias of those convening or facilitating the process or in the information

CLARIFY, DEFINE AND

CLARIFY THE PROBLEM

8 | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION

PROBLEM OBVIOUS UNDERLYING POSSIBLE

Root Cause Corrective action

Problem Cause Root Cause Corrective action

Root Cause Corrective action

Root Cause Corrective action

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | 9

THE ‘BUT WHY?’ TECHNIQUE

• Individual factors could provide targets of change for your

• Do people need more knowledge about the issue, problem or

• Do certain segments of the population need to learn skills to

• Social factors can also be identified. For example, it could help

• Cultural factors, such as customs, beliefs, and values;

• Economic factors, such as money, land, and resources;

• Political factors, such as decision-making power.

The ‘but why?’ technique is best used within a group setting to

10 | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION

Engagement goals reflect the reason for engaging citizens

INFORM information sessions etc. to elicit opinions, perspectives,

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | 11

12 | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION

Engagement processes revolve around stakeholders.