AG19780105 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

and used in Region G last year. The initial reaction of those DSS's which used it seems very favorable. The COG staff is impressed with the prncess for two 'basic reasons. First it is a more professional and systematic approach to planning than is normally used in a social program area. Second, it is b~th flexible end simple enough not to re- quire more time thm, the product is worth. Simply described, the process works like this: The goals of the Title XX program have been expressed in terms of some th/try social problems wh/eh prevent individuals from ackieving some basic levels of eeonomio end social well being. These thirty problems (or bar- tiers) were then included as definitely and comprehensively as possible in a survey instrument which was applied, by N.C. State University, to some 3000 households across the State. This, in effect provides a data base for the major problems which Title ~ programs are supposed to be addressing. The next step is to rank the problems based on community /mportance, seriousness or severity, end the numbers of people experiencing the pro- blare. Tb/s number also wJl] come from the data which N.C. Stats bas com- puterized. Having ranked and Weighted the problems by themselves, the process next uses a matrix tO compare all problems /mportant to the county to s.ll services (usder Ti:lc XX) which the county th/nks it may or should fund. This is en important step hecause you ars syst-m-tically displaying the relationship of proposed solutions to anticipated problems, amd it gives you a more cum~rshensive picture upon which to base decisions. You cam and should ask some importent added questions about the relationship between your problems and your programs. These questions include: how many probl~,- does a service relate to; are they strong or weak relation- ships; amd finally how important are the problems to which a service re- lates, (This latter question was answered in the prior step, where problems were ranked). The result of this step is a rank or weight for each service beimg proposed. Now, for each service, you are ready to compare the "importence" of the service against some other important questions. How many persons need this service; h°w many persons were served last year and at what cost; and how mm,y were served by other agencies (to avoid duplicate counting). This f~-I arraying of facts against adm~-istrattve end funding constraints w/ll allow administrators to look systematically at each service amd hope- fully make better decisions. Of course we all know there is not enough money to serve all the needs. That is precisely why we should work to display more information about all existing end proposed services - to feel comfortable that we are making the best choices on our own best iaformation as we display it before us. One final word about the ~quality of the N.C. State data. If Was gathered end projected using a system ~imilar 'to network election return sampling and seems very good. The real point, however, is that the data most tailored to the questions we must ask about Title XX end it is the same data being used by DHR and all the other counties. I