Exam 15: Data-Driven Advocacy and Advocacy Evaluation

Correct Answer:

Verified

Although advocacy evaluation can be problematic in a number of ways, evaluators can proactively address the challenges through early identification of potential barriers, such as the lack of a practical guide for conducting advocacy evaluation, different requirements by funding sources, varying perspectives regarding the role of evaluation, trouble identifying outcomes, and methodological issues. Without practical guidance and resources for conducting advocacy evaluation, nonprofit organizations and other agencies often struggle to assess their advocacy efforts. Furthermore, funders struggle with evaluation requirements, often stipulating that the fundee limit the focus to solely outputs or impose overly aggressive outcome goals (e.g., achieving a policy change in a short period of time).
Beyond varying requirements for evaluation, differences among funders add additional challenges for advocacy evaluation. In addition, the alignment of funder preferences with the activities and objectives of an organization's advocacy efforts may be a difficult process. Moreover, funders differ in their goals and emphases for evaluation activities; some focus exclusively on outcomes, others emphasize implementation, and still others prefer to assess the connections between the implementation of advocacy activities and outcomes, all while adhering to state laws and federal Internal Revenue Services (IRS) requirements for lobbying-related activities. State and federal IRS and ethics stipulations are another unique challenge that can impact advocacy evaluations as the design, process, and results must not violate any requirements. Clearly a one-size-fits-all approach to advocacy evaluation will not meet the needs of all funders.
Another challenge to advocacy evaluation relates to varying perspectives regarding the role(s) of evaluation in this context. For instance, many organizations engaged in advocacy efforts view evaluation as reflecting opposition to their work. In a similar vein, the leadership and staff of some organizations may think their work cannot be evaluated and, in fact, believe efforts to conduct an evaluation can hamper advocacy efforts. Evaluations of advocacy may be labeled as unsuccessful if the efforts do not include prespecified activities or achieve predetermined outcomes, despite the variable nature of advocacy work and plethora of unpredictable policy influencers.
Determining outcomes represents another challenge to advocacy evaluation. Traditionally, projects are funded for short time frames, usually 1-3 years; however, the goals or targeted outcomes of advocacy efforts often require a much longer time frame. Therefore, it is important to determine appropriate or flexible time frames at the outset, noting that changes in outcomes and time frames are commonplace in the advocacy and policy arena. Additionally, outcomes can be difficult to define when key contexts and stakeholders are changing due to political climate and election cycles. Flexibility is crucial in specifying variables and processes for advocacy evaluation, both for short-term and long-term outcomes.
Finally, advocacy evaluation faces a number of methodological challenges. Challenges in this context include making accurate attributions (i.e., supporting that observed actions or changes reflect a specific effect of an individual, organization, effort, or activity), accounting for complexity (i.e., various methods are typically employed across different levels to achieve a single goal), organizational capacity and engagement (i.e., evaluation experience and evaluation process buy-in of staff members), assessing and controlling for the role(s) of external forces (i.e., advocacy efforts, at various levels, working together (or against) the same goal), reconciling shifting strategies and milestones (i.e., shift in tactics to reflect change in advocacy context), and managing varying and often extended time frames (i.e., amount of time needed for social, political, or policy change.

Correct Answer:

Verified

Effective advocacy work can address knowledge deficits, dispel misconceptions, and guide political action. With accurate information on trends and best practices, including knowledge from evaluation processes and activities, advocates can play a critical role in informing legislators so that they can create responsible, well-targeted policy. Moreover, advocates' data-driven influence can ignite legislative action.
Advocacy is an essential method for achieving social change because it has the potential to impact not only individuals and families but also communities and societies. Advocacy is defined as "a wide range of activities conducted to influence decision makers at various levels" (Morariu & Brennan, 2009, p. 100). This expansive definition is intended to incorporate all potential advocacy-related activities, goals, and outcomes. Advocacy activities can include coalition or network building, earned or paid media, electronic outreach/social media, grassroots organizing and mobilizing, litigation, lobbying, marches, polling, petitions, public education, presentations, public service announcements, and rallies.
The goal of advocacy, then, is to change social-, political-, or policy-related outcomes. The activities, goals, and intended outcomes of advocacy efforts are not prescribed; that is, there is no standard method or set of methods by which specific processes and operations are employed to meet certain goals or achieve particular outcomes. In a similar vein, advocacy is not a straightforward, linear process; it does not involve a sequenced set of ordered steps that are completed to accomplish a specified goal or outcome. In fact, organizations may try several different tactics, simultaneously or over time, to accomplish a difficult goal or outcome.

Correct Answer:

Verified

Extensive information exists regarding the way communication influences perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. Just as paid media advertisements have the potential to shape consumers' perceptions of and decisions about using products, the way in which an advocacy position is communicated can shape audience perceptions on social issues and influence the likelihood of behavioral action. A primary characteristic involved in investigations and evaluations of the impact of communications on perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors is message framing. Message framing refers to the process whereby one message, among two or more messages with contrasting words or phrases, is preferred by individuals, even when the messages are logically equivalent. In other words, message framing occurs when, given a consistent outcome across multiple messages, different words or phrases within the messages demonstrate predictable individual preferences among the messages.
Effective communication is the bedrock of successful advocacy work, making it possible to influence public discourse in a way that gives shape and substance to the policy landscape. Message framing is thereby important because it can provide the consumer with an alternative way of processing information and, ultimately, provide a signal for how the communicator feels about a given social situation. By understanding the context in which effective communication occurs, advocates and advocacy partners can align messaging and potentially have a positive effect on social issues via advocacy.