Extensive Needs Assessment Vs. Intensive Needs Assessment
The broad difference between extensive and intensive needs assessment is that extensive research uses a large number of cases to determine the characteristics of a population, while intensive research examines one or a few cases in depth to understand cause and effect. A variety of data collection and decision making tools and processes can be used for each, including the examples below (also see Watkins, West Meiers, Visser, 2011).
The use of population-based indicators is common in extensive needs assessments and has several strengths. These strengths include that such data are available for broad geographical areas, available on a large number of individuals or cases, allow description of entire populations, allow trend analysis over time, are relatively easy to access, inexpensive to use, and perceived as unbiased. Another method commonly used in extensive needs assessments is the survey. The strengths of the survey method are: they allow for direct feedback to the public as well as stakeholders, can foster public awareness about a problem or concern, can be customized to address specific issues, can be targeted to specific population groups or geographic areas, and can provide very timely results. An additional potential data source for extensive needs assessments are service and program databases. The strengths of this source of data are: they often contain data collected over many years, are readily accessible by existing program staff, provide the most current data, and they are relatively inexpensive to operate and maintain.
One type of extensive needs assessment is SWOT analysis. SWOT stands for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. The basic process involves gathering information about an organization’s activities and outcomes within a set time period. The figure below lists a simplified version of the SWOT process.
| A model SWOT analysis
1. Recruit research group of 10-20 stakeholders or core group members for one to three meetings lasting approximately two hours each. 2. Generate a list of successes and failures of the group or organization over the past year. Allow for some limited discussion of each, without dwelling on any. 3. Generate a list of the group’s or organization’s strengths and weaknesses, and the external environment’s opportunities and threats, based on the understanding of successes and failures. 4. Brainstorm ideas for maximizing strengths and minimizing weaknesses while taking advantage of the environment’s opportunities and neutralizing its threats. |
Once the group has identified needs, they then generally turn to intensive needs assessment in order to rank the identified needs so they can choose what they will address. An important thing to note is that while the ambitious may want to dive right into their list of needs, generally money and time constraints do not allow for all needs to be addressed and that is where an intensive needs assessment is useful.
As mentioned earlier, intensive needs assessment requires the ranking of priorities. While there are many methods to rank needs, it is important to develop ranking criteria. Feasibility is often used as criteria, but it is often useful for a group to identify their own set of criteria. This part of the research is not so much concerned with developing a detailed plan for solving the needs situation, but rather for examining the depth of the need and potentially required resources. Force field analysis, developed by Kurt Lewin, is one method for facilitating determining needs feasibility. An example taken from Stoecker1 states that if, “for example, feasibility is defined as degree of staff expertise and time, or funds to buy expertise and time, the force field analysis can look for data indicating available staff expertise and time and/or available external funds and expertise.” The illustration below displays a model force field analysis.
| A model force field analysis
1. Recruit research group of 10-20 stakeholders or core group members for one or more meetings lasting approximately two hours each. 2. Review the list of needs developed through a SWOT analysis or other procedure. Allow for some limited discussions of each without dwelling on any. 3. Develop criteria for rating the feasibility of meetings needs. 4. Using the feasibility criteria, collect information on facilitating and impending forces inside the group or organization and outside it. This can be done through separate data collection or in a meeting if the stakeholders are well informed. 5. Apply the data to determine the feasibility of meeting each need. |
As mentioned previously, the use of population-based indicators does have several strengths; however, it also has several weaknesses. These include that such data reveal problems more readily than they do solutions, may not include specific variables of interest, are difficult to alter in terms of type of data collected, not always available in a timely manner, and any individual data point may be of questionable validity. Population-based indicators data are thus not generally useful for intensive needs assessments. Service and program databases are also not useful data sources for intensive needs assessments, because they do not provide data on unmet needs that are not directly addressed by the given service or program, address demand for only that program or service, only provide data for those who seek and participate in the program or service, and some data elements may be of uncertain quality. The use of surveys, however, can be appropriate for intensive as well as extensive needs assessments. Regardless of the method used, intensive needs assessments typically allow deeper analysis and greater flexibility in terms of type of data collected. While often not as convenient as extensive needs assessments, they can be quite useful for determining needs in a small setting. One method of data collection for intensive needs assessments is a structured group. Some strengths of this method are: 1) it allows account of many different perspectives, as they involve diverse sets of people, including the target audience, key informants, stakeholders, and the general community, in direct conversation; 2) it can foster acceptance of and cooperation with the entire needs assessment process within the community and various target populations; 3) it accounts for opinions, perceptions, and desires in a manner that no other method does; 4) it generates new ideas about an existing problem as well as potential solutions; 5) it can be conducted relatively quickly and provide immediate feedback; and 6) it is relatively inexpensive. However, because intensive needs assessments typically require much more coordination and planning in the data collection phase and it is often inappropriate to generalize from them, extensive needs assessments seem to be much more common.
Read more about this topic: Needs Assessment
Famous quotes containing the words extensive, assessment and/or intensive:
“The tumultuous populace of large cities are ever to be dreaded. Their indiscriminate violence prostrates for the time all public authority, and its consequences are sometimes extensive and terrible.”
—George Washington (1732–1799)
“The first year was critical to my assessment of myself as a person. It forced me to realize that, like being married, having children is not an end in itself. You don’t at last arrive at being a parent and suddenly feel satisfied and joyful. It is a constantly reopening adventure.”
—Anonymous Mother. From the Boston Women’s Health Book Collection. Quoted in The Joys of Having a Child, by Bill and Gloria Adler (1993)
“We have to transpose ourselves into this impressionability of mind, into this sensitivity to tears and spiritual repentance, into this susceptibility, before we can judge how colorful and intensive life was then.”
—Johan Huizinga (1872–1945)