3.3 Afinidades con los recursos energéticos y la ingeniería aplicada
3.3.2 Características de la infraestructura eléctrica
Disagre e
Strongly Agree Immed
iate Priority Intermed iate Priority Long-Term Priority
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSAs): Assessment and Information
The system has the ability to quickly respond to emerging or new information to
prevent problems and enhance outcomes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C
Large-Group Discussion: Regional attendees stated that the regional system can react more quickly to emerging issues and that there was too much “red tape”
at the State level that hindered a quick response. Others felt that State-level communication was good and, depending on the issue, a quick response can happen (e.g., attorney general’s office).
Prioritization Discussion: No significant discussion occurred.
The system has the ability to conduct broad-based outreach and mobilize the
support of decisionmakers, community members, and other stakeholders. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C
Large-Group Discussion: Attendees noted that a structure for communication between the State, regional, and community levels was in place, but could be
improved so that swift and efficient communication to mobilize happens both ways.
Prioritization Discussion: No significant discussion occurred.
The system has developed a broad base of State, tribal, community, and/or other
support. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C
Large-Group Discussion: Attendees stated there was broad support, but this could be improved by developing community-level partners. Prioritization Discussion: No significant discussion occurred.
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSAs): Strategic Planning
Members of the system have the necessary KSAs and access to resources to engage in comprehensive, data-driven strategic planning to identify and achieve priority outcomes.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C
Large-Group Discussion: Attendees stated this has improved considerably in recent years, but wanted to make sure it remains on the State’s radar (A–C
priority).
Prioritization Discussion: Members noted, “We are already over-planners.”
System members have the KSAs to select a comprehensive array of locally and culturally appropriate strategies—based on data and sound causal theory—that can create positive changes in the physical, social, legal, and/or economic environment, as well as within individuals.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C
Large-Group Discussion: Attendees that supported a high score stated that the regional system was equipped with these KSAs, but that the indicator should
remain on the State’s radar.
Prioritization Discussion: No significant discussion occurred.
Cultural Competency
The system operates from a deep understanding of State, tribal, and/or community contextual conditions, and ensures that all policies, practices, programs, and activities are locally, culturally, and developmentally appropriate.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C
Large-Group Discussion: The State and regional attendees gave this a higher score because they said that the regional networks would not be successful
unless they were good in this area. Regional representatives expressed their understanding of the community culture (socioeconomics, responding sensitively to issues, etc.) in their service areas.
Prevention system question set copyright © 2008. Permission is granted to copy and use the question set provided the questions, acknowledgment, and copyright notice remain intact. Laurie Barger Sutter [email protected]
22
RADAR
EFFECTIVE PROCESS PRIORITIES
INDICATORS
Strongly Disagre e Strongly Agree Immed iate Priority Intermed iate Priority Long-Term PriorityInformation, Communication, and Marketing
System members share their data and databases. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C
State Agencies/Organizations Score of 4 (A): No comment. Score of 5 (A): No comment.
Score of 6 (A): We are getting better at this, but first and foremost we need a data repository that is accessible, real-time, and useful to those
inputting the data (not just to the State or other funders).
Score of 7 (C): To the extent of my knowledge, which is limited.
Score of 8 (2 Cs): 1) New Hampshire has grown in this area and has plans to grow even more; 2) Regional networks, BDAS, and CFEx are
partners in this activity.
Score of 9 (C): No comment. Score of 10 (A): No comment.
4 0 4
Statewide Organizations/Contractors Score of 2 (C): No comment.
Score of 7 (B): This is a great strength of our prevention system. I would like to see the data that are shared trickle down throughout the entire
system and across systems
Score of 8 (A): No comment.
1 1 1
Regional Organizations NR (A): No comment.
Score of 2 (B): PIERS is not shared between partners, and looks very different for the State vs. contractor. E-Studio is a great place to share
information, but is underutilized.
Score of 6 (B): No comment.
Score of 8 (B): From those I have worked with, everyone seems very open to helping each other out and sharing information as needed.
1 3 0
Prioritization Discussion: Members noted that State agencies provide data to each other. The SEOW is an example of this. Evidence-Based Planning and Practices
The system engages in planning processes that are driven by data and based upon
identified actual needs rather than by available funds. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C
State Agencies/Organizations NR (B): No comment.
Score of 5 (C): Mediocre. Attempt is to use data where possible, but systematic data collection usually takes a back seat to other processes, but
not available funds, of which there are few anyway. The idea is that by not having funds, all that is left is data, so that is where the action is.
Score of 7 (A): No comment. Score of 8 (B): No comment.
Score of 9 (3 As): 1) We are in the middle of this; 2) That is the ongoing work of the regions—the test is whether they deliver a plan as described
here; 3) No comment.
Score of 9 (C): New Hampshire has used a community-based process to gather information of what is needed in each community.
4 2 2
Statewide Organizations/Contractors Score of 3 (A): No comment. Score of 7 (A): No comment.
Score of 8 (C): The prevention system's initiatives and programs are heavily data driven.
2 1 0
Regional Organizations
Score of 6 (A): I'm not privy to the internal systems and how they are, but I do think the system is making gains, such as using recovery coaches,
helping in innovative ways those who cannot go into traditional settings due to time, motivation, work, etc. This is extremely important. We need to meet patients where they are, perhaps have treatment in new and different settings (e.g., childcare centers, primary care centers), and be innovative in how to respond, (e.g., more flexibility with payment).
Score of 8 (C): No comment.
Score of 8 (B): I know that all the work we do at a local level is done this way.
Score of 9 (A): At the regional network and State level we are amazing at data-driven community-based planning. Our regional plans feeding the
State plan are a great example of this. All problem statements at the regional level were data driven. We need to improve the variety of data we have. Business data, medical, etc. Immediate priority only because it is happening now.
2 1 1