Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.
Am J Community Psychol. 2013 Mar;51(1-2):232-42. doi: 10.1007/s10464-012-9544-4.
Coalitions are routinely employed across the United States as a method of mobilizing communities to improve local conditions that impact on citizens' well-being. Success in achieving specific objectives for environmental or structural community change may not quickly translate into improved population outcomes in the community, posing a dilemma for coalitions that pursue changes that focus on altering community conditions. Considerable effort by communities to plan for and pursue structural change objectives, without evidence of logical and appropriate intermediate markers of success could lead to wasted effort. Yet, the current literature provides little guidance on how coalitions might select intermediate indicators of achievement to judge their progress and the utility of their effort. The current paper explores the strengths and weaknesses of various indicators of intermediate success in creating structural changes among a sample of 13 coalitions organized to prevent exposure to HIV among high-risk adolescents in their local communities.
美国各地经常采用联盟的方式来动员社区，改善影响公民福祉的当地条件。在实现环境或结构性社区变革的具体目标方面取得成功，并不一定能迅速转化为社区人口状况的改善，这对联谊会构成了困境，因为它们追求的变革侧重于改变社区条件。如果没有逻辑合理且适当的成功中间指标的证据，社区就会花费大量精力来规划和追求结构性变革目标，这可能会导致徒劳无功。然而，目前的文献几乎没有提供关于联盟如何选择中间成就指标来判断其进展和努力的效用的指导。本文探讨了在一个由 13 个联盟组成的样本中，各种中间成功指标在创造结构变革方面的优缺点，这些联盟旨在防止当地高危青少年接触艾滋病毒。
