Aligning Local Evaluation Strategies to 

Community Readiness Model 

Dimension Scores 

Local Performance Assessment

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Funding 

Opportunity Announcement (FOA) states that grantees must periodically review the 

performance data they report to SAMHSA, assess their progress, and use this 

information to improve management of their grant projects. Native Connection (NC) 

Grantees will be required to report on progress achieved, barriers encountered, and 

efforts to overcome these barriers in a performance assessment report submitted 

annually. NC Grantees should use this progress assessment to find out: 

• Whether the goals outlined in the grant are being met. 

• Whether the grant is having an impact in the community. 

• Whether Community Readiness Model (CRM) scores are rising in key 

dimensions. 

• Whether grantees need to adjust project activities. 

The CRM is central to grantee local performance assessment. It is important to consider 

when developing other evaluative measures for local performance assessment.

Indigenous Evaluation

One purpose of evaluating the grant activities is to measure performance outcome; 

determine what is working or not working to change or adapt activities. Another 

purpose is to share stories, successes, and lessons learned with the community and 

tribal leadership. In Years 2 through 5, NC grantees will work with SAMHSA’s 

~ $"""'"~ Ab"H ... Moolal Health SONI,~ Admlolst,atloo 

~ 5f!Mlt.5tl 
2

evaluation contractor to conduct an evaluability assessment. This assessment will 

include community member interviews, focus groups, and community surveys. 

These types of evaluation strategies are necessary but to make them meaningful and 

useful to the community, they should align with both Indigenous evaluation principles 

and the community’s CRM dimension scores. 

The American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) developed an Indigenous 

Framework for Evaluation, which synthesizes Indigenous ways of knowing and 

Western evaluation practice. AIHEC views evaluation as a process, “an invitation to 

reframe evaluation practice by centering it through Indigenous ways of knowing and 

aligning it with core Tribal values.” 1

Some factors that make evaluation “Indigenous” are:

• Involving the community from the beginning and throughout the entire 

evaluation process

• Honoring the community’s goals

• Respect for individual and tribal sovereignty 

• Respect for individuals participating in the evaluation

• Empowering the community using culturally valid measures such as oral 

measures, elder review, and community contributions

• Approaching evaluation from a strengths-based perspective, not a deficit-based 

perspective

Community Readiness Dimension Scores

Dimensions of readiness are key factors that influence your community’s preparedness 

to take action on suicide prevention. The six dimensions identified and measured in the 

CRM are comprehensive in nature. They are an excellent tool for diagnosing 

community needs and for developing strategies to meet those needs. Below is a review 

of these dimensions:

 

1 The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation Vol. 23 No. 2 Pages 13–31, ISSN 0834-1516 Copyright © 2010 Canadian 

Evaluation Society, Reframing evaluation: defining an indigenous evaluation framework.

flQtive CONNECTIONS 
3

A. Community efforts: To what extent are there efforts, programs, and policies that 

address suicide prevention?

B. Community knowledge of the efforts: To what extent do community members 

know about local efforts and their effectiveness, and are the efforts accessible to 

all segments of the community?

C. Leadership: To what extent are appointed leaders and influential community 

members supportive of suicide prevention?

D. Community climate: What is the prevailing attitude of the community toward 

suicide prevention? Is it one of helplessness or one of responsibility and 

empowerment?

E. Community knowledge about the issue: To what extent do community members 

know about or have access to information on suicide prevention, consequences, 

and understand how it impacts your community?

F. Resources related to the issue: To what extent are local resources (people, time, 

money, space) available to support the prevention efforts?

NC Grantees will choose grant activities based on the CRM dimension scores. Most 

grantees will focus on activities that target the dimensions which scored the lowest on 

the CRM. Just as activities offered by the NC Grant should be appropriate to the CRM 

dimension scores, evaluation strategies and methods should also correspond to CRM 

scores. 

Aligning Evaluation Methods with CRM Dimension 

Scores

When considering evaluation methods to employ, think about both the aspects of 

Indigenous evaluation detailed above and the CRM Dimension scores. Some methods 

of evaluation strategies to consider include:

• Attendance counts

• Surveys

• Focus groups

• Interviews with participants

flQtive CONNECTIONS 
4

• Pre- and post-surveys for youth participants

Now let’s think about measuring progress on one of the CRM Dimensions using one of 

these methods. For example, if the community scored low on “Dimension B. 

Community Knowledge of the Efforts,” you might choose to conduct a survey of 

community members asking specific questions about what community members know 

about the issue of suicide, where they get their information about the efforts, and where 

they would like to get their information.

Another example, if the community scored low on “Dimension E: Community 

Knowledge of the issue” and the grantee subsequently held various education events, 

attendance counts and a brief pre- and post-survey assessing new knowledge would be 

appropriate evaluation tools for a community that scored low on this dimension.

Another example, if the community scored low on “Dimension D. Community 

Climate,” you may want to conduct a focus group of youth and elders on the topic of 

suicide. A focus group might be appropriate to tease out the differences in climate 

between groups in the community, the accuracy of what is known, and the extent of 

what is not known.

If used in a way that is aligned with an Indigenous world view, that is, strength- and 

culture-based, the story of your NC Grant can work the way many teaching stories 

work. It can instill knowledge about the topics that are being targeted. In the example 

above of the focus group, the results of the focus group could be presented to the Tribal 

Council, which may serve to raise the CRM “Dimension C. Leadership” score.

If your annual performance assessment -- the story of your grant -- is to be an effective 

tool for communicating with the community and assessing merit and worth in ways 

that “tells our story in our place2,” it makes sense that the story aligns with the CRM 

dimension scores and Indigenous evaluation principles.

 

2 Lafrance, J., Brief 02- Indigenous Evaluation & Native Student Success. Retrieved from 

http://indigenouseducationtools.org/bf/02 2/22/2017.

flQtive CONNECTIONS