Branda Nowell PhD

This project is designed to produce research findings to inform future strategic investments to improve community capacity to live with, and respond to, wildfire in California. In order to accomplish this, three phases of research will be conducted. In Phase 1, a statewide assessment of state investments into wildfire resilience will be conducted. The focus of this assessment will be to describe the different pathways through which activity dedicated to enhancing wildfire resiliency might be funded and to identify any disparities in access to funding associated with geographic location. The second phase of this project will conduct case study data on a key set of state programs. The focus of this phase will be to assess differences in program logic for each of these programs and the implications of these differences for local organizations and communities. The final phase of this project will be a field study conducted with 3-5 local communities. The intent of this phase of the project will be to understand the lived experience of local organizations as they attempt to reconcile community needs with state level funding guidelines.

Co‐management of fire risk is both a process and an outcome of negotiation and decision making (Calkin et al. 2015; Thompson et al. 2016). Network governance refers to the forums and institutionalized practices within which co‐management occurs. Understanding effective network governance and the social‐psychological mechanisms through which governance influences co-management outcomes is therefore critical to advancing the science. Ineffective co‐management manifests in conflict and problematic communication and coordination among the variety of stakeholders during an incident, hindering the effectiveness of the incident response network (Nowell et al, 2015). Our project draws from network science to pose the following research question: How do network governance tools, cognitive alignment in risk perception, and value orientations relate to more or less effective co‐management?

Failures in effective communication and coordination within the network of responding organizations and agencies during a wildfire can lead to problematic or dangerous outcomes. Although risk assessment and management concepts are usually understood with regards to biophysical attributes in the wildfire context, these concepts can be extended to understanding risk for problematic communication and coordination embedded within social and organizational relationships. In this research, we propose leveraging existing network and social coordination theory to investigate how pre-fire relationships and capacities affect both preparedness before a wildfire and inter-agency communication and coordination during a wildfire. This research will not only advance the science of incident management but also provide the empirical foundation for the development of a new set of concepts and rapid assessment tools that we call: Relational Risk Assessment and Management (RRAM).

Branda Nowell, Ph.D. will assist the team in the design and analysis of the social network component of the project. In year one, she will assist the team in adapting the social network methodology employed by the principal investigator in previous research to develop the network analysis framework and interview guide for use in the case studies. She will then assist the team in data collection during the summer and advise in setting up the database for data entry of all social network data. She will be responsible for all quantitative analysis and visualization modeling of the social network data for each of the five case studies. In Year 2, she will assist the team in developing the social network measures for use in the contractor telephone survey and again be responsible for all quantitative analysis and visualization modeling of the social network data. In year 3, she will assist the team in developing the social network measures for use in the CBO internet survey and be responsible for all quantitative analysis and visualization modeling of the social network data. She will also collaborate on dissemination activities.

This proposed project will assist in the development of a new framework for post-fire research that will facilitate more consistent and rigorous data collection and improve the ability to aggregate lessons across fires. Recent years have seen the costs from wildfires escalating throughout the world, whether in terms of lives and homes lost, dollars spent on fighting fires, or ecological damage and subsequent rehabilitation. As a result, greater attention is being focused on the period following a fire as an ideal time to learn how various factors before and during the fire contributed to or mitigated negative outcomes. Such post-fire follow up investigations can clarify how the complex interactions between decisions made and actions taken before and during the fire, by fire and land managers and members of the public, contribute to better or worse outcomes. While much can be learned from individual studies, more could be learned by aggregating lessons from different fires. In order to do this, a common methodology is needed so that effective comparisons and appropriate conclusions can be made. The project goals are to learn from and build upon existing post-event research efforts, both for wildland fires and for other natural hazards, to develop a standardized post-wildfire research process that can be used by both researchers and land managers to inform common research needs. We will assist in the development of a methodology that can be implemented shortly after a fire with a small number of people and core set of research issues and questions, but that is adaptable (scalable) to allow more specific and local issues and challenges to be addressed. Such a research framework would 1) ensure a base level of consistent data across fires and future research efforts, 2) facilitate effective rapid responses after an event, 3) promote organizational learning, and 4) improve fire programs and policy.

The State of North Carolina Division of Public Health seeks a summative evaluation of the IA Initiative. The primary goal of this evaluation is to communicate the outcomes and impact of the IA Initiative to external stakeholders including policy makers who will make decisions about the continued funding of the Initiative. Formative evaluation activities (continuous learning efforts) are being taken care of by technical assistance providers. The Innovative Approaches Initiative theory of change consists of a suite of strategies that are designed to increase capacity for systems change in six counties; leading to system improvements that ultimately improve outcomes for CYSHCNs. The appended IA Initiative Theory of Change represents my current understanding of the Initiative, its components, and associated relationships (see figure 1). The evaluation scope of work table (Table 1) has been developed in reference to this theory of change. The summative evaluation for this Initiative aims to understand the causal linkages from the IA Initiative strategies to each of these subsequent areas of change (i.e., improvements in system change capacity, service delivery system changes, and improvement in the lives of CYSHCNs). Because these phases of change are serial in nature – understanding the influence of the IA Initiative strategies to changes in the later phases (i.e., improvements in the lives of CYSHCNs) requires an understanding of the pathway to change through the intermediate phases.

The State of North Carolina Division of Public Health seeks a summative evaluation of the IA Initiative. The primary goal of this evaluation is to communicate the outcomes and impact of the IA Initiative to external stakeholders including policy makers who will make decisions about the continued funding of the Initiative. Formative evaluation activities (continuous learning efforts) are being taken care of by technical assistance providers. The Innovative Approaches Initiative theory of change consists of a suite of strategies that are designed to increase capacity for systems change in six counties; leading to system improvements that ultimately improve outcomes for CYSHCNs. The appended IA Initiative Theory of Change represents my current understanding of the Initiative, its components, and associated relationships (see figure 1). The evaluation scope of work table (Table 1) has been developed in reference to this theory of change. The summative evaluation for this Initiative aims to understand the causal linkages from the IA Initiative strategies to each of these subsequent areas of change (i.e., improvements in system change capacity, service delivery system changes, and improvement in the lives of CYSHCNs). Because these phases of change are serial in nature – understanding the influence of the IA Initiative strategies to changes in the later phases (i.e., improvements in the lives of CYSHCNs) requires an understanding of the pathway to change through the intermediate phases.

The State of North Carolina Division of Public Health seeks a summative evaluation of the IA Initiative. The primary goal of this evaluation is to communicate the outcomes and impact of the IA Initiative to external stakeholders including policy makers who will make decisions about the continued funding of the Initiative. Formative evaluation activities (continuous learning efforts) are being taken care of by technical assistance providers. The Innovative Approaches Initiative theory of change consists of a suite of strategies that are designed to increase capacity for systems change in six counties; leading to system improvements that ultimately improve outcomes for CYSHCNs. The appended IA Initiative Theory of Change represents my current understanding of the Initiative, its components, and associated relationships (see figure 1). The evaluation scope of work table (Table 1) has been developed in reference to this theory of change. The summative evaluation for this Initiative aims to understand the causal linkages from the IA Initiative strategies to each of these subsequent areas of change (i.e., improvements in system change capacity, service delivery system changes, and improvement in the lives of CYSHCNs). Because these phases of change are serial in nature – understanding the influence of the IA Initiative strategies to changes in the later phases (i.e., improvements in the lives of CYSHCNs) requires an understanding of the pathway to change through the intermediate phases.

The State of North Carolina Division of Public Health seeks a summative evaluation of the IA Initiative. The primary goal of this evaluation is to communicate the outcomes and impact of the IA Initiative to external stakeholders including policy makers who will make decisions about the continued funding of the Initiative. Formative evaluation activities (continuous learning efforts) are being taken care of by technical assistance providers. The Innovative Approaches Initiative theory of change consists of a suite of strategies that are designed to increase capacity for systems change in six counties; leading to system improvements that ultimately improve outcomes for CYSHCNs. The appended IA Initiative Theory of Change represents my current understanding of the Initiative, its components, and associated relationships (see figure 1). The evaluation scope of work table (Table 1) has been developed in reference to this theory of change. The summative evaluation for this Initiative aims to understand the causal linkages from the IA Initiative strategies to each of these subsequent areas of change (i.e., improvements in system change capacity, service delivery system changes, and improvement in the lives of CYSHCNs). Because these phases of change are serial in nature – understanding the influence of the IA Initiative strategies to changes in the later phases (i.e., improvements in the lives of CYSHCNs) requires an understanding of the pathway to change through the intermediate phases.

The State of North Carolina Division of Public Health seeks a summative evaluation of the IA Initiative. The primary goal of this evaluation is to communicate the outcomes and impact of the IA Initiative to external stakeholders including policy makers who will make decisions about the continued funding of the Initiative. Formative evaluation activities (continuous learning efforts) are being taken care of by technical assistance providers. The Innovative Approaches Initiative theory of change consists of a suite of strategies that are designed to increase capacity for systems change in six counties; leading to system improvements that ultimately improve outcomes for CYSHCNs. The appended IA Initiative Theory of Change represents my current understanding of the Initiative, its components, and associated relationships (see figure 1). The evaluation scope of work table (Table 1) has been developed in reference to this theory of change. The summative evaluation for this Initiative aims to understand the causal linkages from the IA Initiative strategies to each of these subsequent areas of change (i.e., improvements in system change capacity, service delivery system changes, and improvement in the lives of CYSHCNs). Because these phases of change are serial in nature – understanding the influence of the IA Initiative strategies to changes in the later phases (i.e., improvements in the lives of CYSHCNs) requires an understanding of the pathway to change through the intermediate phases.