National Research Project
Building Knowledge, Building Capacity:
Assessing and Enhancing the Field of Community Mediation
Harry Mika, Principal Investigator, Central Michigan University and Queens University of Belfast
Tim Hedeen, Research Digest Coordinator, Kennesaw State University
Amber Hardin, Research Assistant, National Association for Community Mediation
Linda Baron, Executive Director, National Association for Community Mediation
Project Overview
Despite what is acknowledged to be a general proliferation of increasingly diverse community mediation programs throughout the United States, research and policy literatures have surprisingly little to offer in terms of documentation of program activities and impacts. The National Association for Community Mediation (NAFCM), with support from the Hewlett Foundation, conducted research to build a knowledge base of the community mediation field that is beneficial to policy makers and program managers alike, both enhancing the capacity of mediation centers and contributing generally to building the field of community mediation.
Four general questions capture the dominant themes that guided the research initiative. First, what are the activities and outputs common to community mediation programs, what is the range and scope of their diversity, and what are the results of community mediation work? Second, how do particular program configurations affect community mediation activities, outputs and impact? Third, what are the relevant indicators of program effectiveness that should guide the development of best practice and quality service assurance? Finally, what strategies and resources are most productive in achieving the goals of community mediation?
Objectives and Outcomes
In the short term, this research project anticipated a variety of outcomes, including efforts to: a) present credible, clear, timely and empirical evidence of the work of community mediation programs, from the tangle of existing data; b) assemble and build a knowledge base on processes and principles that are relevant specifically to community mediation; c) develop local program capacity to self-assess and plan, through dissemination of tools and protocols; d) educate practitioners on the uses and advantages of quality program data; e) present a coherent research agenda for community mediation; f) allow internal program benchmarking of organizational development; g) facilitate increased utilization of NAFCM case management software among member organizations; and h) promote dialogue, among state offices and associations of dispute resolution, among community mediation programs, and among researchers for the purpose of enhancing information about community mediation suitable to improving program performance and impact, and for development of relevant public policy on dispute resolution.
Over the longer term, the National Association for Community Mediation intends to utilize this research process and its outcomes to: a) generate interest among the research community to focus on community mediation and the host of unanswered questions about its performance, impact, and promise; b) improve the quality of community mediation by increasing information about its strengths and shortcomings; c) produce longitudinal information about community mediation that allows analyses of continuity and change in services, outcomes and impact; d) identify strategies, derived from the collective experiences of like-situated programs, to sustain and improve community mediation organizations as they face the routine challenges of their own development; and e) develop and internal, self interest among practitioners in research for their own planning and evaluation purposes, as well as an external interest in research for enhancement of the community mediation field generally.
Specific outputs generated by this research include: a general report on the analysis of community mediation programs, activities and impact; a guide to community mediation programs that includes typologies of centers, descriptions of various challenges to program development and effectiveness, and corollary strategic interventions to enhance program performance; a digest of community mediation research that will be periodically updated by NAFCM (click here) ; a survey of assessment instruments with recommendations for alternative tools and protocols, and a proposed research agenda for the community mediation field.
Research Modules
To explore and address the various themes and multiple objectives of this initiative, the research was organized in four interdependent modules, each tapping specific sources of existing or newly generated data:
Module 1: Analysis of Program Data
Purpose: empirically support an overview of community mediation program activity, output and impact by utilizing three sources of existing case and program data:
Source A: data gathered by NAFCM member centers utilizing case management software (approximately 60 participating centers; analysis of 80,000 cases anticipated)
Source B: case and program data collected by state offices of dispute resolution and state associations on their community mediation centers
Source C: NAFCM mini-grant proposals and reports (approximately 150 proposals and reports)
Module 2: Profile of Programs
Purpose: develop typologies/profiles of community mediation programs, including information on the “life cycle” or developmental phases of community mediation organizations by utilizing two sources of new data, and one existing source of data on program and organizational profiles:
Source D: national survey of community mediation programs (approximately 525 centers)
Source E: intensive site visitations to develop in-depth profiles, including program and management audit, and organizational portfolio (10-15 community mediation centers)
Source F: annual NAFCM membership survey (approximately 200 surveys from 325 member programs)
Module 3: Digest of Community Mediation Research
Purpose: develop a compendium of timely community mediation research that is accessible to practitioners, policy makers and other interested parties utilizing data derived from a survey of literatures:
Source G: academic and professional literatures on community mediation, alternative dispute resolution, and informal/community/popular justice
Module 4: Assessing Knowledge About the Community Mediation Field
Purpose: assess assumptions, methods, tools and protocols currently used to generate information about community mediation through three surveys on existing tools and instruments used to measure outputs and impacts of community mediation, as well as measures and indicators that attempt to represent/summarize the status of community mediation; develop a relevant research agenda for community mediation through consultation:
Source H: survey of professional organizations, state offices of dispute resolution, state associations, and individual programs on research/evaluation instruments in use (approximately 160 organizations)
Source I: survey and consultation with researchers, practitioners, program administrators and foundations to select core community mediation indicators
Source J: survey of major conflict resolution “theory” centers on community mediation research initiatives
Source K: consultation with researchers, practitioners, program administrators and foundations to develop a community mediation research agenda
The specific intent of utilizing these four research strategies/modules was to focus on community mediation, as both the subject of the assessment and the target of capacity building and research. Certainly, “mediation” has achieved respectability and currency in the contemporary practice of conflict resolution, but what is known specifically about community mediation practice, as both a mode and model of service delivery, is deficient. Not surprisingly, there is a parallel lack of serious consultation in research and policy formation with community mediation programs and their practitioners.
The work described during this session, augmented with research briefs that summarize for participants the findings and recommendations for various components of these four modules, features the community mediation program as itself the most relevant unit of analysis and contemplates its role in responding to community conflict.
