MPA Capstone Learning and Professional Development Portfolio Piece of Evidence Cover Sheet Name: Samuel T. Weekley Title/Label of Evidence: Research Designs for Policy Analysis Type of Evidence: o Course assignment for (identify class): QNT 562, Data Analysis for Public Policy and Management, Dr. Lester Reams o Internship artifact for (identify internship): _____________________________________ o Written reflection produced for the portfolio o Other (explain): __________________________________________________________________ __ Competency/capacity addressed: 2d: Design policy implementation methodology Self Assessment Score: 3 Criteria you have met: Can undertake a detailed assessment of policy implementation within specific contexts. Instructor Assessment Score: ___________ Check list: o Written assessment follows completed rubric o Evidence is located after written assessment or may be found under another tab/page of the portfolio (add location): _________________________________________ o Additional supporting evidence included Written as a course-required assignment, this piece describes the multiple forms of policy analyses proposed by Dunn (2008), and the tools necessary to produce substantive results. This was specifically an explanatory assignment designed to ensure our understanding of the fundamental principles and tools required for a policy analysis. As an added element, we were asked to explain the difference between problem finding, and problem solving, and how, or under what circumstances and conditions public managers may face challenges associated with policy issues that require extensive data analysis. Explaining the difference between research, and policy analysis is an imperative objective for instructors within public management, policy, and affairs programs at NASPAA accredited universities. Programs that do not full explain the difference, as well as develop fundamental criteria that describe the necessary tools, as well as their function in the policy process risk graduating students who do not have the capacity for focusing research, and staying objective. One major issue I had with UCF was the lack of attention placed on identifying the differences between policy analysis and research, and the necessary tools to produce substantive data. The instructor I was assigned for my policy analysis class, Mike Abels, placed very little emphasis on policy analysis, choosing to tell his students stories instead of teaching fundamental principles. As a result, many of the students who took that class with me still cannot identify the difference between the two, which is evident in later core course such as PAD 6207, Public Financial Management. William Dunn’s (2008) book: Policy Analysis: An Introduction is by far the best overall book I have read on this topic, and should be a standard for all NASPAA accredited MPA programs. Research Designs for Policy Analysis Name: Course: Instructor: Samuel T. Weekley QNT 562 Dr. Lester Reams INTRODUCTION Policy analysis is a multidisciplinary procedure that is composed of numerous working combinations of theories, methods, and structural analytic forms for defining and describing the problem, the recommendation of a course of action to solve the problem, the potential outcomes, policy issues and situations that may arise as a result of the recommended action; answering whether or not those outcomes were sufficient in their means to “solve the problem,” and the expected futures if the recommended action is disregarded for some other course of action. These policy problem schematics can be descriptive, or explanatory in nature, and are critical elements of the analysis process for producing, “policy problems, policy performance, expected policy outcomes, preferred policies, and observed policy outcomes” (Dunn 2008, p. 3). There are also two types of research designs that each individual method may employ to answer the “what,” and the “why” of the research problem. Descriptive designs are generally in direct response to a policy problem, and aid in the research analyst’s formulation of a policy study purpose, whereas explanatory research designs attempt to answer exactly why these circumstances concerning the policy problem are arising. Dunn (2008) also suggests five methods commonly used by policy analysts to provide the aforementioned goals of policy analysis: policy monitoring, forecasting, evaluation, recommendation, and problem structuring. These methods for obtaining policy data are exclusively interdependent, as it is simply impossible to use one methods without having first used the others. When performing a policy analysis, a policy analyst may choose from eight policy “forms” that embody the relationships between policy-informational components, analytic methods, and informational transformations: prospective, retrospective, descriptive, normative, integrated, and segmented policy analysis as well as problem finding, and problem solving. FORMS OF POLICY ANALYSIS Prospective and Retrospective Analysis According to Dunn (2008) prospective, or ex-ante policy analysis “involves the production and transformation of information before policy actions have been taken” (Dunn 2008, p. 10). Dunn furthers this suggestion by citing Allison (1971), who states that prospective policy analysis is, “a means of synthesizing information to draw from it policy alternatives and preferences stated in comparable, predicted quantitative and qualitative terms” (Dunn 2008, p. 10). Prospective policy analysis is descriptive in its means to account for the circumstances that created the initial policy problem, and contrasts policy research, which, according to Dunn (2008), “are the studies that use scientific methodologies to describe phenomena and/or determine relationships among them,” and, “does not include the gathering of information” (Dunn 2008, p. 10). Retrospective, or ex-post policy analysis is the “production or transformation of information that takes place after the policy has been implemented” (Dunn 2008, p. 11). Retrospective policy analysis can be considered explanatory in its means to answer why the policy issues came to be, by gathering policy relevant information after the policy’s implementation in order to provide the analyst with a clear depiction of the circumstances surrounding the policy. Descriptive and Normative Policy Analysis Descriptive policy analysis, as defined by Dunn (2008), “is a set of logically consistent propositions that describe policy action, and may be tested against observations obtained through monitoring and forecasting” (Dunn 2008, p. 13). The descriptive theories conceptualized during the policy analysis process are created, according to Dunn (2008) to help policy analysts “explain, understand, and predict policies by identifying patterns of causality, and to establish the approximate validity of causal inferences relating policies to their presumed outcomes” (Dunn, 2008, p. 14). Contrary to its name, descriptive policy analysis can be considered explanatory in nature, as the information that is produced through descriptive policy analysis is accumulated after the initial policy action. Normative policy analysis, as described by Dunn (2008), “is a set of propositions that rest on disagreements about passionately held values, to evaluate or prescribe action” (Dunn, 2008, p. 14). Normative policy analysis is descriptive in its means to provide data that clarifies the policy problem, and the research study’s purpose, and is concerned more with policy issues that particular stakeholders may hold, and the most effective way in which to approach those policy issues on behalf of the stakeholders. Problem Finding and Problem Solving Problem finding in policy analysis concerns the various elements that aid in the definition of the problems themselves, and are formulated to offer solutions to policy problems. Problem finding is a descriptive process that answers the questions: • • • • Is there a fundamental understanding of the problem? Who are the stakeholders impacted the most? What is the purpose of solving this problem? Are there alternative approaches? • • What are the most important elements? Has the right problem solved? Problem solving is an explanatory process that, according to Dunn (2008), offers numerous techniques for the respective policy analyst to consider when solving a policy problem that will inevitably provide so analyst with the most accurate policy information (Dunn, 2008, p. 14). A few of these techniques are cost-benefit analysis, decision analysis, and implementation analysis, all of which answer the questions: How many variables are involved in the policy problem, what is the likelihood that sufficient information, and an optimal outcome will be obtained, and what are the benefits, and expected utility of solving this policy problem? Integrated and Segmented Analysis When two or more methods, or forms of policy analysis are used conjointly in an effort to maintain accuracy, and variable consistency, the analysis process can be considered one of integrated policy analysis, as opposed to segmented policy analysis, which is the policy analyst’s decision to focus primarily on one specific theory or method to accomplish, or obtain their individual policy problem objectives. Integrated, and segmented policy analysis can both be descriptive, or explanatory in nature, depending upon which research approaches are taken to identify the policy relevant information, and according to Dunn (2008), “helps to examine the assumptions, uses, and limitations of methods employed in segmented and largely overspecialized disciplines and professions,” as well as, “identifies and relates major elements of policy analysis” (Dunn, 2008, p. 15). Integrated policy analysis can be imagined as a specific link that incorporates the aforementioned policy forms and methods together as one functioning, and continuous policy cycle. For example, prospective and retrospective policy analyses are integrated to produce information before, and after the implementation of new policy; descriptive and normative policy analysis are linked to provide policy that accurately reflects the initial policy problem, and problem finding and problem solving, while different in their respective definitions, are united to answer policy questions that arise from a plethora of policy problems or issues in the most clear, concise, and accurate fashion possible CONCLUSION The ultimate outcome of policy analysis for a policy analyst is to achieve an optimal alternative, or a solution to an issue or situation that has been presented as a result of the initial implementation of ill-structured policy. Policy analysis can take many different forms, and answer many different questions about the initial policy, but unless it answers the right question, the countless hours of research study will be in vain. Policy structuring, and analysis itself does not ensure the right answer to the right problem, rather it aids the analyst in a clear, and concise description of the problem, and any potential solutions, or alternatives that are identified during these processes are as a direct result of the supportive, or unsupportive information that is uncovered during the research process. REFERENCES Dunn, Willam (2008) Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction, Fourth Edition; Pearson Education.