CBR 308: Developing Real Solutions to Real Problems Policy Analysis from a Community Perspective

1. CBR 308: Developing Real Solutions to Real Problems Policy Analysis from a Community Perspective

2. Welcome! • Introductions • Icebreaker • Workshop objectives • Key workshop messages

3. Workshop Objectives • Upon Completion of this Workshop you will be able to: • Understand what drives political and public policy decisions • Understand the importance of defining or framing the issue • Understand how to develop and analyze policy options, describe and rationalize recommendations, and identify/assess impacts • Think through, draft and critique policy options and recommendations • Integrate these skills and knowledge into your ability to develop practical and workable policy alternatives within a community of practice

4. Key workshop messages • Understand the psychology and practice of politics and policymaking – “fit” • See your issue through different lenses - how you and others frame an issue shapes its solutions • Use the power of ideas – create language and stories (words, images, symbols) to influence the discourse • Leverage the power of partnership - create a continuum of engagement in your advocacy and activism work, distinguish between disagreement and attack • Sustain the power of community – mobilize capacity, design strategy, ensure succession • Translate policy options into communication strategies • Appreciate that every idea has its time – be patient, be creative

5. MORNING Welcome, Introductions Icebreaker – What Does Good Policy Look Like? Lecture – Around the Cabinet Table Health Break Case Study #1 – “What’s the Issue?”, small group exercise and facilitated plenary discussion Lecture – Developing Options Case Study #2, “Constructing a Policy Options Menu,” small group exercise and facilitated plenary discussion Lunch AFTERNOON Guest Speaker – to be confirmed Q & A Session Revisit – “Constructing a Policy Options Menu,” small group exercise and facilitated plenary discussion Health Break Lecture – Analyzing Options, Developing Recommendations Case Study #3 – “The End” Plenary Discussion - Key Learnings/Reflections Adjourn Agenda

6. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • What do you think of the following 3policy options? Are they options? • Option 1 • • That the federal government develop and implement a comprehensive and coordinated national housing strategy to address the shortage of affordable housing. • Option 2 • That the federal government:• Allow a full rebate of GST on new rental housing projects;• Increase CCA to five per cent for new rental housing; and• Expand the “soft costs” which can be deducted in the first year of operation of new rental properties

7. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • Option 3 • That the provincial government develop a streamlined approvals procedure for the redevelopment of brownfield sites for affordable housing based on risk-based remediation approaches. • Source, slides 6-8: Toronto Board of Trade, “Practical Solutions to Affordable Housing Challenges,” 2003

8. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • What do you think of these policy options? Are they options? • Option 1 • Children from better-off families do better in school. To make university and college accessmore equitable, we need to address inequalities as they build up from early childhood byintervening early to offer lower-income children educational, health and social programs toencourage development that will ultimately allow them to move on to post-secondary education. • Option 2 • Have tuition increases affected the enrolment of students from different income levels?

9. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • Option 3 • While designing specific policies regarding tuition is beyond the scope of this study, we note two ideas that may warrant further consideration in this area: • Putting a limit on the share of revenues that post-secondary institutions can raise by tuition, which would mean that governments sustain their share of funding at the necessary level. • Increasing the predictability of tuition fees with a program-stability guarantee, whereby an institution would fix tuition fees for the duration of a given program, so students would know total cost from the beginning. While overall cost might remain a barrier, guarantees would mitigate the discouraging effect of their unpredictability. The University of Toronto has already put a program like this in place (University of Toronto, 2004). • Source: Canadian Policy Research Networks, “Getting There and Staying There: • Low-income Students and Post-secondary Education:A Synthesis of Research Findings,” 2005

10. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • What do you think of these policy options? Are they options? • Option 1 • Advice to the Toronto Central LHIN • A. Take a Social Determinants of Health approach.The Toronto Central LHIN Steering Committee believes that the Toronto Central LHINmust take a social determinants approach to planning, funding, delivering and evaluatinghealth services in Toronto Central (as opposed to an approach that is based primarily on amedical model)

11. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • Option 2 • The consultation should be undertaken to: • Inform community stakeholders about the LHIN and its functions; • Listen to stakeholder concerns and ideas about the health care system in Toronto; • Engage community stakeholders in Toronto Central in the development of theToronto Central LHIN, and in its ongoing activities; and, • Review and comment on the priority areas set out by the Toronto Central LHINSteering Committee. • Source, slides 11-12: Toronto Central LHIN , “Integration Priority Report,” 2005

12. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • What do you think of these policy options? Are they options? • The Cabinet Committee on Health and Social Policy Committee recommends to the Policy and Priorities Board of Cabinet that:Option 1 • Sole support parents with children 6 years of age and under be exempt from mandatory participation in Ontario Works unless those children are in full-time attendance at school • Option 2 • Do nothing • Option 3 • Exempt sole support parents with children 3 years of age and under from mandatory participation in Ontario Works but continue their option to participate voluntarily

13. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • What do you think of these policy options? Are they options? • Option 1 • The policy framework should: • Complement international objectives and relationships, alleviate suffering, promote diversity, and serve the economy • Option 2 • Social Cohesion • The ultimate indicator of successful immigration policy is the achievement of social cohesion in our cities andcountry, which will depend on how we approach diversity…But diversity as a value in society does not happen on its own – it requires supportand commitment. . . inclusion in the governance and leadershipof society. • Invest in local initiatives to accelerate the participation of immigrants in the leadership of agencies, boards and commissionswhich govern many aspects of community life: library, university, college and hospital boards, public health agencies, various government agency boards, all of which play vital community roles

14. Icebreaker:What does good policy look like? • Option 3 • Drawing on the success of the Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council(TRIEC) provide funding to urban regions to convene the relevant stakeholders andlocal leadershipto find local solutions that link new immigrants to employment appropriateto their education and experience. • Source, slides 14-16: Alan Broadbent on behalf of the Maytree Foundation, “An Open Letter to the New Prime Minister of Canada,” 2006

15. So…How to Make Good Policy Options • Write for a policy audience – plain language, option headers & short descriptors, action verbs • Make sure you tell a story – translate policy options into communications messages • Mix short-, mid-, and long-term options – choice of phased-in changes • Mix incremental and big change options – choice of impacts • Mix low- and high-risk options – choice of pros, cons • Include the status quo – doing nothing is always an option • Pay attention to the “Cabinet Table” – what drives political/public policy decisionmaking (slides 19, 20)

16. Around the Cabinet TableBefore the First Step: What drives political/public policy decisions? • Timeframe of government’s business/election cycle –make the tough decisions early • Difference between election/post-election periods – move from firm to more fluid ideology • Short attention span of politics, short shelf life of policy – “In two years, it’s not my problem” • Government’s policy agenda/priorities – “we want to do this” • Government’s communications agenda/priorities – “we want to say that”

17. Around the Cabinet TableBefore the First Step: What drives political/public policy decisions? • Current/prospective health of government finances – “can we afford it?” Current/prospective economic cycle –view fromBay Street, global markets • Values, beliefs, ethics – find the social consensus • Media attention/perspective, opinion polls – understand the public mood • Difference between government and the people who work there – government is heterogeneous • Different points of access – deal direct or “back channel”

18. Crafting the FoundationThe First Step: Finding research to ground your options • Most persuasive • Real intervention outcomes, especially local/regional – “it’s worked before, ” “it’s worked here” • Research outcomes – “it should work” • Quantitative data – “the numbers prove it works” • Consensus – “everyone believes it works” • Well-known sources – “it’s credible” • Research on other issues where there is a clear connection in practice or established/emerging expert opinion, e.g., connection between social determinants of health and health status of individuals

19. Crafting the FoundationThe First Step: Finding research to ground your options • Less persuasive (* denotes value of this research is increasing ) • Real intervention outcomes but outside– “it’s worked but in a different place” • Research in progress – “it might work but we’re not sure” • Qualitative data – “people say it works”* • Community-based data – “it isn’t expert”* • Conflict – “not everyone believes it will work” • Less-known sources – “is it credible?”* • Research on other issues where there is little/no affirmation from practice or research communities • It’s all about risk management via comparative policy/research scanning, consensus-building

20. Crafting the FoundationThe Second Step: Positioning research to frame your options • To “make the case,” apply and distinguish - what’s same/similar, what’s different, and why? • How is the issue framed? • Who is affected? • What is the political and policymaking environment? • How is the solution communicated? • Who benefits, who doesn’t? • What alternatives were considered? • What is the outcome, is it relevant? • What are the next steps? • What would we have to change for it to work here?

21. Crafting the FoundationThe Third Step: Leveraging community • Create communities of interest - build and sustain networks, alliances, coalitions inside/outside your community • Look for opportunities to build consensus and credibility, even on relatively small issues – build capacity to disagree, negotiate, compromise, and move forward • Work from the grassroots – generate issues and solutions that are “of the community,” with voices from the community • Practise collaborative consultation - “travel in groups” • Develop parallel advocacy strategies – “demos. and docs.” • Other?

22. Case Study #1 “What’s the Issue?” • The facts • You are the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care in Ontario. • The Chief Medical Officer of Health for the province, who is a public servant, has suggested that all fish sold to the public in Ontario must be frozen before it is sold in a grocery store, market, or restaurant. It is known that some fish contains parasites, usually roundworms that can make people sick if they eat contaminated fish. With the recent emphasis on public health following the Walkerton water crisis and deaths, SARS, and mad cow disease, Ministry public health staff want to ensure that the Ontario public is protected. • Your group taskWhat are the issues here? How do you, as Minister, see them? How could others see them? What’s the story?

23. Developing OptionsWhat is a policy options menu? • Range of possible to probable solutions • Moves along a continuum of complexity, impact (equity, efficiency, security , liberty), cost, and risk • Rational relationship between the issue and the policy option to solve it

24. Developing OptionsWhat makes a policy option relevant? • It has a human dimension – it’s about people • It’s a simple concept – it’s easy to understand • It’s a great story – it’s easy to explain, has great key messages • It works – it solves the problem • It reflects current or emerging values – it’s grounded in social consensus, it seems like the “right thing to do”

25. Developing OptionsWhat makes a policy option relevant? • It reflects “good government” – it shows political or community leadership to move towards social consensus • Its benefits outweigh its costs – more people will like it or benefit than be left out • Its investment can be justified – it’s cost-neutral or cost-effective • It’s a new way of doing things – it’s innovative, hasn’t been presented and rejected before • It “fits” – it delivers on the government’s policy, communications, and/or fiscal agenda

26. Developing OptionsHow do you choose a policy instrument? • Instrument – is what you use to implement the policy • Range of least to most intrusive interventions • Moves along a continuum of complexity, impact (equity, efficiency, security, liberty), cost, risk • Rational relationship between policy objective and means to achieve it

27. Developing OptionsMaximize your strengths: What do you bring to the table? • Expertise – you know more about your issue – what it is and how to solve it - than most government advisers • Passion – your commitment and energy • Network – your capacity to access, mobilize and activate communities of citizens, voters and taxpayers • Leadership – your record of creating vision and building trust • Credibility – your profile lends credibility to you (and the government)

28. Developing OptionsFinally, write for a policy audience • Use plain language – avoid jargon, acronyms • Keep it short – summaries, bullet points • Distinguish between and balance facts vs. values, analysis vs. advocacy • Be practical, realistic – understand “fit”

29. Case Study #2 “Constructing a Policy Options Menu” • Again, the facts of the Case Study • You are the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care in Ontario. • The Chief Medical Officer of Health for the province, who is a public servant, has suggested that all fish sold to the public in Ontario must be frozen before it is sold in a grocery store, market, or restaurant. It is known that some fish contains parasites, usually roundworms that can make people sick if they eat contaminated fish. With the recent emphasis on public health following the Walkerton water crisis and deaths, SARS, and mad cow disease, Ministry public health staff want to ensure that the Ontario public is protected.

30. Case Study #2 “Constructing a Policy Options Menu” • Your group task • Construct a policy options menu to deal with the issues these facts present. • Keep in mind our earlier plenary discussion about framing “problems” and developing options. • Take a strategic approach: consider each from a policy perspective, as well as from communications, fiscal, community/partnership development. • Finally, think about the impact – the “pros and cons” – of each option.

31. Analyzing OptionsThe concept of “pros/cons,” “benefits/costs” • For government, basic knowledge exchange and risk management tool • For you, basic information, strategy and credibility tool • Pros – the benefits or what lessens risk, e.g., delivers a government commitment, equity, accountability/governance, social consensus, good messages • Cons – the costs or what increases risk, e.g., lack of “fit,” inequity/disparate impact, inadequate resourcing (operating/capital costs, human), liabilities (financial, legal), complexity, lack of constitutional authority • Never neutral or non-political

32. Identifying/Assessing ImpactsWhat are expected impacts? • Expected impacts are consequences that • should be obvious and planned for • may have a direct or indirect effect on policy outcomes • Such as… • legal/regulatory requirements via legal advice • technical issues in program design/implementation • institutional capacity to deliver, evaluate and modify (human and fiscal resources) • effect on intergovernmental relations (federal/provincial/territorial)

33. Identifying/Assessing ImpactsWhat are expected impacts? • Expected impacts are consequences, such as… • Legislative reaction via political party statements, Question Period • Stakeholder reaction via third party statements, consultation • User/client reaction via patterns of use, consultation • Media/public reaction via polling, consultation

34. Identifying/Assessing ImpactsWhat are unexpected impacts? • Unexpected impacts are consequences that • Should be expected but may not be factored in as variables in policy analysis (traditional vs. alternative analytical approaches) • May be random, therefore unpredictable, less controllable • May be direct or indirect effect on policy outcomes • Such as… • Socio-economic outcomes • Gender impacts • Ethno-cultural and racial impacts

35. Identifying/Assessing ImpactsWhat are unexpected impacts? • Unexpected impacts are consequences, such as… • Other equity-based impacts, e.g., disability, language, age, immigrant/refugee status • Cross-cutting impacts that involve other policy areas • Longitudinal outcomes, i.e., change in outcomes over time • Changes in larger structures or systems, e.g., political instability, economic decline, loss of social cohesion, demographic shifts, public health trends, environmental or natural disaster

36. Developing RecommendationsWhat turns a policy option into a decision? • It reflects consensus or compromise – it’s the best deal • It works – it solves the problem or at least makes it go away • It manages risk well – it’s relatively “safe” • It can lead to more change – it’s incremental • It gives your community and the government an opportunity to engage - it carries the power of partnership • It “fits” – it delivers on the government’s policy, communications, and/or fiscal agenda • Other?

37. Developing RecommendationsHow do you describe the key elements of a decision? • Reference the issue and how you’ve framed it – this solves the problem as we understand it • Translate the policy solution into a communication strategy – this is what it means • Explain the “why” - summarize and highlight the rationale, including the political benefit – this is why we’re recommending this • Highlight the risks – there is a possible/probable risk of… (legal challenge, cost pressures, inequity/disparate impact, adverse public/media/community reaction, being off-message, stakeholder pressures (“floodgates”), timing, etc.)

38. Case Study #3: The End • Your group task will be distributed during the workshop…

39. Sources • Texts • Brooks, Stephen. Canadian Democracy: An Introduction, 4th ed. (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2005) • Inwood, Gregory J. Understanding Canadian Public Administration: An Introduction to Theory and Practice, 2nd ed. (Toronto: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2004) • McCaskell, Tim. Race to Equity: Disrupting Educational Inequality (Toronto: Between the Lines, 2005). • Rice, James J. and Michael J. Prince. Changing Politics of Canadian Social Policy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000) • Savoie, Donald J. Thatcher, Reagan, Mulroney: In Search of a New Bureaucracy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005); Breaking the Bargain: Public Servants, Ministers, and Parliament (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003); Governing from the Centre: The Concentration of Power in Canadian Politics (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999) • Stone, Deborah. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decisionmaking (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1998) • Swanson, Jean. Poor-Bashing: The Politics of Exclusion (Toronto: Between the Lines, 2001)

40. Sources • Journals • Canadian Journal of Policy Research, www.isuma.net • Canadian Public Administration, www.ipac.ca • Canadian Public Policy • The Canadian Journal of Political Science • Journals for specific policy areas, e.g., Journal of Community Practice, Canadian Journal of Public Health, Canadian Journal of Urban Research, Journal of Urban Health, Ethnicity and Health, Social Problems, Canadian Journal of Sociology, Journal of Health and Social Policy,, Research on Social Work Practice (access via e-indices by topic or search engines, e.g., Silverplatter, Scholars Portal, Medline) • Advocacy journals, e.g., AIDS and Public Policy Journal

41. Sources • Websites • Institute of Public Administration Canada, www.ipac.com • Canadian Policy Research Networks, www.cprn.com • Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, www.policyalternatives.ca (includes federal and provincial alternative budgets) • Caledon Institute, www.caledoninst.org • Local/regional social planning councils, community service organizations, communities of research and practice • Government (federal departments; provincial/territorial ministries, ;agencies, boards, commissions)

42. APPENDIX 1: What Policymakers Say: An Intuitive Approach to the Policy Cycle Highlights from Key Informant Interviews with Ontario Policymakers, Dr. Ito Peng and Margot Lettner, 2004

43. REFLECTIONS: WHAT POLICYMAKERS SAY: AN INTUITIVE APPROACH TO THE POLICY CYCLE

44. REFLECTIONS: WHAT POLICYMAKERS SAY: AN INTUITIVE APPROACH TO THE POLICY CYCLE

45. REFLECTIONS: WHAT POLICYMAKERS SAY: AN INTUITIVE APPROACH TO THE POLICY CYCLE

46. REFLECTIONS: WHAT POLICYMAKERS SAY: AN INTUITIVE APPROACH TO THE POLICY CYCLE

47. Analyzing OptionsQuantitative analysis: the basics • Always ask – is it credible, transferable, dependable, confirmable? Who can tell you?

48. Analyzing OptionsQualitative analysis: the basics • Always ask – is it credible, transferable, dependable, confirmable? Who can tell you?

49. Workshop Objectives • Upon Completion of this Workshop you will be able to: • Understand what drives political and public policy decisions • Understand the importance of defining or framing the issue • Understand how to develop and analyze policy options, describe and rationalize recommendations, and identify/assess impacts • Think through, draft and critique policy options and recommendations • Integrate these skills and knowledge into your ability to develop practical and workable policy alternatives within a community of practice

50. CBR 308: Developing Real Solutions to Real Problems Policy Analysis from a Community Perspective