Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCaverly, Susan Elizabethen_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-10-07T01:20:23Z
dc.date.available2009-10-07T01:20:23Z
dc.date.issued2002en_US
dc.identifier.otherb48537822en_US
dc.identifier.other51627843en_US
dc.identifier.otherThesis 51734en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1773/10328
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2002en_US
dc.description.abstractThis research represents a secondary analysis of a series of thirty focus groups addressing the topic of public sector community mental health services. These groups were conducted with four designated constituency groups (Consumers and Advocates, Children's Service Providers, Health and Social Service Providers, and Justice Service Providers) in three geographic locations in Washington state.The purpose of this secondary analysis was to explore the potential for using focus groups as a method for gathering information from the public stakeholders in the community mental health delivery system. The significance of this hinges on the reality that the citizenry funds public sector community mental health services yet few citizen stakeholders participate in the determination of service need, planning or evaluation. Professional expertise and voice has historically been privileged thereby diminishing community ownership of public mental health services and jeopardizing funding allocations. A trustworthy, cost-effective method is needed if a broad range of stakeholders are to be included in the processes noted above, even if only to educate those who have the authority to make public mental health policy. Focus groups hold potential to be this method.This research developed a model for planning and conducting focus groups that was shown to yield trustworthy data that was generalizable to similar constituencies or regions. Transcripts of focus groups were analyzed using ATLAS.ti and Excel. Patterns of consistencies were found in transcript themes among and across constituency clusters; these supported the validity and usefulness of focus groups for accessing stakeholder voice and public opinion. Limitations of the research include transcription quality, coding issues, and most importantly the lack of ethnic diversity of participants. Further study is recommended to evaluate the application of focus groups in other public service arenas and to explore ways in which this method might be more effective with regard to involving a diverse and representative population in the public discourse.en_US
dc.format.extentv, 233 p.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.rightsCopyright is held by the individual authors.en_US
dc.rights.urien_US
dc.subject.otherTheses--Individual programen_US
dc.titleFocus groups as a method for accessing stakeholder voice in public sector community mental healthen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record