BC Community Response Networks exist to help prevent abuse, neglect, and self-neglect before harm occurs.
But prevention rarely makes headlines – because when it works, nothing dramatic happens.
And therein lies the challenge of trying to measure the impact of this kind of preventative work.
So, how do you measure something that didn’t happen? And how do you know if your efforts are working or not?
For the past 13 years, BC CRN has conducted a developmental evaluation of its work across the province, which involves a year-long process of surveying affiliates, coordinators, mentors, and now non-affiliates, as well.
It includes qualitative research and analysis of administrative data, and it plays a vital role in helping BC CRN learn, adapt, and demonstrate its impact.
As researcher Ben Kadel explains, the goal is simple:
“The goal is to get better at what we’re doing. It’s organizational self-reflection. Simply put, there are things that work; let’s do more of that. There are things that don’t work; let’s do less of that. And we don’t know what those are unless we take the time to look.”
A Year-Long Cycle of Learning
This kind of developmental evaluation is not a one-time survey. Data collection typically runs from January through February, March is dedicated to analysis, and April is dedicated to reporting, including sharing findings at the BC CRN Summit.
Throughout the year, the results are shared gradually – a “slow drip” approach – to keep learning active rather than static, and each year builds on the last.
Core questions remain consistent to allow for long-term trend tracking, and new questions are added to reflect emerging issues, organizational changes, or “burning questions” from the field. The result is a broader, more nuanced picture of what is happening across CRNs in British Columbia.
What Does the Developmental Evaluation Actually Measure?
One of the biggest challenges in prevention work is that the most important things are often intangible.
“The things that matter you can’t measure and the things you can measure don’t matter,” said Ben.
Prevention, especially in complex social systems, does not follow a simple cause-and-effect pattern, and this is where you start running into issues. For instance, raising awareness may temporarily increase reports of abuse – not because abuse is increasing, but because more people feel safe enough to report it.
“Especially an issue like this where there’s stigma attached to it,” Ben explained. “There’s a lot of shame. People don’t want to talk about it. And for a lot of people, it’s not even on their radar.”
So, instead of trying to measure only outcomes, the evaluation also examines conditions.
CRNs are relational networks that bring together service providers, community members, and partners. So, the evaluation also measures things like:
- Perceived impact
- Engagement levels
- Trust between partners
- Confidence in the work
- The emotional tone of meetings
- Evidence of outreach and collaboration
- The number and diversity of relationships
Fellow researcher April Struthers described some of the subtle indicators they track:
“What’s the sort of emotional flavour of your meetings? Is it more positive language, less positive language, more sense of fairness?”
The evaluation looks at throughput, output, and outcome, tracking what CRNs control, what immediate changes are happening, and what longer-term impacts may be emerging. It also asks participants directly whether they’ve seen an impact – and what kind.
Why Developmental Evaluation?
This is not a traditional “report card”, and Ben is clear about that:
“This is not somebody coming from the outside and assessing whether we’re doing good or not. It’s actually trying to ask good questions about what’s working and how can we get better.”
And that distinction matters because if the evaluation becomes solely about proving worth to funders, for instance, it distorts what can be learned from these surveys.
“If you think you’re doing something to justify your funding, you’re going to skew the answers,” Ben said. “There’s a sort of a pressure that comes into it. And that just squashes any kind of creativity or curiosity about what’s working and what’s not.”
While findings are shared with funders and government partners – and are certainly valuable for demonstrating impact – the primary purpose is internal growth and improvement.
What’s more, this supports what April describes as evaluative thinking, which includes training mentors and coordinators to think scientifically about their work, to test ideas, and to reflect on what they’re seeing.
“We’re fond of what Ben calls short, sharp, shiny projects,” she said. “And we have people try stuff in a short time period and then ask, so what did that tell us? And what are we going to do with that?”
The COVID Pivot: A Powerful Example
One of the clearest examples of the value of this long-term evaluation came during COVID.
Because BC CRN already had baseline data from previous years, April and Ben could see how CRNs responded during the pandemic – and how they recovered.
“We could watch, you know, as the world was shifting,” Ben said. “Without having that through line, we really wouldn’t be able to see what was going on.”
And what they saw was resilience.
“I don’t think we lost any CRNs during COVID,” Ben noted. “We know a lot of other organizations where they actually contracted because of the pandemic… but we continued robust growth in both activity and CRNs through the pandemic.”
Part of the reason for this is that local networks were often able to pivot faster than larger institutions. That adaptability reflects the power of self-organized networks, which is one of the deeper insights April and Ben have seen confirmed over 13 years of evaluations.
“What, for me, was a theory very early on in this field about what could happen with self-organized networks has turned out to be the actuality,” April shared.
Can Prevention Be Measured?
Some believe prevention cannot be measured at all, but April disagrees.
“It can be measured, but possibly indirectly,” she said.
Ben expanded on that idea, saying, “It’s really about developing this understanding of the system… What are the factors that increase the likelihood of abuse? And what are the factors that decrease it?”
So, while you may not be able to prove a specific incident did not occur because of a CRN, you can measure strengthened relationships, increased awareness, trust, collaboration, and responsiveness – all of which help to reduce risk.
“I think I’ve become a little bit of a fundamentalist in terms of having strong, supportive relationships at a community level, and how that addresses almost all of the challenges that we’re talking about,” Ben said.
“The lack of those strong community bonds perpetuates most of the problems.”
Looking Ahead: This Year’s Focus
This year’s evaluation includes a significant question, which is what people will be using as their “elevator pitch” to explain what a CRN is and what it does.
This is crucial, as prevention can feel abstract, but this year’s evaluation will help to refine language that makes it easier to understand.
And this will help to ensure members can explain prevention work clearly to community members, funders, and local elected officials.
As April noted, “People understand service provision… But understanding what this entity with the funny name does… most people don’t understand it in those terms.”
April and Ben hope this year’s results may help to bridge that gap.
Why This Work Matters
After being asked what keeps him motivated to do this work, Ben mentioned the moment when tension dissolves in a room and collaboration begins, and how inspiring that is for him.
“That moment when people recognize the possibility of collaboration… and people sort of light up to the possibility,” he described.
And that’s what BC CRN’s developmental evaluation ultimately supports.
It strengthens the conditions that allow adults to be valued, respected, and supported by informed communities.
It validates the work happening at CRN tables across British Columbia.
It ensures BC CRN is not guessing – but learning, adapting, and improving.
And over 13 years, it has demonstrated something powerful:
Networks work. And when networks are supported with curiosity, reflection, and evidence, they become even stronger.
