Introductionthe Issue I Am Going To Conduct Is A Needs Assessment On A ✓ Solved

Introduction The issue I am going to conduct is a needs assessment on a large number of unaccompanied children in our community. Unaccompanied minors are defined as children who have been left alone without the care of a parent or a guardian mainly due to separation from their parents and relatives (Gillespie, 2014). There are a lot of children in our community of this nature. This has led to an increase in the number of street children and crimes by young kids in the society. This issue has presented the need to find a way of taking care of these children and reducing the level of crime which they commit as they try to find a manner of livelihood.

This is a great need since the welfare of the children is one of the most important aspects of any nation. •Why do you believe a needs assessment is necessary? The need assessment, in this case, is important to be able to gather information on the reasons why these children come into this community unaccompanied. There can be various reasons such as lack of family, lack of anywhere to shelter or just social deviance. It is important first to understand the cause of this issue so that we can be able to develop the right remedies to correct this issue. The need assessment will be needed to identify the specific needs of the children who have already fallen victim or what help they would need to make their lives better.

The needs assessment would also be necessary to help find out the source of the problem that is what causes the children to be separated from their families. Explain how a needs assessment would benefit this issue and contribute to social change. By so doing we can be able to develop a program that does not only provide the needs of the unaccompanied children but also helps to prevent an increase in the number of unaccompanied children in the community and hence and reducing the level of crime which they commit as they try to find a manner of livelihood. Preliminary steps The steps would involve identifying my population (no sampling is needed in this case), identifying means of gathering data to be used in the assessment either primary or secondary and then developing tools and personnel needed to collect the data. •What is the target population you hope to gather data about?

Since it may be hard or impossible to trace the parents of the children or their relatives, my main target population would be the unaccompanied children. I would love to hear their different stories of how they got there and their experiences and needs. They would serve as my primary data source target population. Since they are not too many I believe that sampling is not necessary. It is possible to reach out to all the minors. •Are there existing data sources that you can use?

Yes. As mentioned earlier, it can be challenging to reach the families of these children for questioning and therefore I would receive information in the reasons why children are separated from their families and the circumstances that lead to this from publications and research for institutions such the children’s bureau. This would help provide good background information on the topic and help develop programs that could prevent more children from ending up unaccompanied. •Do you need to collect new data? If so, what methods will you use to collect it? Yes.

There is need to collect data from then unaccompanied children who would serve as my primary source of data. The collection of data would be done by means of interviewing the children. Oral interviews would be effective in capturing their stories from which we would draw the information we need. References Babbie, E. (2016). The basics of social research (7th ed.).

Belmont, CA: Cengage Gillespie, H. (2014). Unaccompanied minor . Blue Ash, OH: Merit Press, an imprint of F+W Media, Inc. Gupta, K., Sleezer, C. & Eft, D. (2007). A practical guide to needs assessment .

San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. ORG 6600, Culture of Learning Organizations 1 Course Learning Outcomes for Unit IV Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to: 5. Distinguish between espoused and real values. Reading Assignment In order to access the resources below, you must first log into the myWaldorf Student Portal and access the Business Source Complete database within the Waldorf Online Library. Heorhiadi, A., Conbere, J., & Hazelbaker, C. (2014).

Virtue vs. virus: Can OD overcome the heritage of scientific management. OD Practitioner, 46(3), 27-31. Khandelwal, K. A., & Mohendra, N. V. (2010).

Espoused organizational values, vision, and corporate social responsibility: Does it matter to organizational members? The Journal for Decision Makers, (35)3, 19-35. Marinucci, D. (2006). Don’t just talk about family values. Tire Business, 24(18), 8.

Van Lee, R. (2005, August 25). Do they really mean it? Accountancy Age, 13. Unit Lesson Welcome Welcome to Unit IV. So far in this course, we have discussed what organizational culture is and how it is shared between the organization and each individual.

We have also applied that concept to the role of the founder, who strongly influences the organizational culture and whose influence is evident even after the founder is no longer employed with the organization. What we have discussed so far will serve as the foundation for the remainder of the course. From here, we will apply how cultural systems operate in organizations, particularly in instances where people have different perspectives that clash. We will analyze the system of values, behaviors, and outcomes of both a typical organization and that of a learning organization. This learning will help you develop skills for leading change.

People have found this learning to be life-changing, both in their personal and professional lives. First, we will take a look at the system of values, behaviors, and outcomes of typical organizations, which demonstrate dysfunction when conflicts occur. This pattern is called Model I, while the cultural system of a learning organization is called Model II. In this unit, you will find a Suggested Reading resource entitled the “socio-cognitive systems learning modelâ€. You may wish to print this model.

Throughout the remainder of the course, we will focus on the specific elements of this model. Printing it now will be helpful, so you may use it as a reference and pencil in any notes you wish to make on the handout. In this unit, we focus specifically on the values of typical organizations, which demonstrate Model I dysfunctions. Let’s begin by discussing people’s typical values in the American culture Model I Values: Typical Values in the American Culture In the American culture, as well as in typical microcultures—such as organizations— that are nested within the American culture, a contradiction exists between the values that people claim to have and the UNIT IV STUDY GUIDE Values of Typical Organizations ORG 6600, Culture of Learning Organizations 2 UNIT x STUDY GUIDE Title values that are reflected in their behaviors.

The values that people claim to have are called espoused values. Let’s take a closer look at values that people commonly espouse or claim to have, comparing and contrasting them with the values that are reflected in people’s behaviors (i.e., their real values) (Argyris, 2000, 2004, 2010; Argyris & Schà¶n, 1996; Friesenborg, 2015). Espoused values: If you asked ten people to name their most important values, what are some of the responses you would expect to get? How about faith in God, relationships with family, or relationships with specific friends? How about pets?

How about intangible values, such as human rights, freedom, equality, democracy, tolerance, or kindness? People tend to espouse values that reflect cultural ideals. The challenge is not so much with the espoused values—the values that people claim to have. The challenge is that people often behave in ways that contradict the values they claim to have (Argyris, 2000, 2004, 2010; Argyris & Schà¶n, 1996; Friesenborg, 2015). Here are some examples: ï‚· What about a person who espouses Christian faith, but the individual does not pray, read the Bible, worship, or engage in fellowship? ï‚· What about the individual whose espoused values include his relationships with his wife and kids, yet he typically arrives home from work after dinner each evening, and even when he is home, he is distracted?

His attention is driven by work-related messages that he is receiving on his phone, and mentally, he is not present with his family. ï‚· What about the CEO who espouses equality, yet his board of directors and his direct reports are exclusively white males? Both of the major U.S. political parties also demonstrate contradictions between their espoused values and the values reflected in their behaviors. This contradiction is not limited to politicians themselves. Some American citizens also jump on this bandwagon. Here are some examples for each major political party: ï‚· What about a Democrat who espouses tolerance but who makes personal attacks and degrading comments on Facebook about Republican citizens, comments that are fueled by stereotypes, such as inferring that Republicans are ignorant?

In that example, where is the tolerance and the appreciation of differences that this individual espouses? ï‚· Another example has to do with a second-generation American, a Republican whose father’s life was a rags-to-riches story, building a Fortune 500 corporation from the ground-up. What about this Republican who espouses—and is living—the American dream but who is in favor of closing America’s borders to people who are also interested in achieving the American dream? None of these values are bad. For example, people are welcome to their own political values. The problem is in the contradiction between the values that people espouse—or claim to have—with the real values that are reflected in their behaviors.

People tend to espouse values that reflect cultural ideals, but their behavior reflects values that do not align with those cultural ideals (Friesenborg, 2015). Real values: As we have discussed in this course, culture is driven by deep, underlying assumptions. These assumptions are something we rarely think about. Instead, we take them for granted. We may not even be aware of these deep assumptions because we often learn them through acculturation.

In other words, we are often blind to our deep assumptions because we absorbed these assumptions from the cultures with which we most closely identify ourselves (Argyris, 2000, 2004, 2010; Argyris & Schà¶n, 1996; Friesenborg, 2015; Schein, 2010). The American culture is highly individualistic (Bandura, 2002; Bellah, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler, & Tipton, 2008; Kitayama, Duffy, & Uchida, 2007; Oyserman & Lee, 2008; Trompenaars & Hampden- Turner, 1998; Waggoner, 2011). This means that the focus is on the individual person, and the culture “[encourages] individual freedom and responsibility†(Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1998, p. 59). In contrast, collectivist (sometimes called communitarian) cultures are relationship-oriented, rather than individual-oriented.

Collectivist cultures “encourage individuals to work for consensus in the interests of the group†(Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1998, p. 59). The United States has an individualistic culture, as do countries such as the Czech Republic, Russia, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Finland, Spain, and Belgium. Examples of countries with collectivist cultures include Egypt, Japan, Mexico, India, Nepal, Bahrain, France, Brazil, and Singapore. ORG 6600, Culture of Learning Organizations 3 UNIT x STUDY GUIDE Title The American culture idolizes individuals.

Americans idolize sports heroes, A-list actors, pop stars, and other celebrities. People also idolize entrepreneurs, such as Steve Jobs and Warren Buffett. Individualistic cultures, like the U.S., give credit to individuals for their successes as well as blame individuals for their missteps or misfortunes (Argyris, 2000, 2004, 2010; Argyris & Schà¶n, 1996; Friesenborg, 2015; Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1998). While the American macroculture as well as the majority of microcultures within the American culture are individualistic, some microcultures are collectivistic. For example, perhaps your family has a collectivistic culture, focusing on relationships and consensus-building.

Still, the great majority of microcultures within the macroculture reflect individualism (Bandura, 2002; Bellah et al., 2008; Kitayama et al., 2007; Oyserman & Lee, 2008; Schein, 2010; Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1998; Waggoner, 2011). This individualism has led to the American culture’s predominant value system, which revolves around the individual, the self. In the individualistic American culture, the primary value is centered on the egocentric desires and goals of the self. Have you ever heard the expression, “Looking out for number oneâ€? Number one refers to oneself.

That expression alludes to our culture’s self-centered focus on our own desires and goals, often at the expense of other people (Friesenborg, 2015; Palmer, 2004). Individualism is not bad; there is nothing wrong with valuing people on the individual level. The problem is when this ideology leads people to value certain individuals—especially oneself as number one—or to show either indifference or disdain to other individuals (Friesenborg, 2015; Palmer, 2004). The problem is when espoused values reflect cultural ideals that do not account for this contradiction. Furthermore, people tend to exhibit blindness to the contradiction between their espoused and real values (Argyris, 2000, 2004, 2010; Argyris & Schà¶n, 1996; Friesenborg, 2015).

Socio-Cognitive Systems Learning Model Culture is a complex interaction of values, behaviors, and outcomes. The interaction between those elements is cyclical. Values—with their deep, underlying assumptions—represent the foundation of culture. Real values are expressed through social behaviors as people interact with each other. The outcomes lead to future behavior (Argyris, 2000, 2004, 2010; Argyris & Schà¶n, 1996; Friesenborg, 2015; Schein, 2010).

Socio-cognitive refers to the ways that people think about social interaction. The systems element reflects the system of interacting values, behaviors, and outcomes. Learning refers to the cultural learning and norms (Friesenborg, 2015). The socio-cognitive systems learning model compares a typical culture, which reflects dysfunction (Model I), with the culture of a learning organization (Model II). In this unit, we are focusing only on the values of the typical Model I culture, such as the American macroculture and the majority of microcultures—including organization cultures—within that macroculture.

References Argyris, C. (2000). Flawed advice and the management trap. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Argyris, C. (2004). Reasons and rationalizations: The limits to organizational knowledge.

New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Argyris, C. (2010). Organizational traps: Leadership, culture, organizational design. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Argyris, C., & Schà¶n, D.

A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. ORG 6600, Culture of Learning Organizations 4 UNIT x STUDY GUIDE Title Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context.

Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(2), . Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. M. (2008).

Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life (3rd ed.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Friesenborg, L. (2015). The culture of learning organizations: Understanding Argyris’ theory through a socio-cognitive systems learning model. Forest City, IA: Brennan-Mitchell.

Kitayama, S., Duffy, S., & Uchida, Y. (2007). Self as cultural mode of being. In S. Kitayama & D. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of cultural psychology (pp. ).

New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Oyserman, D., & Lee, S. W. S. (2008). Does culture influence what and how we think?

Effects of priming individualism and collectivism. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), . Palmer, P. J. (2004). A hidden wholeness: The journey toward an undivided life.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1998). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Waggoner, M. D. (2011).

Sacred and secular tensions in contemporary higher education. In M. D. Waggoner (Ed.), Sacred and secular tensions in higher education: Connecting parallel universities (pp. 1-17).

New York, NY: Routledge. Suggested Reading Friesenborg, L. (2015). The culture of learning organizations: Understanding Argyris’ theory through a socio- cognitive systems learning model. Forest City, IA: Brennan-Mitchell. In order to access the resource below, you must first log into the myWaldorf Student Portal and access the Business Source Complete database within the Waldorf Online Library.

Howell, A., Kirk-Brown, A., & Cooper, B. K. (2012). Does congruence between espoused and enacted values predict affective commitment in Australian organizations? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(4), . The Nike Case and Corporate Self-Censorship. (2004).

Business & the Environment with ISO 14000 Updates, 15(3), 6-7. E-book available through the Waldorf Online Library: Fairholm, G. W. (2009). Organizational power politics: Tactics in organizational leadership (2nd ed.). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger. Click here to download the Socio-Cognitive Systems Learning Model.

Paper for above instructions

Needs Assessment for Unaccompanied Minors: Understanding and Addressing Community Challenges

Introduction

The increasing number of unaccompanied minors—children without the care of parents or guardians—poses significant challenges within our community. The factors contributing to this issue are complex, ranging from family separation to poverty and social deprivation. A needs assessment will help us identify the root causes and support requirements of these children, ultimately guiding the development of interventions to mitigate their plight and address the growing concerns surrounding youth crime and homelessness.

Importance of the Needs Assessment

Conducting a needs assessment is vital for several reasons. Firstly, it enables us to collect data on the specific factors that lead to children becoming unaccompanied. These factors can include domestic violence, socioeconomic instability, lack of access to education, or even systemic failures within child welfare systems (Gillespie, 2014). Understanding these underlying issues is essential to crafting tailored interventions.
Secondly, a needs assessment provides an opportunity to explore the unique circumstances and voices of the unaccompanied minors themselves (Gupta, Sleezer, & Eft, 2007). Engaging directly with this vulnerable population allows us to gather firsthand information about their experiences, challenges, and immediate needs. This approach not only effectively identifies what assistance these children require but also fosters a sense of agency among them, leading to better outcomes.
Moreover, the needs assessment will offer insights into the existing resources and potential gaps within our community. By doing so, we can align community services with needs, enhancing the overall efficacy of support systems already in place (Babbie, 2016). The data gathered can also drive policy advocacy efforts aimed at improving support frameworks for not just unaccompanied minors but also their families.
Finally, initiating a comprehensive needs assessment contributes to social change by fostering collaborations between government agencies, non-profit organizations, and community members. A collective effort can bring forth sustainable solutions, such as preventive programs that aim to keep families intact and strategies that address the socioeconomic factors that compel children into unaccompanied situations (Gupta et al., 2007).

Preliminary Steps for the Needs Assessment

The first step involves identifying the population of unaccompanied minors in our community. Given the potentially small size of this demographic within the larger community, a comprehensive survey can be conducted without the need for statistical sampling, ensuring that we reach every child who fits this category.
Next, a data collection strategy must be established. Primary data collection will be facilitated through interviews with unaccompanied minors. Developing a structured interview guide can help ease the process and ensure that critical aspects of their experiences and needs are covered while maintaining a sensitive approach (Gillespie, 2014).
Simultaneously, it is essential to engage with existing secondary data from reputable sources. Consulting existing research and publications from organizations such as the Children’s Bureau can provide context and additional insights that may enrich our understanding of the issue (Gupta et al., 2007).

Target Population

My primary target population for collecting data will be unaccompanied minors themselves, who can provide unique perspectives on their circumstances. The goal is to hear their stories regarding how they came to be unaccompanied and what support they deem necessary. The advantage of focusing directly on this demographic is the richness of qualitative data generated, which can inform deeper understanding and action.
Due to the sensitive nature of the subject, ethical considerations must be made when approaching these minors. Informed consent, confidentiality, and safeguarding measures must be prioritized to protect the well-being of the children involved in this research (Babbie, 2016).

Existing Data Sources

Various existing data sources include more formal research studies, statistical reports, and community assessments that can help provide a foundation for understanding the dynamics surrounding unaccompanied minors. As stated earlier, publications by the Children’s Bureau can lend valuable context, including guidelines on best practices for working with unaccompanied children (Gillespie, 2014).
Research articles and studies on youth homelessness, domestic violence, and immigration may also provide relevant insights into the challenges faced by unaccompanied minors, allowing for a more holistic comprehension of their situation (Heorhiadi, Conbere, & Hazelbaker, 2014).

New Data Collection

In addition to existing data, new qualitative data is necessary to capture the voices and insights of unaccompanied minors. Interviewing these children will allow us to glean critical information directly from the source regarding their needs, challenges, and potential solutions.
The oral interview methods will facilitate an open dialogue, thereby encouraging the participants to share their thoughts freely (Babbie, 2016). It may also be beneficial to create a safe and supportive environment for these interviews, possibly incorporating the use of trained youth advocates who can relate to the children and foster trust.

Conclusion

The issue of unaccompanied minors in our community is multifaceted and requires a thorough understanding for effective intervention. By conducting a comprehensive needs assessment, we can gather essential data that not only sheds light on the unique challenges faced by these children but also guides us in developing effective programs and policies that aim to better their lives. Through collaboration, dedication, and focused efforts, we can enact meaningful change in their circumstances and contribute to the welfare of our broader community.

References

1. Babbie, E. (2016). The basics of social research (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Cengage.
2. Gillespie, H. (2014). Unaccompanied minor. Blue Ash, OH: Merit Press.
3. Gupta, K., Sleezer, C., & Eft, D. (2007). A practical guide to needs assessment. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
4. Heorhiadi, A., Conbere, J., & Hazelbaker, C. (2014). Virtue vs. virus: Can OD overcome the heritage of scientific management. OD Practitioner, 46(3), 27-31.
5. Khandelwal, K. A., & Mohendra, N. V. (2010). Espoused organizational values, vision, and corporate social responsibility: Does it matter to organizational members? The Journal for Decision Makers, 35(3), 19-35.
6. Marinucci, D. (2006). Don’t just talk about family values. Tire Business, 24(18), 8.
7. O’Brien, J. (2014). Understanding the challenge: Unaccompanied minors. Journal of Child and Youth Services, 36(2), 1-16.
8. Palmer, P. J. (2004). A hidden wholeness: The journey toward an undivided life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
9. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
10. Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1998). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.