Study Circles Post-Survey Data:

HORIZONS COM M UNITY: WISHRAM - CHANGES IN

KNOWLEDGE OF P OVERTY BEFORE AND NOW/ AFTER STUDY
CIRCLES FROM P OSTSURVEYS 2.09

4.0

3.60 3.64 3.60

Wishram
3.5 3.51
3.26 3.29 3.21
3.0
3 . 15
2.82 2.91
2.5 2.49 2.56
2.24 2.29 2.24
2.0 2.09
B EFOR E a v e r a ge r a t i ng
1. 5

1. 0 N OW/ A FT ER a v e r a g e
0.5
r a t i ng

0.0

P ossi bl e D i f f er ent R easons i t i s H ow pover t y St r a t e g i e s t o I ndi vi dual C o mmu n i t y P ol i ci es t hat

causes of ki nds of di f f i cul t t o a f f e c t s my r educe act i ons t o act i ons t o woul d r educe
pover t y pover t y get out of c o mmu n i t y pover t y r educe r educe pover t y
pover t y pover t y pover t y

Scale of 1 = Almost n ot hin g t o 4 = A gr eat deal

HORIZONS COM M UNITY: WISHRAM

STUDY CIRCLE P OSTSURVEY INFORM ATION 2.09 Community Progress:
100.0%
90.0% 7 8 .9 %
Study Circles and
Leadershipplenty®
80.0%
6 5 .8 %
70.0% 5 5 .3 % 5 5 .3 %
60.0%

Survey Results
50.0%
4 2 .1%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
I ncr eased A l r eady t aken V er y l ikel y in V er y l ikel y in V er y l ikel y in
knowl edge of act i on f ut ur e t o t ake f ut ur e t o j oi n f ut ur e t o
pover t y i ndi vi dual act i oc
n o m m u n i t y a c t i o ns u p p o r t p o l i c i e s
t o r educe
pover t y

Study Circles
47 Participated in Study Circles

LeadershipPlenty®
35 Participated in LeadershipPlenty
 LeadershipPlenty® Post-Survey Data:
LeadershipPlenty® Pre-Survey Data:
WISHRAM COMPARED TO ALL WA HORIZONS COMMUNITIES: WAYS PROGRAM HAS
H OR I ZON S C OM M U N I T Y: WI S H R A M HELPED TO ADDRESS/CHANGE POVERTY IN COMMUNITY FROM LEADERSHIPPLENTY
P OVER T Y R A T ES C OM P A R I S ON C EN S U S WI TH S T U D Y C I R C L E A D U LT
POSTSURVEYS 6.09
P A R TI C I P A N TS Wishram

5 7 . 1%
60.0%
53.6%
All Washington Horizons
50.0%
42.9%
communities
40.0%
26.3% 53 .8 %
M or e pe opl e a r e a wa r e of pov e r t y
30.0%
i n t he c ommuni t y 4 6 .2 %
20.0%

We a r e di s c us s i ng pov e r t y a nd wha t
6 6 .8 %
10 . 0 %
t o do a bout i t 6 5.4 %
0.0%

C e ns us LP A dul t s 1 0 0 % FP G LP A dul t s 1 5 0 % FP G LP A dul t s 2 0 0 % FP G

4 4 .2 %
M or
o e pe opl e a r e s t e ppi ng up t o
a s s i s t t hos e i n pov e r t y 4 6 .2 %

M or e l ow i ncome pe opl e a r e
3 3 .6 %
HORIZONS COM M UNITY: WISHRAM i nv ol v e d i n t he c ommuni t y 3 0 .8 %
AGE COM P ARISONS CENSUS WITH LEADERSHIP P LENTY
4 0 .9 %
P ARTICIP ANTS 4.09 We a r e wor k i ng t o c r e a t e c ha nge s
i n publ i c pol i c y 4 2 .3 %

2 5.6 %
Census 5 5 .6 M or e pe
p opl e a r e ge t t i ng he l p t o ge t
2 6 .9 %
60 out of pov e r t y
LP Participants
2 3 .6 %
We a r e t a k i ng c onc r e t e s t e ps t o
50 2 6 .9 %
a ddr e s s pov e r t y

40 0. 0% 10. 0% 20. 0% 30. 0% 40. 0% 50. 0% 60. 0% 70. 0%

25
30
19 .4

20

W ISHHR A M C OM PA R ED T O A LL W A HOR IZ ON S C OM M U N IT IES:

10 6 .5 % 8 0 .6 % 9 .7 % B EF OR
O E A N D A F T ER SELF R A T IN GS LEA D ER SHIP SKILLS Wi sh r a m B EFOR E
F R O M LEA D ER SHIPPLEN T Y POST SU R V EY S 6 .0 9
Wi sh r a m A F TER
0
A l l Wa shi n g t o n B EF OR E
Under 18 years 18 to 64 years 65 years and over 
A l l Wa shi n g t o n A F T ER
5.0

4.5
HO R I Z ON S C OM M U N IT Y : W ISHR A M
4 .13 4 .0 9 4 .2 8
PR IO R EX PER I EN C E A N D C OM M U N IT Y R OLES O F LEA D ER SHIPPLEN T Y 4 .10
4 .0 5
PA R T I C IPA N T S 4 .0 9
4.0
3 .8 5 4 .0 2 3 .8 0 3 .9 5 3 .9 6 3 .7 5
3 .7 3 3 .7 3 3 .7 3 3 .8 1 3 .7 2 3 .7 4
3 .5 8 3 .4 6 3 .5 4 3 .5 4 3 .6 1 3 .6 9 3 .5 8 3 .6 5
3.5 3 .4 2
3 8 .7% 3 .2 7 3 .19 3 .2 7
40.0%
3.0
3 .12 3 .0 8
35.0%
3 2 .3 % 3 2 .3 % 2 .5 8
2 .7 2 2 .6 2 2 .4 5 2 .4 8 2 .6 8 2 .3 9
30.0%
2 .5 0 2
2 .5
.4 8
6 2 .5 7
2.5
2 .3 8 2 .3 5 2 .4 2
25.0%
2 .2 3 2 .2 3 2 .3 3
2 .12
2 .4 1
2 .15 2 .19 2 .2 3 2 .13 22.2
.129
2 .2 7
.0 3
2 .2 8
20.0% 2.0 1.9 2 1.8 5 2 .11
1.8 5
15 . 0 %
9 . 7%
10 . 0 % 1.5 1.5 4
3 .2 % 3 .2 %
5.0%

0.0% 1.0
I am
m able t o I r ecogn zi e t he I am able t o I kn ow how t o I am able t o I am able t o I am able t o e
l ad I kn ow how I am able t o I kn ow how I kn ow how t o I kn ow t he I n ow how t o I kn ow how t o I kn ow t he I kn ow how t o
E ver P er son who A ct i ve but Just an N ot r eal l y N or or ever
r eccogn zi e r elat o
i n ship wor k wit h t he appr oach d
i en t fi y t he guide pr oduct vi e con f cil t an d man age par t n er ships plan an d commun ti y assess t he shar e value of discuss r ace
i nvol ved ma k e s not a or di nar y pa r t of t he an elected
e
l ader shi
s p skisl n
i bet ween e
l ader ship n
i my commun ti y st ages of discussion s meet n
i gs. t en sion con f cil t n
i n
i fu
l en ce m
i plemen t act o
i n pr ocess value of gr oup n
i f or mat o
in br n
i gin g r elat o
insn
i a
l eader shi p c o mmu n i t y deci si on per son c o mmu n i t y of f i ci al
ott her s get t n
i gn
i volved or gan zi at o
in developmen t gr oup amon g diver se n l en ce gr oup gr oup wor k.
i fu commun ti y commun ti y pr oblem- solvn
i g wit h diver se cit zi en s n on -
p r o g r a m? deci si ons ma k e r
an d civci an d/ or pr oblems. developmen t . r oups of people wor k. pr oblem solvn
i g chan ge ef f or t s. audien ces. t oget her t o t hr eat en n
i g

e
l ader ship. gr eat er pr oject s. t alk about way.
commun ti y. si sues.

Scal e of 1 = Str ongly Disagr ee to 5 = Str ongl y Agr ee