(Printer Friendly Version)
This year we are planning another dynamic LGBT TIG set of activities including multi-session papers, a discussion-based business meeting, and a Friday night social.
Keep watching this space for more information. We need your help at our business meeting to plan next year's conference!
| SOCIAL: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Issues TIG. Friends and allies welcomed! You need not be a member of the LGBT TIG to attend! |
| LGBT Really Fab Social on (tentatively) Friday, Nov 7, 7:30 PM to 9:30 PM (tentatively) to be held at: The Avenue Grill 630 E 17th Ave (at Washington) 303/861-2820 Web: www.avenuegrill.com |
| Description:
By tradition, the LGBT TIG hosts an off-site Really Fab Social in a
semi-private room at a wonderful restaurant with appetizers. (You
may purchase drinks and additional food.)
It is a great time to relax and mix. |
| Session Title: Monitoring and Promoting LGBTQ Health Through Evaluation |
| Multipaper Session 207 to be held in Capitol Ballroom Section 6 on Thursday, Nov 6, 9:15AM-10:45 |
| Sponsored by the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Issues TIG and the Health Evaluation TIG |
| Chair(s): |
| Steve Fifield, University of Delaware, fifield@udel.edu |
| Inclusive Service Provision for Sexually Diverse Populations: Surveying Staff as a Tool for Sensitization | /tr>
| Presenter(s): |
| Shelly Makleff, International Planned Parenthood Federation, smakleff@ippfwhr.org |
| River Finlay, International Planned Parenthood Federation, rfinlay@ippfwhr.org |
| Stephanie Chamberlin, International Planned Parenthood Federation, schamberlin@ippfwhr.org |
| Abstract: International Planned Parenthood Federation/Western Hemisphere Region (IPPF/WHR) launched a series of projects in 2004 to address the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs of sexually diverse (including gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) populations throughout Latin America. Strategies involve the use of tools to assess attitudes, define needs, and develop institutional priorities. Tool implementation among IPPF/WHR member associations revealed an unanticipated outcome: the act of tool completion itself served to sensitize staff to issues of sexual diversity, by instigating dialogue and posing questions that were new to participants. This process facilitated reflection of assumptions around client sexual behavior and reproductive intentions--assumptions that affect quality of care and client-provider interactions. This session will describe programmatic and institutional uses of tool implementation and findings. Evaluation tool implementation is one of many strategies to facilitate provision of high quality and non-judgmental services for all clients. |
| A Dangerous Combination: How Policy and Methodological Challenges Perpetuate Health Disparities in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Populations |
| Presenter(s): |
| Kari Greene, Program Design and Evaluation Services, kari.greene@state.or.us |
| Abstract: Researchers and evaluators face numerous methodological challenges when examining lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) health issues. These challenges are exacerbated by multi-level structural and political barriers specific to LGBT communities, resulting in a dearth of national and local research and evaluation on LGBT health issues. A review of the extant literature reveals health disparities for LGBT populations for a number of health indicators, yet structural barriers exist on multiple levels to further examining, addressing and ameliorating those disparities. This session will examine four key methodological challenges related to evaluating and researching LGBT populations and health issues. Furthermore, key policies, practices and structural issues that impact the health of LGBT populations will be explored. Through a multi-level examination of these factors, attendees will gain knowledge the hidden and overt barriers to improving health outcomes for LGBT communities. |
| Smoking Prevalence and Cessation among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Arizona Residents |
| Presenter(s): |
| John Daws, University of Arizona,johndaws@email.arizona.edu |
| Abstract:
In Arizona, tobacco is a particular problem for the lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. Compared to heterosexual
residents, LGBT Arizonans have a higher prevalence of current smoking,
are younger when they initiate smoking, smoke more cigarettes per day,
and are less likely to be ex-smokers. Recently, however, the number of LGBT smokers who participate in state-run cessation programs has increased. Success in quitting has also recently increased: in the past fiscal year, the quit rate for LGBT clients (18%) was significantly higher than that for heterosexual clients (12%). This paper will describe differences between LGBT and heterosexual smokers, and how these differences affect cessation success. Absent from this paper will be information about tobacco use among LGBTQ youth in Arizona. None of the three surveillance instruments which monitor youth smoking (and other substance use) include sexual-orientation questions. This paper will discuss strategies for evaluating the youth tobacco problem. |
| Session Title: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Issues TIG Business Meeting and Presentation: Evaluation Policy and Practice for LGBT Issues and People |
| Business Meeting Session 436 to be held in Capitol Ballroom Section 5 on Thursday, Nov 6, 6:10PM -7:00PM |
| Sponsored by the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Issues TIG |
| TIG Leader(s): |
| Kari Greene, Program Design and Evaluation Services, kari.greene@state.or.us |
| Lyn Paleo, Evaluation Research and Training, paleo@igc.org |
| Steve Fifield, University of Delaware, fifield@udel.edu |
| Virginia Dicken, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, vdicken@siu.edu |
| Abstract: The 2008 conference theme is Evaluation Policy and Evaluation Practice. Quoting AEA President, William Trochim, "An evaluation policy is any rule or principle that a group or organization uses to guide its decisions and actions when doing evaluation. Sometimes these are formal, explicit and written; at other times they are more implicit and ad hoc principles or norms that have simply evolved over time." Join us to discuss how formal and informal evaluation policies and practices affect LGBT issues and people. Programs that serve the general public are usually not evaluated with LGBT people and concerns in mind. Is this bad policy? Is it homophobia? And what is the policy climate for the evaluation of LGBT-targeted programs? What can we do to advance evaluation policies and practices that are affirming, just, and useful? |
| Session Title: LGBTQ Evaluation in Education Settings: Schools and Museums |
| Multipaper Session 554 to be held in Capitol Ballroom Section 7 on Friday, Nov 7, 10:55AM-11:40AM |
| Sponsored by the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Issues TIG |
| Chair(s): |
| Virginia Dicken, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, vdicken@siu.edu |
| Exploring the Museum's Closet Doors: A Pilot Study of Gay and Lesbian Visitors< |
| Joe E Heimlich, Ohio State University, heimlich.1@osu.edu |
| Judy Koke, Art Gallery of Ontario, judy_koke@ago.net |
| Abstract: Museums continually seek to expand their visitor and membership base; a much cited belief is that visitation leads to membership. One population that seems to defy that pattern is the GLBTQ community where attendance or visiting does not seem to lead to membership, subscription, or donation. This pilot study of GLBTQ visitation was undertaken to 1) test instrumentation for creating a long-term study of gay and lesbian museum visitors; and 2) begin to develop an understanding of specific issues, interests and barriers related to museum visitation from these specific audience segments. The population was purposefully selected to represent the "ideal" demographic of highly educated, above average income. Findings indicate that visitation is on a rate much greater than in the wider population and, of visitors/audiences membership/subscribership is very low. Heteronormativism emerges from the data as the dominant barrier. |
| Making Schools Safe for LGBTQ and All Youth: Lessons from a Safe Schools Coalition |
| Presenter(s): |
| Lisa Korwin, Korwin Consulting, lisa@korwinconsulting.com |
| Robin Horner, Korwin Consulting, rh4consulting@yahoo.com |
| Abstract: Starting in the summer of 2003, a group of nonprofit and public sector organizations in Northern California launched a coalition dedicated to fostering safe school environments for LGBTQ and all youth. The coalition was formed in response to a strategic planning process which revealed significant systemic prejudice and violence against LGBTQ youth. From the start, coalition members and their funder recognized and prioritized the role of evaluation in this endeavor. Over the next four years, the evaluator, Korwin Consulting, worked closely with coalition members to identify desired outputs and outcomes. In partnership, the coalition and evaluator designed and implemented a mixed-methods evaluation. We will present two of the three short evaluation reports that resulted from this process. In our presentation, we will highlight strategies and lessons learned from evaluating a coalition working on changing community norms. |