Problem:
Other stages also reinforce this alignment. Analyzing the problem (stage 1) refines understanding of Rochester's violence dynamics and identifies root causes of violence. Setting goals and objectives (stage 2) ensures measurable outcomes are tied to community priorities (Welsh & Harris, 2016). The later phases, such as policy implementation (stage 5), evaluation (stage 6), and review (stage 7), provide mechanisms for tracking performance, measuring outcomes, and institutionalizing successful practices (Welsh & Harris, 2016). Together, these stages create a structured yet flexible framework for growing and strengthening PTP in a way that maintains accountability while staying responsive to community needs. Limitations of the Model in Real-World Context Despite its strengths, the Welsh and Harris model exhibits limitations when applied to complex, community-based contexts such as PTP. The model's sequential structure assumes that program development proceeds logically from analysis to implementation, but violence prevention environments are rarely linear. In reality, the environment shifts quickly due to changes in social networks, in-person and online disputes, evolving community tensions, and other influences. Outreach workers in PTP often respond to crises in real-time. Need Assignment Help?