PROGRAM PLANNING and EVALUATION
in HEALTH and MEDICINE
prepared by Martin Rusnak
International Brain Trauma Foundation
Fischhof 3, A-1010 Wien, Austria
rusnakm@healthnet.sk
www.healthnet.sk
OBJECTIVES
-
to demonstrate mutual dependence of planning and evaluation (P&E)
-
to discuss the cycle of P&E process
-
to assess approaches
-
to motivate for further studies
-
and get oriented
PROJECT CYCLE
|
STEP 5
|
STEP 4
|
STEP 3
|
STEP 2
|
STEP 1
|
| Administrative and policy dg |
Educational and organizational dg |
Behavioral and environmental dg |
Epidemiological dg |
Social dg
|
HEALTH PROMOTION
Health Education
Policy Regulation
Organization
|
Predisposing Factors
Reinforcing Factors
Enabling Factors
|
Behaviour and Lifestyle
Environment
|
Health
|
Quality of Life
|
|
STEP 6
|
STEP 7
|
STEP 8
|
STEP 9
|
STEP 9
|
| Implementation |
Process Evaluation |
Impact Evaluation |
Outcome |
Evaluation |
Based on Green, L.W., Kreuter, M.W.: Health Promotion
Planning. An Educational and Environmental Approach. Myfield Publishing
Comp., 1991, 506 pp.
PLANNING an INTERVENTION into HEALTH RELATED BEHAVIOUR
|
ask WHY
|
before
|
HOW
|
Desired Final
OUTCOME
|
|
What has to
PRECEDE
that Outcome
|
|
EVALUATION
|
|
PLANNING
|
PLANNING
Perhaps the most important issue facing the health service is not how
it should be organised or financed, but whether the care it provides actually
works. This applies not only to particular interventions, but to whole
packages of care, and one of the features of the evidence-based approach
- systematic review - has been to starkly demonstrate that what we think,
or what we believe we know, falls flat when it comes to proof.
ASSESSING QUALITY OF LIFE CONCERNS
Goal:
to determine people's perceptions of their own needs or quality of life
, and their aspirations for the common good, through broad participation
and the application of multiple information-gathering activities designed
to expand understanding of the community.
Methods and Strategies
-
key informant interviews;
-
community forums;
-
focus groups;
-
nominal group process;
-
surveys;
-
social indicators;
-
archival research;
-
synthetic estimates from national data interpolated to the local level.
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE
Goals:
-
to determine which health problems are important (measured objectively,
rather than by their subjectively perceived importance to quality of life)
-
to identify those behavioural and environmental factors which contribute
to the occurrence of those health problems
SITUATION ANALYSIS, FEASIBILITY
-
Behavioural and Environmental Evidence
-
Assessing Educational and Organizational Factors Affecting Health-Related
Behaviour and Environments
PRIORITIES
|
More
important |
Less
imortant |
| More
changeable |
High priority
for program focus |
Low priority
except to demonstrate change for political purposes |
| Less
changeable |
Priority for
innovative program; evaluation crucial |
No program |
PRIORITIES
|
More
important |
Less
imortant |
| More
changeable |
Smoking |
Medical treatment |
| Less
changeable |
Eating foods
with high fatty-acid content
Overeating
Lack of exercise |
Not relaxing |
ASSESSMENTS
| Resources Needed
& Available |
Barriers
|
Policies
|
| policies, regulations, organizations |
political forces |
| time |
staff commitment and attitudes |
motivation |
intra- organizational |
| personnel |
goal conflict |
consistency |
inter-organizational |
| budget |
community barriers |
flexibility |
system approach |
|
rate of change , complexity, space |
loyalty, discretion |
advocacy approach |
EVALUATION
| LEVEL
of |
| PROJECT |
CLUSTER |
PROGRAMMING
POLICYMAKING |
| consistent, ongoing collection and analysis |
how well the collection of projects fulfills
the objectives of systematic change |
cross-cutting programming and policy questions |
PROJECT-LEVEL EVALUATION
-
examine how the project functions within the economic, social, and political
environment of its community and project setting;
-
help with the planning, setting up, and carrying out of a project as well
as the documentation of the evaluation of a project;
-
assess the short- and long- term results of the project.
CONTEXT EVALUATION
-
early stage of a project
-
assess needs, assets, and resources;
-
identify political atmosphere and human services context to increase the
likelihood that chosen
-
later phases of a project
-
gathering contextual information to modify project plans and / or explain
past problems (e.g. slower than anticipated growth);
-
identifying the political, social, and environmental strengths and weaknesses
of both the community and the project;
-
examining the impact of changing national and local climates on project
implementation and success.
IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION
activities enhance the likelihood of success by providing indications
what happened and why.
QUESTIONS ASKED
-
what are the critical components/activities
of this project (both explicit and implicit)?
-
how do these components connect to the goals
and intended outcomes?
-
what aspects of the implementation process
are facilitating success or acting as stumbling blocks for the project?
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS for a NEW PROGRAM
-
what characteristics of the project implementation process have facilitated
or hindered project goals?
-
Which initial strategies or activities of the project are being implemented?
Which are not? Why or why not?
-
Is the project reaching its intended audience? Why and why not? What
changes must be made to reach intended audiences more effectively?
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS for an ESTABLISHED PROGRAM
-
Which project operations work? Which aren't working? Why or why not?
-
What strategies have been successful in encouraging client participation
and involvement? Which have been unsuccessful?
-
How effective is the organisational structure in supporting project
implementation? What changes need to be made?
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS for FUTURE PROGRAM
-
What is unique about this project?
-
What project strengths can we build upon to meet unmet needs?
-
Where are the gaps in services/program activities? How can the project
be modified or expanded to meet still unmet needs?
-
Can the project be effectively replicated? What are the critical implementation
elements? How might contextual factors impact replications?
OUTCOME EVALUATION
assesses the short- and long-term results of a project and seeks to
measure the changes brought about by the project.
-
early stage of a project
-
what outcomes are hoped for or expected;
-
how individual participant / client outcomes connect to specific program
or system-level outcomes.
-
later stage of a project
-
demonstrating the effectiveness of a project and making a case for its
continued funding or for expansion/replication;
-
helping to answer questions about what works, for whom, and in what circumstances,
and how to improve program delivery and services;
-
determine which implementation activities and contextual factors are supporting
or hindering outcomes and overall program effectiveness.
DEVELOPING and IMPLEMENTING an OUTCOME EVALUATION PROCESS - QUESTIONS
to be ASKED
-
Who are you going to serve?
-
What outcomes are you trying to achieve for your target population?
-
How will you measure whether you've achieved these outcomes?
-
What data will you collect and how will you collect it?
-
What are your performance targets?
SUSTAINABILITY
Activities associated with the project -if not the project itself-
may be sustained through state and local monies, funding from other foundations,
private donors, or adoption by larger organizations. How successfully projects
are able to develop a strategy for the transition from short-term funding
sources to long-term funding may determine their future existence.
REPLICATION and DISSEMINATION
Projects can replicate or disseminate important lessons learned through
publishing journal articles; participating in networks of communities/projects
grappling with similar issues; presenting information locally, regionally,
or nationally; advising similar projects; or assisting in replicating the
project in other communities.
IMPACT on POLICY
Research and evaluation rarely affects policy directly; instead policy
is influenced by a complex combination of facts, assumptions, ideology,
and the personal interests and beliefs of policymakers. At the same time,
it is critical to proactively design and utilize evaluation processes and
results not only to improve practice, but also to improve and change policies
at multiple levels.
SUMMARY
-
Planning and Evaluation of projects (programs) is closely related and critical
for any successful activity.
-
Every activity should be planned and evaluated.
-
People individually should improve their knowledge, skills and experiences
in P&E throughout their carriers.
SUGGESTED READING
-
Evaluation Fundamentals Handbook. Open Society Institute and Collaborative
Inquiry Corporation
-
Green, L.W., Kreuter, M.W.: Health Promotion Planning. An Educational and
Environmental Approach. Myfield Publishing Comp., 1991, 506 pp.