How to Write a Summary of an Article?
Advanced Search Abstract Community-based health promotion often emphasizes elements of empowerment, participation, multidisciplinary collaboration, capacity building, Outcomes and evalustion of community health and sustainable development.
Secondly, we discuss possible objects of interest, the first component of an evaluation. We then discuss the spirit of the times and its implications for community-based health promotion.
Finally, we address the key question of setting standards. A typology of standards is presented. Arbitrary, experiential and utility standards are based on perceived needs and priorities of practitioners, lay participants or professional decision-makers.
Historical, scientific and normative standards are driven by empirical, objective data. Propriety and feasibility standards are those wherein the primary concern is for consideration of resources, policies, legislation and administrative factors.
Further, we argue that standards should be set from an inclusive, salutogenic orientation. This approach offers a means of creating a situation in which policy-makers and funders are more supportive of evaluation designs that fit with community realities, and community stakeholders are more capable and consistent in rigorously evaluating community-based health promotion programmes and policies.
Empowerment, in its most general sense, refers to the ability of people to gain understanding and control over personal, social, economic and political forces in order to take action to improve their life situations Israel et al.
This emphasis is often juxtaposed with equally powerful notions of evidence-based decision making and accountability, in that funders and government decision-makers are frequently more concerned with measuring outcomes and defining success.
Community practitioners and lay participants often feel that evaluations are imposed upon them, and that the evaluation process does not appreciate the uniqueness of their community, its programme, and its resources and skills Labonte and Robertson, ; Trussler and Marchand, Portraying these viewpoints in a dichotomized manner may appear overly simplistic.
We present them in this manner to assert that the issues raised by both sides represent legitimate concerns within the practice of community-based health promotion.
It is essential to recognize that all parties involved are seeking to provide the most worthwhile programmes or policies to a designated community.
The progression from programme objectives, to strategies employed, to data collected, to definitions of programme success is often not operationally articulated in a transparent, measurable fashion.
The focus of this paper is on the latter stage i. While concerns for accountability and outcomes are part of our current zeitgeist spirit of the timesevaluation should not be a disempowering process.
If practitioners are provided with adequate support for conducting an evaluation, they are highly motivated in knowing if they are making a difference, and how they can improve their programme. This paper provides an approach that depicts evaluation as being mutually beneficial to all stakeholders.
Our aim is to make the evaluation process more transparent and collaborative so that all parties will be satisfied, and gain from the outcomes of community-based health promotion evaluations. The issues raised in this paper are closely related to the sustainability and improvement of programmes, and the health of the communities served.
Practitioners are often concerned that their programmes will not be continued due to a perceived lack of success by decision makers. We assert that standards for the evaluation of community-based health promotion are, for the most part, implicitly defined or assumed.
Secondly, we assert that standards employed in the evaluation of community-based health promotion that are not expressed may succumb to the same fate as health promotion indicators; i. More importantly, they are often ignored or forgotten as a programme proceeds over time.
We endorse making the use of such standards more explicit and transparent in a collaborative process. The first section of the paper underscores the values and philosophy of health promotion as it relates to the evaluation process. Next, we discuss possible objects of interest, the first component of an evaluation, in community-based health promotion.
Then, we further explicate the spirit of the times and its implications for community-based health promotion. For our present purposes, we endorse the definition of evaluation proposed by Green and Kreuter Green and Kreuter,namely that evaluation involves the comparison of an object of interest against a standard of acceptability.
We believe all stakeholders have a role in articulating the objects of interest e. We endorse the use of a comprehensive, diverse set of standards that reflects different concerns and forms of evidence related to the evaluation of health promotion programmes.
This approach offers a means of creating a situation in which policy-makers and funders can be more supportive of evaluation designs that fit with community realities, and community stakeholders can become more capable and consistent in evaluating their health promotion programmes and policies.
Evaluation should facilitate understanding by all stakeholders. Although we refer to community-based health promotion, the issues raised may be relevant to health promotion interventions at other levels i. This vision includes a viable natural environment, a sustainable economic environment, a sufficient economy, an equitable social environment, a convivial community and a liveable environment Labonte, We propose salutogenesis as the core or foundational value underlying the development, articulation and implementation of standards for community-based health promotion programmes or policies.
Adoption of a salutogenic perspective highlights the importance of starting from a consideration of how health is created and maintained through community-based health promotion Cowley and Billings, Social capital is defined here as: It is social cohesion, and comprises attention, engagement and trust of both non-familiar people and the institutions of governance.
Social capital can be used to measure the capacity of the social linkages and their resilience or fragility. Using this approach, evaluation standards should maximize human health, quality-of-life and well-being.
This view also recognizes that health has an instrumental value rather than being an end in itself.Introduction to Program Evaluation for Public Health Programs: A Self-Study Guide.
Research initiatives (e.g., an effort to find out whether disparities in health outcomes based on race can be reduced) Advocacy work (e.g., While inspired by real CDC and community programs, they are not intended to reflect the current.
The report shows that empowering initiatives can lead to health outcomes and that empowerment is a viable identified on multiple levels and domains: psychological, organizational, and community-levels; and within household/family, economic, political, programs and services (such as health, water systems, What is the evidence on.
Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan Setting the course for (CDC’s) Office on Smoking and Health (OSH) and Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity (DNPAO). This workbook was developed as part of a series of technical purpose and anticipated outcomes.
Frankish, C. J.
and Bishop, A. () Background Paper and Plan for Inclusion of Community Health Indicators in the Canadian Community Health Survey. Prepared for the Canadian Consortium of Health Promotion Research Centres and the Advisory Committee on the . Outcomes and Evaluation of Community Health Project It is important to evaluate any public health program to determine its contribution and health impact on the population it was designed to help, in addition to its sustainability.
Outcomes and Evalustion of Community Health Project Outcomes and Evaluation of Community Health Project It is important to evaluate any public health program to determine its contribution and health impact on the population it was designed to help, in addition to its sustainability.