EVALUATION IN HEALTH

PROMOTION

Karen Leslie L. Pineda, RND, MSPHKaren Leslie L. Pineda, RND, MSPH

PLANNING PARADIGMPLANNING PARADIGMJ Thomas Butler, 2000J Thomas Butler, 2000

Implementation

Development of program plan• Goals & objectives•Policy formulation•Methods & techniques•Implementation plans•Evaluation plans

Evaluation

Needs Assessment• Analysis of population• Determination of health problems• Prioritizing needs

Evaluation Needed to assess results,

determine whether objectives have been met and find out if the methods used were appropriate and efficient.

Findings can then be fed back into the planning process in order to progress practice

About identifying values or criteria which will be used to determine success

Naidoo & Wills, 2009Naidoo & Wills, 2009

“…implies judgment based on careful assessment and critical appraisal of given situations, which should lead to drawing sensible conclusions and making useful proposals for future action.”

WHO, 1981WHO, 1981

Evaluation

CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION Effectiveness – the extent to which

aims and objectives are met.

Appropriateness – the relevance of the intervention to needs.

Acceptability – whether it is carried out in a sensitive way.

Efficiency – whether time, money and resources are well spent, given the benefits.

Equity – equal provisions for equal need.. Naidoo & Wills, 2009Naidoo & Wills, 2009

Identifies effective health promotion practices which others can adopt.

Naidoo & Wills, 2009Naidoo & Wills, 2009

Evaluation

Reasons for evaluation: the three Es

To assess what has been achieved – did an intervention have its intended effects? (Efficiency)

To measure its impact and whether it was worthwhile (Effectiveness)

To judge its cost-effectiveness and whether the time, money and labor were well-spent (Economy)

- To inform future plans

- To justify decisions to others.

Naidoo & Wills, 2009Naidoo & Wills, 2009

PROCESS, IMPACT

&

OUTCOME

EVALUATION SCHEMES

Process Evaluation Formative or illuminative

evaluation

Concerned with assessing the process of programme implementation

Addresses participants perceptions and reactions to health promotion interventions, and identifies the factors which support or impede these activities Naidoo & Wills, 2009Naidoo & Wills, 2009

Impact Evaluation Impact – the immediate effects

such as increased knowledge or shifts in attitude

tends to be the most popular choice, as it is the easier to do

can be built into a programme as the end stage

Naidoo & Wills, 2009Naidoo & Wills, 2009

Outcome Evaluation Outcome – the longer-term

effects such as changes in lifestyle.

More difficult as it involves an assessment of longer-term effects

More complex and costly

Often the preferred evaluation method as it measures sustained changes that have stood the test of time

Naidoo & Wills, 2009Naidoo & Wills, 2009

Health Promotion Program

Smoking Reduction

Health Promotion Objectives For Smoking Reduction

Increased knowledge, e.g. harmful effects of passive smoking

Changes in attitudes, e.g. less willingness to breathe in others’ smoke

Changes in behavior, e.g. stopping smoking

Acquiring new skills, e.g. learning relaxation methods to reduce stress

Naidoo & Wills, 2009Naidoo & Wills, 2009

Introduction of healthy policies, e.g. funding to enable GPs to prescribe nicotine replacement aids for people on low income

Modifying the environment, e.g. banning tobacco advertising and promotion, workplace no-smoking policies

Reduction in risk factors, e.g. reduction in number of smokers and amount of tobacco smoked per person

Increased use of services, e.g. take-up rates for smoking cessation clinics, number of calls made to quit smoking telephone help lines

Reduced morbidity, e.g. reduced rates of respiratory illness and coronary heart disease

Reduced mortality, e.g. reduced mortality from lung cancer

THANK YOU VERY MUCH

& GOOD DAY!