Elements to Enhance the Successful Start and Completion of Program and Policy Evaluations: The Injury & Violence Prevention (IVP) Program & Policy Evaluation Institute

J. Porter, L. Brennan, Mighty Fine, Ina Robinson
{"title":"Elements to Enhance the Successful Start and Completion of Program and Policy Evaluations: The Injury & Violence Prevention (IVP) Program & Policy Evaluation Institute","authors":"J. Porter, L. Brennan, Mighty Fine, Ina Robinson","doi":"10.56645/jmde.v16i37.659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Public health practitioners, including injury and violence prevention (IVP) professionals, are responsible for implementing evaluations, but often lack formal evaluation training. Impacts of many practitioner-focused evaluation trainings—particularly their ability to help participants successfully start and complete evaluations—are unknown. \nObjectives: We assessed the impact of the Injury and Violence Prevention (IVP) Program & Policy Evaluation Institute (“Evaluation Institute”), a team-based, multidisciplinary, and practitioner-focused evaluation training designed to teach state IVP practitioners and their cross-sector partners how to evaluate program and policy interventions. \nDesign: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of 13 evaluation teams across eight states at least one year after training participation (24 participants in total). Document reviews were conducted to triangulate, supplement, and contextualize reported improvements to policies, programs, and practices. \nIntervention: Teams of practitioners applied for and participated in the Evaluation Institute, a five-month evaluation training initiative that included a set of online training modules, an in-person workshop, and technical support from evaluation consultants. \nMain Outcome Measure(s): The successful start and/or completion of a program or policy evaluation focused on an IVP intervention. \nResults: Of the 13 teams studied, a total of 12 teams (92%) reported starting or completing an evaluation. Four teams (31%) reported fully completing their evaluations; eight teams (61%) reported partially completing their evaluations. Teams identified common facilitators and barriers that impacted their ability to start and complete their evaluations. Nearly half of the 13 teams (46%) – whether or not they completed their evaluation – reported at least one common improvement made to a program or policy as a result of engaging in an evaluative process. \nConclusion: Practitioner-focused evaluation trainings are essential to build critical evaluation skills among public health professionals and their multidisciplinary partners. The process of evaluating an intervention—even if the evaluation is not completed—has substantial value and can drive improvements to public health interventions. The Evaluation Institute can serve as a model for training public health practitioners and their partners to successfully plan, start, complete, and utilize evaluations to improve programs and policies. \nKeywords: Evaluation; injury; multidisciplinary partnerships; practitioner-focused evaluation training; professional development; program and policy evaluation; public health; technical assistance; violence","PeriodicalId":91909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v16i37.659","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Public health practitioners, including injury and violence prevention (IVP) professionals, are responsible for implementing evaluations, but often lack formal evaluation training. Impacts of many practitioner-focused evaluation trainings—particularly their ability to help participants successfully start and complete evaluations—are unknown. Objectives: We assessed the impact of the Injury and Violence Prevention (IVP) Program & Policy Evaluation Institute (“Evaluation Institute”), a team-based, multidisciplinary, and practitioner-focused evaluation training designed to teach state IVP practitioners and their cross-sector partners how to evaluate program and policy interventions. Design: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of 13 evaluation teams across eight states at least one year after training participation (24 participants in total). Document reviews were conducted to triangulate, supplement, and contextualize reported improvements to policies, programs, and practices. Intervention: Teams of practitioners applied for and participated in the Evaluation Institute, a five-month evaluation training initiative that included a set of online training modules, an in-person workshop, and technical support from evaluation consultants. Main Outcome Measure(s): The successful start and/or completion of a program or policy evaluation focused on an IVP intervention. Results: Of the 13 teams studied, a total of 12 teams (92%) reported starting or completing an evaluation. Four teams (31%) reported fully completing their evaluations; eight teams (61%) reported partially completing their evaluations. Teams identified common facilitators and barriers that impacted their ability to start and complete their evaluations. Nearly half of the 13 teams (46%) – whether or not they completed their evaluation – reported at least one common improvement made to a program or policy as a result of engaging in an evaluative process. Conclusion: Practitioner-focused evaluation trainings are essential to build critical evaluation skills among public health professionals and their multidisciplinary partners. The process of evaluating an intervention—even if the evaluation is not completed—has substantial value and can drive improvements to public health interventions. The Evaluation Institute can serve as a model for training public health practitioners and their partners to successfully plan, start, complete, and utilize evaluations to improve programs and policies. Keywords: Evaluation; injury; multidisciplinary partnerships; practitioner-focused evaluation training; professional development; program and policy evaluation; public health; technical assistance; violence
加强成功启动和完成项目和政策评估的要素:伤害和暴力预防(IVP)项目和政策评估研究所
背景:包括伤害和暴力预防(IVP)专业人员在内的公共卫生从业人员负责实施评估,但往往缺乏正式的评估培训。许多以从业者为中心的评估培训的影响——特别是他们帮助参与者成功开始和完成评估的能力——是未知的。目的:我们评估了伤害和暴力预防(IVP)项目和政策评估研究所(“评估研究所”)的影响,这是一个基于团队的、多学科的、以从业者为中心的评估培训,旨在教授州IVP从业者及其跨部门合作伙伴如何评估项目和政策干预。设计:在参加培训至少一年后,对来自8个州的13个评估小组的成员(总共24名参与者)进行了半结构化访谈。文件审查被用于三角测量、补充和将报告的对政策、计划和实践的改进置于环境中。干预:从业者团队申请并参加了评估研究所,这是一个为期五个月的评估培训计划,包括一套在线培训模块,一个面对面的研讨会,以及来自评估顾问的技术支持。主要结果衡量标准:以IVP干预为重点的项目或政策评估的成功开始和/或完成。结果:在研究的13个小组中,共有12个小组(92%)报告开始或完成评估。四个团队(31%)报告完全完成了评估;八个小组(61%)报告部分完成了他们的评估。团队确定了影响他们开始和完成评估的能力的共同促进因素和障碍。13个团队中有近一半(46%)——无论他们是否完成了评估——报告了至少一个项目或政策的共同改进,这是参与评估过程的结果。结论:以从业人员为中心的评价培训对于培养公共卫生专业人员及其多学科合作伙伴的关键评价技能至关重要。评估干预措施的过程——即使评估尚未完成——具有重大价值,并可推动公共卫生干预措施的改进。评估研究所可以作为培训公共卫生从业人员及其合作伙伴成功规划、启动、完成和利用评估来改进方案和政策的典范。关键词:评价;损伤;多学科合作;以从业人员为中心的评估培训;专业发展;项目和政策评估;公共卫生;技术援助;暴力
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信