Field Trial of Local Nutrition Plans and Programs Monitoring and Evaluation Protocol in the Philippines

IF 0.4 Q4 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Leila S. Africa, N. Tandang, M. Talavera, N. Querijero, W. B. Carada, Kristine V. Montecillo, A. Bustos, A. Juras, Mayo Grace C. Amit, Hygeia Ceres Catalina B. Gawe, Jasmine Anne F. Tandingan
{"title":"Field Trial of Local Nutrition Plans and Programs Monitoring and Evaluation Protocol in the Philippines","authors":"Leila S. Africa, N. Tandang, M. Talavera, N. Querijero, W. B. Carada, Kristine V. Montecillo, A. Bustos, A. Juras, Mayo Grace C. Amit, Hygeia Ceres Catalina B. Gawe, Jasmine Anne F. Tandingan","doi":"10.25182/jgp.2021.16.2.71-80","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The field trial was conducted to establish the reliability in producing similar results between evaluators of the proposed new tools for Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) of the nutrition plans and programs in the Local Government Units (LGUs). To do this, orientation activities were conducted to familiarize the 46 M&E team (MET) members evaluating the provincial, municipal, city, and barangay levels in two regions with the proposed tools during the field trial. After the event, the perceptions of the MET members of the tools were gathered by asking them to rate the tools through a self-administered questionnaire, and by noting their written and verbal commentaries about the proposed system. During the field trial, each MET member, as well as the member of the Project Team (PT), individually evaluated the LGUs usingthe tools. Secondary data on the LGUs performance scores using the old system were also gathered. The MET members’ perception was examined based on the median rank of their ratings and content analysis of their insights about the tools, whereas the reliability of the tools was assessed based on the interrater reliability of the MET members’ scores for the LGUs analyzed through paired samples t-Test, Pearson correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient, and technical error of measurement. The weighted scores of the MET and PT members were also compared. Moreover, the difference in the generated scores between the old and the new system was determined. The findings revealed that the MET members generally have a positive perception of the new system but raised some issues and concerns. Although the reliability of the tools was generally observed, actions are warranted for improvement. The tools generated statistically different scores when used by MET and PT members, and when compared to the existing system. Steps should be taken to improve the reliability of the proposed tools.","PeriodicalId":41982,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25182/jgp.2021.16.2.71-80","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The field trial was conducted to establish the reliability in producing similar results between evaluators of the proposed new tools for Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) of the nutrition plans and programs in the Local Government Units (LGUs). To do this, orientation activities were conducted to familiarize the 46 M&E team (MET) members evaluating the provincial, municipal, city, and barangay levels in two regions with the proposed tools during the field trial. After the event, the perceptions of the MET members of the tools were gathered by asking them to rate the tools through a self-administered questionnaire, and by noting their written and verbal commentaries about the proposed system. During the field trial, each MET member, as well as the member of the Project Team (PT), individually evaluated the LGUs usingthe tools. Secondary data on the LGUs performance scores using the old system were also gathered. The MET members’ perception was examined based on the median rank of their ratings and content analysis of their insights about the tools, whereas the reliability of the tools was assessed based on the interrater reliability of the MET members’ scores for the LGUs analyzed through paired samples t-Test, Pearson correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient, and technical error of measurement. The weighted scores of the MET and PT members were also compared. Moreover, the difference in the generated scores between the old and the new system was determined. The findings revealed that the MET members generally have a positive perception of the new system but raised some issues and concerns. Although the reliability of the tools was generally observed, actions are warranted for improvement. The tools generated statistically different scores when used by MET and PT members, and when compared to the existing system. Steps should be taken to improve the reliability of the proposed tools.
菲律宾地方营养计划和方案监测与评价方案的实地试验
进行实地试验是为了确定评估人员对地方政府单位(lgu)营养计划和方案的监测和评估(M&E)提出的新工具之间产生类似结果的可靠性。为了做到这一点,在现场试验期间,进行了定向活动,以使46名M&E团队(MET)成员熟悉所提出的工具,这些工具在两个地区的省、市、市和村级进行评估。活动结束后,通过要求MET成员通过自我管理的问卷对工具进行评级,并记录他们对拟议系统的书面和口头评论,收集他们对工具的看法。在现场试验期间,每个MET成员以及项目团队(PT)成员都使用该工具对lgu进行了单独评估。还收集了使用旧系统的地方政府部门绩效评分的辅助数据。MET成员的感知是基于他们的评级的中位数排名和他们对工具的见解的内容分析来检验的,而工具的可靠性是基于MET成员对LGUs得分的间信度来评估的,通过配对样本t检验、Pearson相关系数、类内相关系数和测量的技术误差来分析。MET和PT成员的加权分数也进行了比较。此外,还确定了新旧系统之间生成分数的差异。调查结果显示,MET成员普遍对新系统持积极态度,但也提出了一些问题和担忧。虽然这些工具的可靠性得到了普遍的观察,但仍有必要采取行动加以改进。当MET和PT成员使用这些工具时,以及与现有系统进行比较时,这些工具产生的统计分数不同。应采取措施提高所建议工具的可靠性。
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
Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan
Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan NUTRITION & DIETETICS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信