We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byEthan Reed
Modified about 1 year ago
-A DHPE Approach- Tiffany Cox, MPH, CPH DHPE Fellow Connecticut Department of Public Health Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Overview of tools and process ◦ Background about DHPE and suggested tools ◦ Developing impact categories and goals ◦ Selection of recommendations to analyze ◦ Impact analysis Suggested next steps ◦ Stakeholder Log ◦ Stakeholder Power Analysis ◦ Combining to identify ranking of solutions Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Directors of Health Promotion and Education (DHPE) is a professional association founded in 1946 with voting members representing the health promotion function in each state, territory, or indigenous nation Key areas include: school health, health equity, and shaping policy for health Shaping Policy for Health (SPH) Curriculum was developed through a CDC cooperative agreement with DHPE Curriculum developers are from UNC (Chapel Hill) – James Emery, MPH and Carolyn Crump, PhD Copyright © 2014 DHPE
A policy is a temporary creed liable to be changed, but while it holds good it has got to be pursued with apostolic zeal. -Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Problems are not just about “health” Important political core values include: ◦ Efficiency of market dynamics/allocation ◦ Liberty and freedom to choose ◦ Equity of outcomes or market distributions ◦ Security of outcomes or conditions Other goal terms could be used (i.e. social justice, accessibility, transparency, etc.) Competing values ◦ Security and equity vs. efficiency and liberty Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Not all goals are equal Which criteria are more important? ◦ Client values ◦ Powerful stakeholders’ values ◦ Level of rigor in measurement ◦ Evidence Important goals can be weighted more easily than others Weighting method: percent distribution Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Phrases that operationalize and define the goals in measurable terms Denote what will be observed/measured Similar to evaluation measures Can be quantitative or qualitative Sources to identify impact categories: ◦ Stakeholder perspectives ◦ Research literature ◦ Expert opinions ◦ Coalition members Keep devoid of direction Standardize quantities (using percentages and rates, rather than raw quantities) Copyright © 2014 DHPE
HANDOUT Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Discuss overarching impact goals and categories for your particular workgroup Refer to Handout J for example Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Identify 3-4 recommendations you’d like to further analyze, then complete the last column in Worksheet 4 Copyright © 2014 DHPE
1. Start plugging in Impact goals, goal weights, impact categories, and solutions in Worksheet 5 2. Start discussing impact scores (-1, 0, 1): higher number reflects more positive score 3. Proceed to calculate subtotal scores and then totals 4. Refer to Handout K for example Copyright © 2014 DHPE
1. Stakeholder Log a.Complete individually first, then email to group leader to compile. b.Refer to the partially completed example on obesity. c.The group leader will then send a partially completed Stakeholder Power Analysis (SPA) worksheet to all workgroup members, using the information submitted in the stakeholder logs. Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Worksheet 2 Copyright © 2014 DHPE
2. Stakeholder Power Analysis a.See Handout I for example b.Individually, then discussed by workgroup members during a conference call Copyright © 2014 DHPE
HANDOUT Copyright © 2014 DHPE
3. Combining the results a. See Handout L for example b. Marijane Carey will then combine the group’s SPA and Impact Analysis, then share with workgroups. Copyright © 2014 DHPE
4. Interpreting combined results – second conference call to interpret, discuss, and agree on final rankings 5. Coalition meeting – workgroups will present final ranking decisions and recommendations with larger Coalition group. Coalition will discuss and provide input. 6. Formalize recommendations - following this meeting, volunteers from each workgroup will create a short policy brief and/or complete the final recommendation template provided by the group leader Copyright © 2014 DHPE
1. Stakeholder Log – individually, then email to the group leader to compile. The group leader will then send a partially completed Stakeholder Power Analysis (SPA) worksheet to all workgroup members. 2. Stakeholder Power Analysis (see Handout I for example) – individually, then discussed by workgroup members during a conference call. 3. Combining the results (see Handout L for example) – The group leader Carey will combine the group’s SPA and Impact Analysis, then share with workgroups. 4. Interpreting combined results – second workgroup conference call to interpret, discuss, and agree on final rankings. 5. Coalition meeting – workgroups will present final ranking decisions and recommendations with larger Coalition group. Coalition will discuss and provide input. 6. Formalize recommendations - Following, this meeting volunteers from each workgroup will create a short policy brief and/or complete the final recommendation template provided by the group leader. Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Honest differences of views and honest debate are not disunity. They are the vital process of policy-making among free men. -Herbert Hoover (1874-1964) Copyright © 2014 DHPE
Copyright © 2010, 2006, 2002 by Mosby, Inc., an affiliate of Elsevier Inc. Chapter 10 Evidence-Based Practice Sharon E. Lock.
PPA 503 – The Public Policy Making Process Lecture 4d – Definition: Frame the Problem.
Empowering tobacco-free coalitions to collect local data on worksite and restaurant smoking policies Mary Michaud, MPP University of Wisconsin-Cooperative.
Drawing by Mankoff: copyright 1993 The New Yorker Magazine, Inc.
Research Lead The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill coastalhazardscenter.org 1 Measuring Community Recovery: Developing Healthy Community Recovery.
The TIDE impact assessment methodology TIDE Final Conference Barcelona, September 2015 Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy Oliver.
Professional growth Objectives 1)Pilot program 2)Familiarize/re-familiarize ourselves with new Standards and Indicators 3)Consider the importance of data.
Connecticut Department of Public Health Healthy Connecticut 2020 The CT State Health Improvement Planning Process Background,
Using the "Shaping Policy for Health” analysis tools to develop an action-oriented Plan to Improve Birth Outcomes Rebecca Allen, Senior Manager, CT Community.
Shifting resources: disinvestment and re-investment Craig Mitton, PhD Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research.
Knowledge Translation Curriculum Module 3: Priority Setting Lesson 2 - Interpretive Priority Setting Processes.
Copyright © 2014 by The University of Kansas Health Impact Assessment.
European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education Project updates Marcella Turner-Cmuchal.
Some business of External QA: Transparency (reports), measuring impacts, follow up implementation, expected benefits, strategies for the future Josep Grifoll.
Jeanne M. Clerc, Ed.D. Western Illinois University (WIU) October 14, 2011.
Copyright 2005 by CH2M HILL The Challenge for Consultants Glen T. Daigger, Ph.D., P.E., DEE, NAE Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
DON MARIANOS, DDS, MPH ORAL HEALTH 2014 INITIATIVE WEBINAR MAY 11, 2012 Prevention & Dental Public Health (DPH) Infrastructure: A State Oral Health Program.
ASSESSMENT IN HIAs Elizabeth J. Fuller, DrPH, MSPH Georgia Health Policy Center.
1 Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board Meeting March 6, 2012 Discussion for the Final Evaluation of Milestones.
Provider Peer Grouping: Project Overview James I. Golden, PhD Director, Division of Health Policy Minnesota Department of Health SCI National Meeting May.
Dissemination and Use of Results from OVC Program Evaluations Florence Nyangara, PhD MEASURE Evaluation/Futures Group Dissemination Meeting, September.
Copyright Course Technology Chapter 11: Project Procurement Management.
Washington State Department of Social & Health Services – Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery - PRI One Department Vision Mission Core set of Values.
Using the Policy Brief as a Communication Tool for Stimulating Public Health Action Donna Nichols, MSEd, CHES DHPE Health Policy and Partnerships Director.
NACDD Hill Day: Legislative Visits What to Expect Mari T. Brick, MA Program Consultant, NACDD
Problem Solving and decision making Your name goes here Your course position goes here Your totem goes here, you may use a build if you desire.
Objectives and Criteria: What are they and how do we use them? Where do they come from? What are the “must-have” criteria? How are market and government.
Violence Against Women and Girls A Compendium of Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators.
CHAPTER 13 Government and Public Policy 1. Public Policy in the Political Process 2 Conflict Over the Ends of Government Public policy is “whatever.
BY Karen Liu, Ph. D. Indiana State University August 18,
Copyright © 2014 by The University of Kansas Generating and Choosing Solutions.
National Health Security Preparedness Index Briefing Slides.
Public Health Entrepreneurship Peter D. Jacobson, JD, MPH University of Michigan School of Public Health Jeffrey Wasserman, PhD RAND Corporation Presented.
Including School Stakeholders. There are many individuals and groups associated with schools and many of these people are likely to have valuable ideas.
Improving Data Quality and Quality Assurance in Newborn Screening by Including the Bloodspot Screening Collection Device Serial Number on Birth Certificates.
Student Assessment Inventory for School Districts Wednesday, June 11, :00-4:00pm ET.
Citizens’ contributions to the public agenda on animal cloning: project manager Ida-Elisabeth Andersen Structure of the presentation: 1.What is the Danish.
Chapter 9: Small-Group Communication and Problem Solving.
Support National Social Protection Strategy (NSPS) CARD/SPCU 1.
CDC Journal Evaluation Project Overview Journal “weighted value” scores Spreadsheet: UC Journal Title Values Voting instructions Questions, discussion,
The Policy Paradox: Interpreting Goals Through the Market and Polis PA 306 Farley.
Structural uncertainty from an economists’ perspective Laura Bojke Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
Political Leadership How to influence! And Current OH Issues Carol Bannister Royal College of Nursing of the United Kingdom.
Milkovich/Newman: Compensation, Ninth Edition McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 3 Defining.
Assessment & Program Review President’s Retreat 2008 College of Micronesia - FSM May 13 – 15, 2008 FSM China Friendship Sports Center.
Practice-based Doctoral Dissertations: Lessons Learned from the Executive Doctoral Program in Health Leadership (DrPH)
Monitoring through Walk-Throughs Participants are expected to purpose the book: The Three-Minute Classroom Walk- Through: Changing School Supervisory Practice.
By Dr. Talat AnwarAdvisor Centre for Policy Studies, CIIT, Islamabad Centre for Policy Studies, CIIT, Islamabad
Career success of women managers in the Thailand petroleum industry Dr. Ubonwan Rawd-iam 15 th April 2009.
AdvocacyAdvocacy. Definition Advocacy is influencing decision-makers. Advocacy is championing an issue, drawing attention to it, and getting it on.
© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.