Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

-A DHPE Approach- Tiffany Cox, MPH, CPH DHPE Fellow Connecticut Department of Public Health Copyright © 2014 DHPE.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "-A DHPE Approach- Tiffany Cox, MPH, CPH DHPE Fellow Connecticut Department of Public Health Copyright © 2014 DHPE."— Presentation transcript:

1 -A DHPE Approach- Tiffany Cox, MPH, CPH DHPE Fellow Connecticut Department of Public Health Copyright © 2014 DHPE

2  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

3  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

4 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 ( ) Copyright © 2014 DHPE

5

6  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

7  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

8  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

9 HANDOUT Copyright © 2014 DHPE

10 Discuss overarching impact goals and categories for your particular workgroup Refer to Handout J for example Copyright © 2014 DHPE

11 Identify 3-4 recommendations you’d like to further analyze, then complete the last column in Worksheet 4 Copyright © 2014 DHPE

12 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

13 1. Stakeholder Log a.Complete individually first, then 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

14 Worksheet 2 Copyright © 2014 DHPE

15 2. Stakeholder Power Analysis a.See Handout I for example b.Individually, then discussed by workgroup members during a conference call Copyright © 2014 DHPE

16 HANDOUT Copyright © 2014 DHPE

17 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

18

19 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

20 1. Stakeholder Log – individually, then 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

21 Honest differences of views and honest debate are not disunity. They are the vital process of policy-making among free men. -Herbert Hoover ( ) Copyright © 2014 DHPE

22


Download ppt "-A DHPE Approach- Tiffany Cox, MPH, CPH DHPE Fellow Connecticut Department of Public Health Copyright © 2014 DHPE."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google