Health Care and Promotion Fund Project Expo 2006: Beginning with dissemination in mind: Characteristics of successful health promotion programs Dr. Charles.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Template: Making Effective Presentation about Your Evidence-based Health Promotion Program This template is intended for you to adapt to your own program.
Advertisements

Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness
Restructuring the Cancer Programs and Task Force Workgroups.
Using RE-AIM as a tool for Program Evaluation From Research to Practice.
EESE O&E Committee Update & Next Steps May 14, 2010.
1 Comprehensive Cancer Control In Action. What to expect today? Provide state-level forum for networking & sharing your org’s current survivorship initiatives.
CULTURAL COMPETENCY Technical Assistance Pre-Application Workshop.
Presentation by Cambodian Participants Phuket, Thailand February 2012 Health Impact Assessment Royal Government of Cambodia.
Compassion. Action. Change. CalMHSA Staff Recommendations for County PEI Funded Activities in Phase II FY CalMHSA Board of Directors Meeting December.
How to Evaluate Your Health Literacy Project Jill Lucht, MS Project Director, Center for Health Policy
The Community Engagement Studio: Strengthening Research Capacity through Community Engagement Consuelo H. Wilkins, MD, MSCI Executive Director, Meharry.
Schoolwide Positive Behavior Interventions and Support -SWPBIS- Mitchell L. Yell, Ph.D. University of South Carolina
Shaping the future of palliative care leadership: taking the reins Deborah Law Program Manager Workforce Innovation and Reform Health Workforce Australia.
Setting the Pace to Graduate Date1 Parent Mentor Partnership September 2013.
Program Evaluation and Measurement Janet Myers. Objectives for today… To define and explain concepts and terms used in program evaluation. To understand.
Linking Actions for Unmet Needs in Children’s Health
Addressing Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) in New Brunswick Stacy Taylor Department of Health January 24, 2012.
Health Aspect of Disaster Risk Assessment Dr AA Abubakar Department of Community Medicine Ahmadu Bello University Zaria Nigeria.
WORKING TOGETHER TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE-BASED HEALTHY AGING PROGRAMS: PUBLIC HEALTH, AGING, AND UNIVERSITY COMMUNITIES Lucinda L. Bryant PhD MSHA MBA, University.
1 Minority SA/HIV Initiative MAI Training SPF Step 3 – Planning Presented By: Tracy Johnson, CSAP’s Central CAPT Janer Hernandez, CSAP’s Northeast CAPT.
Evaluation. Practical Evaluation Michael Quinn Patton.
Healthy North Carolina 2020 and EBS/EBI 101 Joanne Rinker MS, RD, CDE, LDN Center for Healthy North Carolina Director of Training and Technical Assistance.
DC Home visiting Implementation and impact evaluation
Community Level Models; Participatory Research and Challenges
Essential Service # 7:. Why learn about the 10 Essential Services?  Improve quality and performance.  Achieve better outcomes – improved health, less.
Models for Program Planning in Health Promotion
Public Health Systems Research: What We Know and Need to Learn Glen P. Mays, PhD, MPH Department of Health Policy & Management UAMS College of Public Health.
STUDY PLANNING & DESIGN TO ENHANCE TRANSLATION OF HEALTH BEHAVIOR RESEARCH Lisa Klesges, Russell Glasgow, Paul Estabrooks, David Dzewaltowski, Sheana Bull.
From Evidence to Action: Addressing Challenges to Knowledge Translation in RHAs The Need to Know Team Meeting May 30, 2005.
HRSA’s Oral Health Goals and the Role of MCH Stephen R. Smith Senior Advisor to the Administrator Health Resources and Services Administration.
1 OPHS FOUNDATIONAL STANDARD BOH Section Meeting February 11, 2011.
Evaluating Dissemination of AHRQ CER Products Darren Mays, PhD, MPH Department of Oncology Georgetown University Medical Center Lombardi Comprehensive.
Approach and Key Components. The Goal of Cities for Life: To help community groups and primary care providers create an environment that facilitates and.
Increasing CRC Screening among Filipino Americans (Maxwell, Bastani, Danao, Crespi, UCLA. ACS ) Recruitment of subjects in 45 CBOs and churches.
My Own Health Report: Case Study for Pragmatic Research Marcia Ory Texas A&M Health Science Center Presentation at: CPRRN Annual Grantee Meeting October.
Implementation Science Vision 21: Linking Systems of Care June 2015 Lyman Legters.
Sabrina Dosanjh-Gantner and Theresa Healy Facilitating Relationships: Northern Health’s Partnering for Healthier Communities Approach.
Measuring and Improving Practice and Results Practice and Results 2006 CSR Baseline Results Measuring and Improving Practice and Results Practice and Results.
CONNECTICUT HEALTH FOUNDATION: Update on Evaluation Planning for the Strategic Plan.
IAOD Evaluation Section, the Development Agenda (DA) and Development Oriented Activities Julia Flores Marfetan, Senior Evaluator.
Barbara Resnick, PhD, CRNP, FAAN, FAANP
Alaska Staff Development Network – Follow-Up Webinar Emerging Trends and issues in Teacher Evaluation: Implications for Alaska April 17, :45 – 5:15.
Socio-behavioral Issues in Aging and HIV: Critical for Success in Prevention and Care Sherry Deren Center for Drug Use and HIV Research, NYU College of.
Prepared by the North Dakota State Data Center July HNDECA and ECCS Evaluation Dr. Richard Rathge Professor and Director North Dakota State Data.
Integrating Knowledge Translation and Exchange into a grant Maureen Dobbins, RN, PhD SON, January 14, 2013.
Maria E. Fernandez, Ph.D. Associate Professor Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences University of Texas, School of Public Health.
A GP for Me Making it Work in Victoria November 27, 2013.
Copyright 2012 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. Chapter 9 Improving Quality in Health Care Organizations.
NHII 03 Consumer Health Track Group A Presented by: Jonathan Wald, MD, MPH Partners Healthcare This presentation does not necessarily reflect the views.
Policies and Procedures for Civil Society Participation in GEF Programme and Projects presented by GEF NGO Network ECW.
Consultant Advance Research Team. Outline UNDERSTANDING M&E DATA NEEDS PEOPLE, PARTNERSHIP AND PLANNING 1.Organizational structures with HIV M&E functions.
Developing a Framework In Support of a Community of Practice in ABI Jason Newberry, Research Director Tanya Darisi, Senior Researcher
Nevada State Innovation Model (SIM) Delivery System and Payment Alignment May 6,
Mt. Hood. IOM Report: 10 Years After & More Coming Mitch Greenlick, Ph.D. Oregon State Representative April 21, 2010.
1 CHRONIC CONDITION SELF-MANAGEMENT FLINDERS HUMAN BEHAVIOUR & HEALTH RESEARCH UNIT THE FLINDERS MODEL.
Georgia Comprehensive Cancer Control Program 3/10/2015 Program Monitoring and Evaluation Activities Short-Term Outcomes Long-Term Outcomes Intermediate.
HPTN Ethics Guidance for Research: Community Obligations Africa Regional Working Group Meeting, May 19-23, 2003 Lusaka, Zambia.
Resource Review for Teaching Resource Review for Teaching Victoria M. Rizzo, LCSW-R, PhD Jessica Seidman, LMSW Columbia University School of Social Work.
RE-AIM Framework. RE-AIM: A Framework for Health Promotion Planning, Implementation and Evaluation Are we reaching the intended audience? Is the program.
Implementation Science: Finding Common Ground and Perspectives Laura Reichenbach, Evidence Project, Population Council International Conference on Family.
TECHNICAL Review: M&E Strategy and Indicators DR HARRIET KIVUMBI, PUBLIC HEALTH SPECIALIST, ACCESS-SMC.
Program Planning for Evidence-based Health Programs.
Overview: Evidence-based Health Promotion and Disease Management Programs.
Putting people first, with the goal of helping all Michiganders lead healthier and more productive lives, no matter their stage in life. 1.
Incorporating Evaluation into a Clinical Project
Evidence-based Practice v. Practice-based Evidence
Blueprint Outlines practical, consumer-focused, state and local strategies for improving eating and physical activity that will lead to healthier lives.
Performance and Quality Improvement
Program Planning: Models and Theories
The Norwalk Story: How one community is using the Ages and Stages Questionnaires (ASQ®) to build a system for developmental screening for young children.
Presentation transcript:

Health Care and Promotion Fund Project Expo 2006: Beginning with dissemination in mind: Characteristics of successful health promotion programs Dr. Charles C. Chan Co-Chair Promotion Sub-committee Health Care and Promotion Fund Committee Health, Welfare and Food Bureau 22 nd May, 2006

The purpose of the HCPF - to foster and support efforts in health promotion and disease prevention.

The HCPF provides financial support to: 1.Health promotion projects by non-profit organizations that help people adopt healthier lifestyles by enhancing awareness, changing behavior or creating an environment that supports good health practices; 2.Research related to health promotion and preventive care. Research projects provide an information base for health promotion interventions that enhance good health and the prevention and early detection of disease and disability. (No HCPF research grants have been awarded since 2002.)

Two perennial questions bothering potential applicants to HCPF 1.Non-research projects : Why do we still have to collect evidence of changes in awareness, behavior and environment that support good health practice? 2.Dissemination : Why would another NPO want to do what we are doing?

Decision makers in health care are increasingly interested in using high quality scientific evidence to support clinical and health policy choices……. Reliable evidence is essential to improve health care quality and to support efficient use of limited resources. Journal of American Medical Association 2003; 290:

The HCPF is obliged to identify the vital characteristics of interventions that enables an intervention to: 1.reach large number of people, and especially those who can most benefit; 2.be widely adopted by different and representative stakeholders and settings; 3.be consistently implemented by staff members and / or community volunteers with moderate level of training and supervision; 4.produce replicable and long-lasting effects (and minimal or no negative impacts) at reasonable cost.

To facilitate further improvement of the quality of project applications, future projects will be encouraged to adopt: 1.multilevel approaches, 2.increasing focus on social contextual factors, and 3.infrastructures built for sustaining and disseminating prevention programs known to be effective in Hong Kong.

Core Questions & Corresponding Strategies for Proposal Preparation Utilizing the RE-AIM framework (Glasgow et al, 2003; 2004) as a planning approach to enhance translation and dissemination, a list of core questions and corresponding strategies were developed, which may be useful to our community stakeholders in proposal preparation.

Reach (Individual Level) The absolute number, proportion, and representativeness of individuals who are willing to participate in a given initiative, intervention, or program. Core QuestionsCorresponding Strategies 1. What percentage of the target population would come in contact with your program? Use a multiple channel, multi- stage plan of recruitment of target population. 2. Do you have a plan (by stage) to reaching the most needy? Funding elements may include those addressing reduction of participation barriers.

Efficacy / Effectiveness (Individual Level) The impact of an intervention on important outcomes, including potential negative effects, quality of life, and economic outcomes. Core QuestionsCorresponding Strategies 1. How effective will the intervention likely to affect key targeted outcomes? Consider examples of tiered care approaches or intervention tailoring methods. 2. Do you expect any unintended adverse consequences? Funding elements may include adverse outcome evaluation and cost-benefit analysis.

Adoption (Setting or Organizational Level) The absolute number, proportion, and representativeness of settings and intervention agents (people who deliver the program) who are willing to initiate a program. Core QuestionsCorresponding Strategies 1. What percentage of the targeted settings and organizations (including high- risk or underserved population) will agree to take on this program? In the case of multi-site applicants, it is important to build-up profiles of settings known to have contact with the target population as potential adoption settings. 2. What kind of motivation package(s) likely to increase the fit between your program and targeted organizational goals and capacity? Funding elements may include cost of adoption, i.e., staff willingness, service re- prioritization (or customization of intervention) and staff-community network capacity enhancement.

Implementation (Setting or Organizational Level) At the setting level, implementation refers to the intervention agents' fidelity to the various elements of an intervention's protocol, including consistency of delivery as intended and the time and cost of the intervention. Core QuestionsCorresponding Strategies 1. What proportion of staff (at different levels) and community partners (including lay persons) within a setting and / or a community will agree to program delivery? Consider alternatives of delivery agents (staff, lay persons, or combinations of staff-lay partnerships, etc.) and process (full or partial automation of the program) with training and supportive supervision of lay partners. 2. What is needed to increase the likelihood that various components will be delivered as intended? Funding elements may include mechanisms of providing feedback and recognition for adherence to implementation.

Maintenance (Individual or Setting Level) The extent to which a program or policy becomes institutionalized or part of the routine organizational practices and policies. Within the RE-AIM framework, maintenance also applies at the individual level. At the individual level, maintenance has been defined as the long-term effects of a program on outcomes after 6 or more months after the most recent intervention contact. Core QuestionsCorresponding Strategies 1. What are the characteristics of persons and settings showing maintenance of the intended program impact? Taking into consideration the status of existing community efforts, including natural environment and natural helpers in the maintenance of the desired behavioral changes. 2. What kind of motivation package(s) is likely to help building the infrastructures needed to sustain further dissemination of the program? Exploration of multiple funding sources to support follow-up assessments on characteristics of successes at both the individual and setting levels.

The HCPFC is exploring ways in which the spirit of health promotion will take root in the communities of Hong Kong by considering: 1.Its role as a regional clearinghouse of successful health promotion programs. 2.Systematic effort in linking successful community practices with university research teams, and that of isolated initiatives from the private sector. 3.Measures to enhance stakeholders efforts in transforming their current capacities into facilitating resources and infrastructures necessary for longer-term implementation of effective programs.

Reference 1.Glasgow, R.E., Lichtenstein, E., Marcus, A.C. (2003). Why don’t we see more translation of health promotion resarech to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 8, Glasgow, R.E., Klesges, L.M., Dzewaltowski, D., Bull, S.S., Estabrooks, P. (2004). The future of health behavior change research: What is needed to improve translation of research into health promotion practice? Annuals of Behavioral Medicine, 27, Solomon, S., Kington, R. (2002). National efforts to promote behavior-change research: Views from the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research. Health Education Research, 17, Tunis, S.R., Stryer, D.B., Clancy, C.M. (2003). Practical clinical trials: Increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. Journal of the American Medical Association, 290, effective programs.