Presentation on theme: "These slides summarize a two year audience research project conducted by two graduate students with an internal audience of NC DPH staff and managers."— Presentation transcript:
These slides summarize a two year audience research project conducted by two graduate students with an internal audience of NC DPH staff and managers. They conducted the research to address a major barrier we encountered to building social marketing capacity in the division: that staff and managers did not appreciate or utilize a formal model of program planning. Without this as a basis, it was difficult to teach them to use a social marketing planning model.
Assessment of Formal Program Planning at the NCDPH Claire M. Ervin Mike Newton-Ward Social Marketing Matrix Team Meeting 12/15/05
Introduction History of Program planning: Jenny Miller, MPH/Social Marketing Team research Current research Results Initiatives Challenge/Next Steps
Background: Jenny's Research Fall 2004, 3 Research Questions: Are SHD employees in NC using an organized or structured model for planning health promotion programs? How do employees compare to each other on their levels of motivation, opportunity, and ability to use both planning models and social marketing? (Rothschild's conceptual framework) What facilitates or hinders the use of planning models and social marketing?
Background: Jenny's Research Methods: Qualitative interviews (n=30): Examined factors that promoted or discouraged program planning and social marketing. Quantitative Surveys (n=63): Examined the behaviors, beliefs and perceptions of program planning and social marketing
Background: Jenny's Research Results Question 1: Are SHD employees in NC using an organized or structured model for planning health promotion programs? NO: The majority of planners do not use a formal program planning process. 18/ 29 respondents said they used a planning process, but could not state what process Models loosely followed or required from funding source. Program planning = team or collaborative process Interviewees stated that they understood the need for, and approved of, a formal program planning platform.
Background: Jenny's Research Results Question 2: How do employees compare on levels of motivation, opportunity, and ability for both planning models and social marketing? (Rothschild's conceptual framework) 10 respondents were inclined and apt to perform the desired behavior (program planning) Education needed. 9 respondents were less inclined/moderately inclined and associated more costs to using program planning or social marketing. Both education and marketing to bring about a behavior change. 44 respondents fell into the category of not wanting to change their behavior. Social marketing could have a potential impact on forty-three out of the sixty-three respondents
Background: Jenny's Research Results Question 3: What facilitates or hinders the use of planning models and social marketing? Barriers to program planning: lack of time; difficulty scheduling program planning meetings with team members; and lack of funding and resources. Barriers to Social Marketing: not understanding social marketing; inadequate staffing; lack of management support; time and cost; might be manipulative
Background: Jenny's Research Question 3: con't Facilitators to Program Planning: More financial and human resources Support from upper management Availability of tools and models Examples of program plans that met success Staff with right skill set Procedures incorporated into a branch to improve planning process Building the infrastructure for groups to share program planning procedures
Background: Jenny's Research Question 3: con't Facilitators to Social Marketing: Hiring of qualified staff or an in-house expert Additional resources (both human and financial) Real life examples and a template of social marketing in action Illustrate its successes **Some overlap with program planning as well
Background: Jenny's Research Key Take Aways: Formal Program planning and social marketing are not occurring with regularity. Program planners feel that a standardized program planning platform would be an excellent tool for planning health programs, BUT, due to the highlighted costs formal program planning as well as social marketing does not occur regularly. Before social marketing can truly take hold, planners must first realize the benefits of structured program planning.
Background: Jenny's Research Next Steps: Continued Research Before we can develop interventions to improve facilitators and lower costs, we must first know exactly: (research questions) What exact steps program planners are doing (since they are not following a model) How important the steps of program planning are? Examine both the frequency and importance of program planning steps
Current Research: Methods Methods Developed survey to answer questions Data points/Survey contents taken from the CDCynergy Social Marketing Edition 64 questions (32 questions asked for frequency and importance)
Current Research: Methods Methods : CDCynergy-Soc. phases Problem definition and description: How to develop a clear problem definition based upon secondary research. Problem analysis/Market Research: Audience selection and segmentation and an in-depth analysis of the market environment. Market Strategy: Pick the target audiences, develop interventions, and define the behaviors for each audience segmentation. Interventions: Turn the "plan" into the blueprint for the specific intervention. Monitor and Evaluation Plan: The plan for continued monitoring and evaluation of the interventions put in place. Implementation: Steps necessary to implement the interventions and evaluation process.
Current Research: Methods Methods Sample: Program planners ID by peers and NCDPH staff (n=36). Inclusion Criteria: Have experience with participating in, or leading the development and planning of a health initiative/program. Those people who apply for funding (Principal Investigators, or people who draft proposals) Project Managers who develop and implement health programs. 25 out of 33 surveys were returned -- a response rate of 75.7%.
Current Research: Results Major Theme: Ideological vs. applied implementation of planning. Program planners found planning to be much more important than actually implementing a program plan Frequency's total = 1750 Importance total = 1285 difference of 465 *lower score is better (1=most important/All the time)
Current Research: Results **The lower the score the better
Current Research: Results Why this dichotomy? Millers's work/Barriers outweigh Benefits: 2 biggest barriers to PP were time and Resources (human and $$) Team planning - 5 people tell me they had group resistance to planning.
Current Research: Results Frequency Planning Steps Completed Most Frequently
Current Research: Results Frequency The first few phases and steps are not done the most! This is alarming due to the fact that program planning is a building process - each phase and step builds on the one that precedes it. Instead of building a solid foundation and doing the necessary research at the beginning of planning a program, respondents start somewhere in the middle of the planning process.
Current Research: Results Frequency This fact is further compounded that elements of the 1st and 2nd phase are done the least
Current Research: Results Frequency Conclusions from Frequency: Are not implementing the necessary first phases of program planning Without conducting and completing the vital foundation for a program plan, the program will lack the necessary groundwork to be successful.
Not only are the last phases being done the most, but they are also believed to be the most important. This finding reinforces the results that building a health prevention/health education program on research is not deemed as important as the actual intervention itself. Only one of the top five steps done the most (Prepare for launch), made it into the list of the top five most important steps.
Four out of eight of these come from the first two phases of planning (questions 1.5, 2.1, 2.4, and 2.3), and four out of the five steps done the least are also found in top five steps found least important (questions 1.5, 2.1, 2.2, and 4.4).
Current Research: Results Importance From this data one could say that if a program planner believes a planning step is unimportant that can have a direct influence on their execution of that step. The correlation the other way is not as strong
Current Research: Discussion Inferred reasons from Miller's data as to why certain steps are preformed more and are more important. Non-random, census sample
Initiatives Developed 2 interventions Used CDCynergy-Soc. frame work and "My Model" Target Audience: Define the target audience for this program Behavior Change: What specific behavior do we want the audience to do Exchange/Benefits: What is the exchange and benefits the plan offers Strategy: Lower barriers and use the "4Ps"
Initiative #1 Top Down Initiative: Target Audience: Managers in programmatic sections of the NCDPH. Two of the biggest barriers to program planning were time and resources. Mangers have considerable impact in reducing those costs/barriers. Behavior Change: 2 Behaviors changes: Behavior #1: Role Model Behavior #2: Staff Encouragement
Initiative #1 Behavior #1: Role Model The behavior change for this program is for managers to practice and implement a formal planning process when they develop program plans in isolation or as a team member. How do we know when they do this? When they complete at least 75% of the CDCynergy-Soc. planning process or another comparable formal program plan. This 75% must include the necessary research phase and problem development and description steps. They must use a formal program plan from the beginning. The planning process should not start half way into a plan, but at its inception.
Initiative #1 Behavior #2: Staff Encouragement Encourage and promote the use of program planning with direct reports and staff. This encouragement should focus on the front end stages of planning -- the research and problem description phases. How do we know when they do this? Provide or arrange program planning trainings for their staff Provide time away from the office for these training and a per- diem Prioritize program planning over other activities when they conflict Verbal support Work plans: conducting program planning becomes a part of a staff members work plan.
Initiative #1 Behavior #1 Benefits: Role Modeling Exchange/Benefits Accountability: By following a formal program plan, managers will be able to account for the decisions made and money spent in the program. Funding: Funding sources will continue to fund successful programs and will also be more prone to fund proposals that have a outline structured program plan. Information sharing: By following a planning protocol, managers will be able to speak the same language to share best planning practices. The barriers to performing program planning and the reason for their current behavior (not using a formal program planning process), are knowledge, time and resources.
Initiative #1 Behavior #2 Benefits: Staff Encouragement Exchange/Benefits Accountability: Their staff will be able to document and support planning decisions made. Lighten Work Load: The better the staff develops program plans, the less work and supervision necessary by the manager. Reduction in Staff Turnover: Better program development leads to continued or more funding and this can promote a happier and more constant work force. As described, the benefits for the adoption of each of the behaviors overlap. The barriers for adoption are the same as well.
Initiative #1 Behavior #1: Role Modeling Strategy: "4Ps" Product: Training Program: Managers in programmatic sections. CDCynergy-Soc. CD. Success Stories Tools: Templates such as My Model - filled out; a resource guide. Behavior #2: Staff Encouragement The products for this program would include the above products developed for the managers, with one addition: Work Plan: Program planning would become a strategic part of a staff member's work plan.
Initiative #1 Place Behavior 1 & 2 On-line: The training, resource guide, and planning tools will all be offered on-line. In-office Training: one-on-one tutorial Time: Offered during the lunch hour and after "normal" working hours; offered in one long session or several short sessions. Date: Trainings offered during relevant times of the year; coincide with Federal funding cycles; national health events (breast cancer awareness month); current events and adverse event trainings.
Initiative #1 Price Behaviors 1 & 2 The "price" of adopting a behavior is addressed by all the 4Ps Products lower the price for both of the sought after behaviors. The barriers to program planning included time, resources, and knowledge -- each barrier is addressed by the developed products. The "place" of each product ensures that managers will have easy access to all products and they will be offered at varying convenient times. It is also important to note that all the offerings will be free of charge -- the only tangible cost is time.
Initiative #1 Promotion Behaviors 1 & 2 Letter from State Health Director Management Meetings: SHD iterate her desire for formal program planning Publications: Distribute publications that promote the use of program planning Newsletters/fact sheets/posters: Ensure that target audience knows all the information about the products and who to contact to ask questions.
Initiative #2 Staff Intervention Target Audience: Staff members in programmatic sections that participate in program planning. Behavior Change: Same as our first intervention for the managers. Follow a formal program plan when developing behavior change/health education programs. How do we know when they do this? When they complete at least 75% of the CDCynergy-Soc. planning process or another comparable formal program plan. Must include the necessary research, problem development, and description phases.
Initiative #2 Exchange/Benefits: Accountability: illustrate and support decisions and actions made in program implementation and development. Increase opportunity for funding and job security Universal Language: Best practice sharing Work Plan: By adopting this behavior, program staff would meet their work plan goals for program planning. Job Performance: In Miller's work several program planners stated they knew that following a program plan would improve their programs and ultimately they would be performing better.
Initiative #2 Strategy: Product, Price, Place are the same for both interventions Promotion: A letter from their managers: research has found people prefer to get information from their direct managers - gives green light for time and resources on program planning. Letter will also include fact sheet about training opportunities Work plan
Initiative #2 Promotion con't Announcements: made at staff meetings to promote program planning Posters, flyers and newsletters Success Stories: posters, emails about grants or programs that were successful due to program planning.
Initiative #2 Can we do this? Is this feasible? Do you feel like you have the training and time to pull this off? Do you want more research done? Thank you for all your help!