1 / 61

Evaluation: Exploring a Reporting Framework – The Community Nutrition Education Logic Model

Evaluation: Exploring a Reporting Framework – The Community Nutrition Education Logic Model. Helen Chipman Program Coordinator, FSNEP, CSREES/USDA Prepared for ASNNA Post-Conference, Washington DC 28 February 2003. Getting to the Same Page. Purposes – To answer questions

brianna
Download Presentation

Evaluation: Exploring a Reporting Framework – The Community Nutrition Education Logic Model

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation: Exploring aReporting Framework –The Community Nutrition Education Logic Model Helen Chipman Program Coordinator, FSNEP, CSREES/USDA Prepared for ASNNA Post-Conference, Washington DC 28 February 2003

  2. Getting to the Same Page • Purposes – To answer questions • What are we getting for our nearly 400 million dollar investment (199 million food stamp administrative dollars)? • Are we making a difference with our target population? • Why Developed • Needed for CES/Land Grant System – a national report that reflects impact without loosing the richness of program diversity Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  3. Getting to the Same Page • Framework – to report what happens in the short, medium and long term, with respect to individuals/households, institutions/communities, social structures/policies • Outcomes – core areas identified by FNS commissioned white papers • Theoretical basis, use of well known model Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  4. Getting to the Same Page • Developed within Extension/Land Grant System; others had opportunity to provide input, recommendations incorporated into the model (all networks, youth evaluation workgroup, FNS/Food Stamp Program - nationally) • FNS has accepted use of the CNE Logic Model, with disclaimer – not exclusively Food Stamp Nutrition Education Logic Model Pesentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  5. Getting to the Same Page • Does not replace reports/information requested by FNS • Information requested should be readily available for transfer to other reports, whoever the stakeholder is • Pilot effort – learn what states have; refine based on what is already in place • Identify gaps (in states and nationally) - strengthen planning/implementation Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  6. Getting to the Same Page • Is something where we had nothing! • Is live – the www.csrees-fsnep.org website contains: • Two training modules: 1) logic models in general; 2) CNE Logic Model specifically • The CNE Logic Model (module 2, section 3) • Worksheet for states to use in preparing state reports (module 2, section 3) Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  7. The State Report • For Extension/Land Grant System; others can use if desired • Will be used to communicate regionally and nationally about Food Stamp Nutrition Education – to tell the story • Information from FY 2002 – make it strong and complete, but brief • States can send 1 or 2 reports (may or may not send separate network report) Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  8. The State Report • State coordinators/directors or their designees to complete • Email attachment to secretary of Helen Chipman • Contractor will aggregate into regional and national reports; also provide feedback to states Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  9. The State Report • Projected timeline* • April 15, 2003 – report due to Helen’s secretary • June 30, 2003 – feedback to states • August 15, 2003 – regional and national reports available on the national website • Actual times depend on what we receive and contractual arrangements we are able to make to develop the reports Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  10. State Reports – Network Considerations • Are considerable number contracted through the Extension/Land Grant System – important to report • Socio-ecological model partially collapsed to reduce complexity (institutions/communities) • Endpoints – model doesn’t resolve the ongoing discussion; determined from FNS guidance/research Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  11. Steps Taken to Explain “How to Complete the Worksheet” • Asked Joyce Counihan to review the worksheet; comments incorporated into web-based document • Reviewed “Food Stamp Nutrition Education Networks – Partners for Better Health” Publication • Completed the worksheet based on information state Networks provided, national statistics, and some extrapolation Presentation by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  12. Situation Statement: Description of State’s Food Stamp Population • State population – 6 million people • State poverty rate – 15% • State food stamp participation 60% of 1,000,000 eligible; average of $185 food stamp benefits/household/month • Children & seniors disproportionately represented ____ % children; ____ % seniors; ____ single parent homes… • Gender, race, household composition… Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  13. Situation Statement: Description of State’s Food Stamp Population, cont. • Dietary Quality: Substantial percentages of households falling short of RDAs – 69% of iron, 79% of folate • Food Security – In 2001, 50% of food stamp participants experienced some level of food insecurity, which they attributed to lack of financial resources (ref); 30 thousand experienced outright hunger (ref) Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  14. Situation Statement: Description of State’s Food Stamp Population, cont. • Rising demands at food banks – emergency food providers around the state attribute the increase in demand to working families; the faltering economy, and… Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  15. Situation Statement: Description of Issues of Concern • Dietary Quality • Poor iron absorption despite high iron intakes – question link to enriched and fortified foods • Increased obesity rates • Decreased meals together as families • Low intake fruits and vegetables • General poor nutrition among seniors Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  16. Situation Statement: Description of Issues of Concern, cont. • Food Security • Lack of food access • Transportation issues • Other barriers (list) • Food Safety • Identify • Shopping Behavior/Food Resource Management • Identify Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  17. Situation Statement: State’s Objectives for FY 2002 • Encourage increased fruits and vegetable consumption by limited resource individuals • Increase consumption of low-fat, calcium-rich foods • Increase physical activity of limited resource individuals by 3% • Connect state objectives to Healthy People 2010 Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  18. Situation Statement: State’s Objectives for FY 2002 • Increase participation in Food Stamp Nutrition Education • Increase participation in the Food Stamp Program by eligible persons • Strengthen the abilities of community nutrition coalitions to increase healthful nutrition and physical activity practices among low-income audiences Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  19. Inputs: Financial Resources – Budgeted Dollars • FNS Funds: $499,000 • Matching Funds, state: $260,000 • Matching Funds, local/other: $241,000 • Total: $1,000,000 Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  20. Inputs: Financial Resources – Budgeted Dollars, comments • State funds – State government and university, state grants • Local funds – County government, local network partner funds, local grants • Does not include private in-kind contributions, other federal funds • Additional state/local contribution of $50,000 not included in cost share Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  21. Inputs: Planning Process • Conduct needs assessment/analyze the situation • Segment and select the target audience • Conduct formative research • Set goals and objectives • Develop marketing and communication strategies • Conduct concept and content pre-testing Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  22. Inputs: Planning Process, cont. • Develop promotion plan and communication materials • Pre-test, refine, and produce materials • Implement program/conduct social marketing campaign • Conduct process and outcome/impact evaluation at all stages • Revise as needed Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  23. Inputs: Materials – Curriculum Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  24. Inputs: Materials – Educational Media • Include content that is not as extensive as a specific curriculum and not part of social marketing campaign Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  25. Inputs: Materials – Social Marketing Campaign • Jump ‘N Jive... Come Alive with Fruit -- includes tip sheets, interactive displays, posters, newsletter articles, school lunch menu backs, food demonstrations and food sampling, stickers and balloons… Contact (name, institution/agency, state, email address, phone) Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  26. Inputs: Materials – Social Marketing Campaign • Pick a Better Snack™ -- promotes fruits and vegetables as snacks; includes public service announcements recipes, newspaper/newsletter articles, videos… Contact (name, institution/agency, state, email address, phone) Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  27. Inputs: People – Expertise • Steering committee – professionals with expertise in nutrition, management, marketing, finances, education…. • Network composition – number of persons, description of expertise, etc. Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  28. Inputs: People – Accountability • Routine fiscal, personnel, affirmative action audits within university/ institutional system; quarterly reports to grants and contracts office; time and effort reporting (plan confirmation/ other) • Periodic reporting to/from partner agencies (describe) Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  29. Inputs: People – Accountability, cont. • Accountability procedures within partner infrastructures (describe) • Annual face-to-face meeting with state food stamp fiscal office representative Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  30. Inputs: People – Intra-Institutional Relationships (STATE Level) • Collaboration between your state Food Stamp agency and other state agencies that administer FNS and other USDA programs • Team Nutrition/Food Stamp Program Partnership – Why needed, how compliment, but do not duplicate • WIC – FSNEP Partnership – Why needed, how compliment, but not duplicate • EFNEP – Same • Others Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  31. Inputs: People – Intra-Institutional Relationships (STATE Level), cont. • Head Start Consortium – access to low-income parents of young children • Fruit & Vegetable Growers Association – provide foods for social marketing campaign to low income families • 5 African American Organizations, 3 Tribal Organizations, 2 Faith-Based Organizations – access to limited resource population Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  32. Outputs: Individual/Household Activities Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  33. Outputs: Individual/Household Participation Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  34. Outputs: Individual/Household Participation – Comments • Direct methods – 12 lessons per child – 3-5 years old – in head start classes • Indirect methods – posters, bookmarks, signage, billboards newsletters, calendars, radio, and newspapers Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  35. Outputs: Institution/Community Activities Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  36. Outputs: Institution/Community Participation Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  37. Outputs: Institution/Community – Comments • School districts – primarily middle school and high schools • Private – supermarkets, neighborhood markets, and warehouse stores Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  38. Outputs: Social Structures, Policies, Practices – Activities Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  39. Outputs: Social Structures, Policies, Practices – Participation • Many Faces of Food and Agriculture – bus tour with continuing dialogue: included network stakeholders, industry leaders, and public officials to provide first-hand look at food production, delivery, and consumption issues in low-income area of state, with special attention to examining impact of issues and the system on low income citizens Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  40. Impact Statement -- # 1 • Objective – 3-5 year old children try new foods • Indicator ID – DQ 1 • Core Element – Dietary Quality • Level of Intervention – Individual/Household and/or Community/Institutions • Time Frame – Short Term Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  41. Impact Statement #1, cont. • In 2002, preschool children who attended head start or preschool participated in a 12-week “new-foods” intervention class. Of the 432 children that participated in a “tasting party” evaluation at the conclusion of the class, 86% tried all four of the novel foods; 96% tried two of the novel foods. Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  42. Impact Statement #1, cont. • What is the significance of this impact, e.g. why is it important that children try new foods? • How representative is this number of preschool age children in the state – geographic area, pilot project, convenience sample? • Does the number represent all children who participated in 12-week intervention? Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  43. Impact Statement #1, cont. • How many children shared the information with their parents later? • What was the impact for parents – did they request additional information, did they offer the new foods at home? • Did the new foods become part of the institutions’ menu options? • Any evidence that the foods are being eaten repeatedly after exposure? Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  44. Impact Statement #1, cont. Data Collection Method • Teachers tracked children’s responses at conclusion of 12-week intervention • likes it • doesn’t like it • didn’t try it • At end of class or after class had been completed? Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  45. Impact Statement #1, cont. Tools • Survey • Developed through formative research? • How validated? Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  46. Impact Statement -- # 2 • Objective – Individuals eat more healthy by eating breakfast • Indicator ID – DQ 1 Could also be DQ 18 or 19 • Core Element – Dietary Quality • Intervention – Individual/Household Could also be Community/Institution • Time Frame – Medium Term Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  47. Impact Statement #2, cont. • Between 2000 and 2002, 74% of participants became aware of the campaign and 12% reported increasing their frequency of eating breakfast as a result of the campaign. Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  48. Impact Statement #2, cont. • Why is eating breakfast important? Tie back to dietary quality. • Who was targeted – general public, low income public, others? Clarify. • How do you know you reached your target audience? • How frequently were they eating breakfast? Any baseline comparisons of how much change this represented? Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  49. Impact Statement #2, cont. • What about community organizing impact – numbers and types of partners who joined to promote eating breakfast – those who were part of the social marketing campaign? • What did the 300+ public and private partners do differently because of Food Stamp Nutrition Education? • Any lasting commitment or further action? Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

  50. Impact Statement #2, cont. Data Collection Method • Secondary data • Telephone contacts • In-depth interviews • How wide scale was the campaign – the whole state; a targeted area, etc.? • Describe more specifically how you arrived at the % -- random sampling, convenience, etc. Sample ideas shared by Helen Chipman, February 2003

More Related