Strengthening Catchment Planning Evaluation

1. Strengthening Catchment Planning & Evaluation

2. Vision for Integrated Health Promotion by 2009 Virtual HP Business Unit SE PCP Healthy Communities Planning and Evaluation Framework that includes one Healthy Communities Plan for all HP collaborative work

3. Purpose To develop a process for linking agency and catchment evaluation that will: prevent duplication of effort be achievable within available resources provide meaningful local information that informs future local planning is supported by partners

4. Process Emphasis has been on partnership development and gaining agency buy in to make it happen Scoping out what currently happens in agencies and at PCP level Determining what can/cannot be changed within agencies (differences between DHS HP funded agencies and non HP funded agencies), including convincing agencies that the outcome will be worth the effort Differences between what information agencies have collected to report back on/accountability and evaluation

5. Process Ensuring that there is buy in at Management and Practitioner level (different perspectives) Trialling of process over the next year using Physical Activity as a demonstration Evaluation of our process and systems Refinement

6. Process Development of common tools including: Baseline questionnaires Partnership Tool Consumer Questionnaire/Feedback Program/Activity Questionnaire Catchment questionnaires

7. Progress to date Implementation: Roles and responsibilities/timeframes The collation of data at different levels Analysis of data Systems required to support the above

8. Learnings So Far We are at the beginning of a longer term, continuous improvement process Catchment planning needs to be effective for our evaluation processes to work Be realistic start small – i.e. 1 priority, core group of agencies Remember that we can only work within the available resources and level of commitment given We need to look at providing DHS with meaningful evaluation reports in the future rather than reports based on accountability.

9. Inner South East Partnership in Community and Health (ISEPICH) Catchment evaluation in a complex situation

10. Complexity Eg ISEPICH - three LGAs, 286,000+ people, 40+ member agencies 100s of HP initiatives by a range of agencies, not just HP funded agencies Multi-level Multiple initiatives and areas for action within agencies (eg CHS, Local government) A range of Partnership initiatives ‘PCP initiatives’ – how are these defined? how are they different? Changing membership on committees

11. PCP priorities and level of collaboration Priority setting process is time consuming and needs structures to support Different levels of collaboration within priorities Eg collaboration in Falls Prevention and Strength Training Other Physical Activity – networking Mental wellbeing and social connectedness some collaboration eg Rooming Houses (but people change) new areas of action eg young families, M&CH

12. Developing a catchment evaluation framework SMR regional evaluation project Original aim: improve evaluation of individual initiatives ISEPICH aim: complex evaluation ‘What is the total result of our efforts?’ Contribution to population health Costs/benefits of HP and partnerships Chose to focus on mental well-being and social connectedness because it is the most challenging

13. Framework Building capacity – knowledge/skills & change in practice Outcomes – more difficult but should try to measure if possibleBuilding capacity – knowledge/skills & change in practice Outcomes – more difficult but should try to measure if possible

14. Results and progress Using the framework to help develop the revised 05/06 plan To do Evaluation package – common measures, evaluation report template Work with regional DHS office to simplify and rationalise reporting, prevent duplication Investigate the possibility of QIPPS generated combined report