1 / 9

Evaluating Complex Health Programmes

Evaluating Complex Health Programmes. Fraser Battye. A word from our gurus(!). “Programmes chart out a perceived course whereby wrongs might be put to rights, deficiencies of behaviour corrected, inequalities of condition alleviated.

verniep
Download Presentation

Evaluating Complex Health Programmes

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. Evaluating Complex Health Programmes Fraser Battye

  2. A word from our gurus(!) “Programmes chart out a perceived course whereby wrongs might be put to rights, deficiencies of behaviour corrected, inequalities of condition alleviated. Programmes are thus shaped by a vision of change and they succeed or fail according to the veracity of that vision. Evaluation…has the task of testing out the underlying programme theories… is that basic plan sound, plausible, durable, practical and, above all, valid?”

  3. Points & structure • Main Points: • Of course it’s complex! • It’s our job to respond • Mix of approaches needed: but always underpinned by programme theory • Structure: • What is GHK? • Why are these evaluations difficult? • How have we addressed this? • Conclusions

  4. What is GHK? • Multi-disciplinary • Independent and employee-owned • Various policy areas • Specialism in evaluation • (Working with ETHNOS)

  5. Why might programmes like COFSS be hard to evaluate? • Complexity: neighbourhoods not labs • Interactions with context: • Other interventions • The real world (e.g. residential ‘churn’ / global catastrophe & war!) • Timescales, effects and attribution: • Intervention output outcome impact • Determinants of health • Lack of / debated evidence • Standards of evidence

  6. How have we addressed this? • Approach based on programme theory • Define theory behind the programme: • What is COFSS? • What does it do? • Desired effects? • How does it expect to work? • Design research to test it: • Quantitatively (neighbourhood; individual) • Qualitatively (lit reviews; interviews; case studies; tracking beneficiaries) • Mixed methods

  7. Defining the theory • Aims to reduce health inequalities • Significant resources at its disposal • Multi-agency and multi-disciplinary • Significant investment in management and ‘True’ partnership working • Community based and uses an assertive outreach approach • Aims to change mainstream service provision • Resident input is central

  8. Testing the theory (example)

  9. Concluding points • It’s always going to be complex (GOOD!) • Evaluation must respond • Theory-driven approaches promising • Best mixed with ‘traditional’ methods • Challenge to accepted public health understandings of ‘evidence’

More Related