|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
An Evaluation Framework for Health Promotion: Theory, Quality and Effectiveness
Erica Wimbush
Health Education Board for Scotland
Jonathan Watson
Health Education Board for Scotland
There is increasing demand for evaluation work funded by public agencies to become more focused on demonstrating effectiveness. Focusing evaluation on outcomes and effectiveness meets the information needs of strategic planners and policy makers, but other stakeholders involved in managing, delivering or using public services and programmes may use other assessment criteria, such as improving the quality of programmes or programme design. The necessity and value of these other criteria are in danger of being obscured. Acknowledging the legitimacy of the range of stakeholder perspectives, this article presents a framework for evaluation that has been developed over a number of years within the context of evaluating health promotion programmes as part of the work of a national health promotion agency. It argues for an approach to evaluation which recognizes the contributions of theory and quality as well as effectiveness in programme development. The Health Education Board for Scotland (HEBS) framework for evaluation – and the analysis that informed it – demonstrates that there are many stages and forms of evaluation which contribute to the development of effective interventions. While outcome evaluations and effectiveness reviews tend to be the prized evaluation products for those concerned with policy and strategic planning, these forms of evaluation are just ‘the tip of the iceberg’ of what is required to build a sound evidence base, bringing together the full range of evaluation needs from the perspectives of all the different stakeholder groups.
Key Words: effectiveness • evaluation • health • health promotion • quality • theory
Evaluation, Vol. 6, No. 3,
301-321 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/135638900000600302
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
W. E. Thurston and A. C. Eisener
Successful integration and maintenance of screening for domestic violence in the health sector: moving beyond individual responsibility.
Trauma Violence Abuse,
April 1, 2006;
7(2):
83 - 92.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Mackenzie and A. Blamey
The Practice and the Theory: Lessons from the Application of a Theories of Change Approach
Evaluation,
April 1, 2005;
11(2):
151 - 168.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Lehtonen
OECD Environmental Performance Review Programme: Accountability (f)or Learning?
Evaluation,
April 1, 2005;
11(2):
169 - 188.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Wimbush, C. Tannahill, and P. Hanlon
Health Promotion Research and the Public Health Function in Scotland: Prospects for the Future
Health Education Journal,
January 1, 2004;
63(1):
15 - 21.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. McKie
Rhetorical Spaces: Participation and Pragmatism in the Evaluation of Community Health Work
Evaluation,
July 1, 2003;
9(3):
307 - 324.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. E. Thurston, J. Graham, and J. Hatfield
Evaluability Assessment: A Catalyst for Program Change and Improvement
Eval Health Prof,
June 1, 2003;
26(2):
206 - 221.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. Shaw and A. Crompton
Theory, Like Mist on Spectacles, Obscures Vision
Evaluation,
April 1, 2003;
9(2):
192 - 204.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M. Andersson, G. E. M. Bjaras, and C.-G. Ostenson
A stage model for assessing a community-based diabetes prevention program in Sweden
Health Promot. Int.,
December 1, 2002;
17(4):
317 - 327.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Learmonth
Utilizing research in practice and generating evidence from practice
Health Educ. Res.,
December 1, 2000;
15(6):
743 - 756.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
