Community Based Intervention

Posted: September 3rd, 2013

Community Based Intervention

Name:

Course:

Institution:

Instructor:

Date:

Community Based Intervention

Scriven describes evaluation as, “the process of determining the merit, worth or value of something. The evaluation process normally involves some identification of relevant standards of merit, worth or value, some investigation of the performance of evaluands on these standards and some integration or synthesis of the results to achieve an overall evaluation or a set of associated evaluations” (Scriven,139). The evaluation of a community based intervention focuses on analyzing the quality of the intervention. The framework, provided by the Centre for the Advancement of Community Based Public Health, seeks to evaluate PRAID coalition PRAID coalition is a community-based intervention that aims at reducing the number of deaths and accidents in young men that occur due to drunk driving in the city of Hope. Different ideas on how to tackle this challenge were incorporated to develop a long-term plan. The coalition received funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to design and run the community based program.

Effective evaluation of a community-based intervention is usually pegged on various aspects. One of these aspects is the quality of the evaluation. While looking at the quality, one needs to put into consideration the evaluation’s correctness, utility, viability and aptness. The viability of the evaluation referrers to its realistic approach with regards to the available resources. The expectations of the community-based interventions should be realistic and consider ability of the intervention to deliver. Not only does the framework used to evaluate PRAID coalition describe the activities of the program, but it also goes through the logical model of the program. The logical model is an illustration that shows whether the project’s expected results are realistic and achievable. The framework makes this conclusion by comparing the resources of the program to the expected outcome.

The utility refers to the evaluation’s ability to outline its purpose. The evaluation should state whether it is being carried out for the purpose of accountability to sponsors, enhancing the project or collecting a wise base knowledge concerning the project. The framework that seeks to evaluate the intervention in the City of Hope clearly sets out its aims. The main reasons for carrying out their evaluation is to collect knowledge on the program’s impact, provide accountability to funders, volunteers, staff and board. The evaluation also wants to identify ways in which the program can be improved. It also wants to improve communication among those involved in the intervention and clarify the programs of the intervention. The utility of the framework is also enhanced when the stakeholders are asked questions that prompt the evaluators to know how useful the evaluation would be.

The aptness of the evaluation referrers to its ability to stay in tune with the core aims of the intervention. Through the utility of the evaluation, the core aims of the evaluation become clear. These aims are similar to those of the community-based intervention in the City of Hope that seeks to reduce the number of accidents and death among young men caused by drunk driving. The appropriateness of the method used should be factored when trying to weigh the effectiveness of an evaluation. For one to conclude whether or not a method used is appropriate, adequate background information on the nature of the intervention and nature of community is necessary.

A conclusive evaluation of a community-based intervention should be able to outline those factors unique to community level interventions. This is done to be able to differentiate them from other interventions with broader jurisdictions. Community based interventions have their focus on creating the necessary channels for the delivering of health services to the members of the community. These channels are links among individuals, community groups and other partners. The study case on the City of Hope shows the integration of individuals of the community and other groups in a formalized commitment known as the Partnership to reduce Alcohol- related Injury and Death (PRAID) coalition. It also seeks to combine prevention and education strategies while at the same time empowering the community. These aspects of a community based intervention aid in identifying the evaluation strategy to be used.

A good evaluation of a community-based intervention will focus on the input, results and the theoretical aspect of the intervention (Chen and Rossi). The evaluation seeks to understand the theory of how the intervention works. A theoretical approach would mean that the evaluator seeks to surface the theories that the intervention is based on. In the second chapter of the framework, it evaluates the program itself. Here it investigates the core components of the program and the strategies put into place to achieve the goals of the program.

A successful evaluation of a community-based intervention will require an active engagement between the participants and evaluators. The framework of the City of Hope largely incorporates the members of the community in the evaluation. The stakeholders met and shared their concerns. These stakeholders were like the Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Students Against Drunk Driving, the Health department, Schools among others. Evaluation of community-based interventions should be able to maintain a degree of openness and appreciation of diversity. They should be able to integrate and empower the members of the community.

The model provided by the Centre for the Advancement of Community Based Public Health is a feasible evaluation. It seeks to bring out the core mandate of a community-based intervention through the situation in good hope. It can be adapted to successfully an actual situation on the ground.

Work Cited

Baker E.Q., Davis A. D., Gallerani R., Sanchez V. and Viadro C. (2000). An Evaluation Framework for Community Health Programs. Retrieved from http://www.doh.state.fl.us/COMPASS/documents/Community_Health_Programs_Eval.pdf

Bickman, R. (1987) Using Programme Theory in Evaluation. New Directions for Programme Evaluation 33. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011). A Framework for Program Evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.fruitsandveggiesmatter.gov/health_professionals/statereport.html

Chanan, G. (1999) Local Community Involvement, a Handbook for Good Practice. Dublin: European Foundation for Improvement in Living and Working Conditions.

Chen, H.T. and Rossi, P. (1992) Using Theory to Improve Policy and Programme Evaluation. Westport, CT, USA: Greenwood Press.

Fruits and Veggies Matter: Health Professional. Retrieved from http://www.fruitsandveggiesmatter.gov/health_professionals/statereport.html

Screven, M. (1991) Evaluating Thesaurus. Newbury Park, CA, USA: Sage