Topic

Key Points Raised

Decision/Action

Development of an evaluation plan for the Alliance Prostate Cancer Education project (Roshan Paudel and David Simmons)

Roshan and David presented general info about the prostate cancer education project.  It’s a 20-30 minute presentation and a 20-30 minute question and answer session. The target population is African American men, many of whom are transient. However through past experience they have found that the men have consistent email addresses. 

They raised many of questions for group consideration, and there was a lively discussion. Questions included:

How do we get screening and treatment follow-up information?

Direct men to community clinics with sliding-fee scale? 

Could we measure age?  Race?

Could we ask the men, ‘Did you get what you came for form this session?’ What drew you here? What did you hope to get? Did you get it? What more do you wish for?

How do you measure informed decision making?

How do you conduct the evaluation with cultural sensitivity?

Roshan and David could consider this evaluation as cyclical. As more sessions are offered, and more information is collected, we may modify the questions to better answer our ultimate evaluation questions.

They plan to spend 10% of the award funds to hire an evaluator on contract.

Discussion of 2008 committee goals

Recruitment of new members

We have 3 new members on the committee this year.  We could take a mentoring approach to recruiting new members who are involved in task force activities.  We should also talk about how to best orient new members of the evaluation committee.

Lisa or Liz will share the 2006 evaluation plan with new committee members.

Establishment of evaluation technical assistance liaisons to all task forces

We need to connect better with task forces and project teams.  We could ask people who are already on the task forces and project teams to act as liaisons to the evaluation committee. We could offer resources to help task force and project team participants develop evaluation skills.

Could we create a set of expectations for project team evaluation liaisons?

Update and implement member survey (Lisa and Julia)

Lisa, Julia and Priscilla compared notes on the member survey in November, and have some ideas about how to modify the survey for the next round.  How can we determine what the ‘value added’ is for the MCA?

Jill is interested in helping with the member survey.

Implementation of database (Julia)

Julia has been working on creation of an online contact and activity database that might be provided by the University of Minnesota Cancer Center.  The database may help collect information required by the CDC for performance measurement.

Julia will work within the University to accomplish the next steps

Update indicators (Carin)

Carin is interested in finding indicators for the objectives that do not currently have measures associated with them.

Carin and David will try to bring a group together

Evaluation plan/ committee (Lisa/ Julia/ Liz)

Liz will take the suggestions that Lisa and Julia wrote down after the previous evaluation plan was shared with the evaluation committee and the steering committee.  She will merge them into one document.

Liz will create a new working draft for a 2008 evaluation plan

Evaluation Training

Deferred to March meeting

Meeting frequency for 2008

All meetings will be from 3-5 pm at Snelling Office Park in St Paul.

Ö         3/20 in the St Croix room

Ö         6/19 in Littlefork Room

Ö         9/18 in Littlefork room

Ö         12/18 in Littlefork room 

We may look for a time to meet earlier in December.