|
Questions for CDC from Evaluation Committee |
Evaluation should be centered on utility to the program.
The philosophy of the CDC has been for comp cancer programs to set up good processes, and measure these processes using performance measures. The evaluation plan for the program should include measures of effectiveness.
What is working for your state program? What is not working? Use evaluation to inform the comp cancer program. It does not have to be bean counting. It should be useful, though.
Phyllis is working to develop the evaluation of the CDC program on a national level. To that end, the CDC is funding evaluation case studies in 10 states, including Iowa. These 10 states were selected because they were advanced implementation programs. From these case studies, they will try to cull some best practices in evaluation and training materials, if possible.
In Spring 2006, CDC will email a detailed survey to state program directors as part of a capacity assessment for comp cancer control.
Be thoughtful about estimating in-kind contributions. Information about in-kind contributions can be helpful for describing how federal money leverages local resources for cancer control.
In Feb 2007, comp cancer program will submit competitive applications for funding. Include outcome/impact assessment. What are the outcomes realized by the plan/alliance? What are the accomplishments due to the plan/alliance? What has happened in Minnesota because of Cancer Plan Minnesota? What specifically is happening or being implemented that can be tied to the work of the alliance?
- One way of describing impacts or outcomes that are due to the existence of the Cancer plan or the alliance is to create ‘case-studies’.
- Make note of any actions/impacts that are replicable and sustainable.
- Keep track of in-kind contributions.
- What is the level of involvement within the community?
- Are community participants satisfied with their experience with the process?
- Have there been any policy changes? Environment changes? Behaviors adopted?
- Interview non-participants to see what they think of the alliance/plan.
- CR: write up or collect success stories, ‘cases’ or vignettes’ of people whose lives are touched by cancer plan Minnesota
- PR: people talking about their cancer experience can be powerful, especially in a public relations video
- DL: measure awareness of existence of plan?
- LG: Iowa has a way of estimated in-kind contributions based on salary. Can set up a tracking spreadsheet to estimate ‘match’. Lorrie will share this system with Minnesota.
- PR: Put your evaluation money and resources where you are likely to show accomplishments.
|
Cheri Rolnick suggested/rephrased evaluation questions based on Phyllis Rochester’s comments. |
|
Evaluation questions |
Q. 3. To be able to make statement about partnership operating effectively, need to be able to measure “effectiveness”.
- Can community partnerships measure involvement by participation and by looking at maintenance of participation?
- How do you measure effectiveness? Are we getting more out of the resources than we are putting into the resources?
- Did we implement what we said we were going to implement?
- How do you know you did the project?
- To what extent has comp cancer control changed your thinking? Your behavior?
- Report back to alliance and CDC
- It is important to report to stakeholders.
|
Eliz to modify logic models for Phyllis Rochester
Phyllis to send Elizabeth
- Florida presentation on evaluation by new contractor
- South Puget evaluation presentation.
- Delaware has a nice presentation.
|
