IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v32y2009i3p221-228.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Planning and implementation of a participatory evaluation strategy: A viable approach in the evaluation of community-based participatory programs addressing cancer disparities

Author

Listed:
  • Scarinci, Isabel C.
  • Johnson, Rhoda E.
  • Hardy, Claudia
  • Marron, John
  • Partridge, Edward E.

Abstract

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has been posited as a promising methodology to address health concerns at the community level, including cancer disparities. However, the major criticism to this approach is the lack of scientific grounded evaluation methods to assess development and implementation of this type of research. This paper describes the process of development and implementation of a participatory evaluation framework within a CBPR program to reduce breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer disparities between African Americans and whites in Alabama and Mississippi as well as lessons learned. The participatory process involved community partners and academicians in a fluid process to identify common ground activities and outcomes. The logic model, a lay friendly approach, was used as the template and clearly outlined the steps to be taken in the evaluation process without sacrificing the rigorousness of the evaluation process. We have learned three major lessons in this process: (1) the importance of constant and open dialogue among partners; (2) flexibility to make changes in the evaluation plan and implementation; and (3) importance of evaluators playing the role of facilitators between the community and academicians. Despite the challenges, we offer a viable approach to evaluation of CBPR programs focusing on cancer disparities.

Suggested Citation

  • Scarinci, Isabel C. & Johnson, Rhoda E. & Hardy, Claudia & Marron, John & Partridge, Edward E., 2009. "Planning and implementation of a participatory evaluation strategy: A viable approach in the evaluation of community-based participatory programs addressing cancer disparities," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 221-228, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:32:y:2009:i:3:p:221-228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(09)00002-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Randolph, Justus J. & Eronen, Pasi J., 2007. "Developing the Learning Door: A case study in youth participatory program planning," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 55-65, February.
    2. Millar, Annie & Simeone, Ronald S. & Carnevale, John T., 2001. "Logic models: a systems tool for performance management," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 73-81, February.
    3. Kaplan, Sue A. & Garrett, Katherine E., 2005. "The use of logic models by community-based initiatives," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 167-172, May.
    4. Fielden, Sarah J. & Rusch, Melanie L. & Masinda, Mambo Tabu & Sands, Jim & Frankish, Jim & Evoy, Brian, 2007. "Key considerations for logic model development in research partnerships: A Canadian case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 115-124, May.
    5. Holte-McKenzie, Merydth & Forde, Sarah & Theobald, Sally, 2006. "Development of a participatory monitoring and evaluation strategy," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 365-376, November.
    6. Nichols, Laura, 2002. "Participatory program planning: including program participants and evaluators," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-14, February.
    7. Papineau, Danielle & Kiely, Margaret C., 1996. "Participatory evaluation in a community organization: Fostering stakeholder empowerment and utilization," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 79-93, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Trotter II, Robert T. & Laurila, Kelly & Alberts, David & Huenneke, Laura F., 2015. "A diagnostic evaluation model for complex research partnerships with community engagement: The partnership for Native American Cancer Prevention (NACP) model," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 10-20.
    2. Totin, Edmond & van Mierlo, Barbara & Mongbo, Roch & Leeuwis, Cees, 2015. "Diversity in success: Interaction between external interventions and local actions in three rice farming areas in Benin," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 119-130.
    3. Lauren V. Ghazal & Hailey Johnston & Elisabeth Dodd & Yasmine Ramachandra & Nicholas Giallourakis & Kayla Fulginiti & Charles Kamen, 2024. "A Needs Assessment Approach for Adolescent and Young Adult Sexual and Gender Diverse Cancer Survivors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(4), pages 1-14, March.
    4. Simmons, Vani Nath & Klasko, Lynne B. & Fleming, Khaliah & Koskan, Alexis M. & Jackson, Nia T. & Noel-Thomas, Shalewa & Luque, John S. & Vadaparampil, Susan T. & Lee, Ji-Hyun & Quinn, Gwendolyn P. & B, 2015. "Participatory evaluation of a community–academic partnership to inform capacity-building and sustainability," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 19-26.
    5. Scarinci, Isabel C. & Moore, Artisha & Benjamin, Regina & Vickers, Selwyn & Shikany, James & Fouad, Mona, 2017. "A participatory evaluation framework in the establishment and implementation of transdisciplinary collaborative centers for health disparities research," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 37-45.
    6. Dryden, Eileen & Hyde, Justeen & Livny, Ayala & Tula, Monique, 2010. "Phoenix Rising: Use of a participatory approach to evaluate a federally funded HIV, Hepatitis and substance abuse prevention program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 386-393, November.
    7. Ribeiro, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena, 2013. "Sustainability assessment of electricity production using a logic models approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 215-223.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cumming, Jennifer & Whiting, Richard & Parry, Benjamin J. & Clarke, Fiona J. & Holland, Mark J.G. & Cooley, Sam J. & Quinton, Mary L., 2022. "The My Strengths Training for Life™ program: Rationale, logic model, and description of a strengths-based intervention for young people experiencing homelessness," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    2. Massey, Oliver T., 2011. "A proposed model for the analysis and interpretation of focus groups in evaluation research," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 21-28, February.
    3. Fielden, Sarah J. & Rusch, Melanie L. & Masinda, Mambo Tabu & Sands, Jim & Frankish, Jim & Evoy, Brian, 2007. "Key considerations for logic model development in research partnerships: A Canadian case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 115-124, May.
    4. Ebenso, Bassey & Manzano, Ana & Uzochukwu, Benjamin & Etiaba, Enyi & Huss, Reinhard & Ensor, Tim & Newell, James & Onwujekwe, Obinna & Ezumah, Nkoli & Hicks, Joe & Mirzoev, Tolib, 2019. "Dealing with context in logic model development: Reflections from a realist evaluation of a community health worker programme in Nigeria," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 97-110.
    5. Peyton, David J. & Scicchitano, Michael, 2017. "Devil is in the details: Using logic models to investigate program process," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 156-162.
    6. O'Keefe, Christine M. & Head, Richard J., 2011. "Application of logic models in a large scientific research program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 174-184, August.
    7. Vinícius P. Rodrigues & Daniela C. A. Pigosso & Jakob W. Andersen & Tim C. McAloone, 2018. "Evaluating the Potential Business Benefits of Ecodesign Implementation: A Logic Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    8. Wagemakers, Annemarie & Vaandrager, Lenneke & Koelen, Maria A. & Saan, Hans & Leeuwis, Cees, 2010. "Community health promotion: A framework to facilitate and evaluate supportive social environments for health," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 428-435, November.
    9. Park, Chul Hyun & Welch, Eric W. & Sriraj, P.S., 2016. "An integrative theory-driven framework for evaluating travel training programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 7-20.
    10. Jose Lopez-De-Pedro & Eva Rimbau-Gilabert, 2012. "Stakeholder Approach: What Effects Should We Take into Account in Contemporary Societies?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 107(2), pages 147-158, May.
    11. Emond, Tina & Guillaumie, Laurence & de Montigny, Francine, 2021. "Using a logic model to develop an intervention for improving miscarriage care in the emergency department," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    12. Parkinson, Sarah, 2009. "Power and perceptions in participatory monitoring and evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 229-237, August.
    13. Wasserman, Deborah L., 2010. "Using a systems orientation and foundational theory to enhance theory-driven human service program evaluations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 67-80, May.
    14. Burford, Gemma & Velasco, Ismael & Janoušková, Svatava & Zahradnik, Martin & Hak, Tomas & Podger, Dimity & Piggot, Georgia & Harder, Marie K., 2013. "Field trials of a novel toolkit for evaluating ‘intangible’ values-related dimensions of projects," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-14.
    15. Olsen, Odd Einar & Lindoe, Preben, 2004. "Trailing research based evaluation; phases and roles," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 371-380, November.
    16. Roberts, Jennifer & Winter, Karen & Connolly, Paul, 2017. "The Letterbox Club book gifting intervention: Findings from a qualitative evaluation accompanying a randomised controlled trial," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 467-473.
    17. Ridde, Valéry & Goossens, Sylvie & Shakir, Sahibullah, 2012. "Short-term consultancy and collaborative evaluation in a post-conflict and humanitarian setting: Lessons from Afghanistan," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 180-188.
    18. Kenny, Tiff-Annie & Fillion, Myriam & MacLean, Jullian & Wesche, Sonia D. & Chan, Hing Man, 2018. "Calories are cheap, nutrients are expensive – The challenge of healthy living in Arctic communities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 39-54.
    19. Wu, Huang & Shen, Jianping & Jones, Jeffrey & Gao, Xingyuan & Zheng, Yunzheng & Krenn, Huilan Y., 2019. "Using logic model and visualization to conduct portfolio evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 69-75.
    20. Daigneault, Pierre-Marc, 2014. "Taking stock of four decades of quantitative research on stakeholder participation and evaluation use: A systematic map," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 171-181.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:32:y:2009:i:3:p:221-228. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.