IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v37y2013icp50-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of a federally funded workforce development program: The Centers for Public Health Preparedness

Author

Listed:
  • Sobelson, Robyn K.
  • Young, Andrea C.

Abstract

The Centers for Public Health Preparedness (CPHP) program was a five-year cooperative agreement funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The program was initiated in 2004 to strengthen terrorism and emergency preparedness by linking academic expertise to state and local health agency needs. The purposes of the evaluation study were to identify the results achieved by the Centers and inform program planning for future programs. The evaluation was summative and retrospective in its design and focused on the aggregate outcomes of the CPHP program. The evaluation results indicated progress was achieved on program goals related to development of new training products, training members of the public health workforce, and expansion of partnerships between accredited schools of public health and state and local public health departments. Evaluation results, as well as methodological insights gleaned during the planning and conduct of the CPHP evaluation, were used to inform the design of the next iteration of the CPHP Program, the Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Centers (PERLC).

Suggested Citation

  • Sobelson, Robyn K. & Young, Andrea C., 2013. "Evaluation of a federally funded workforce development program: The Centers for Public Health Preparedness," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 50-57.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:37:y:2013:i:c:p:50-57
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.01.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718913000025
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.01.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Bates, Reid, 2004. "A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 341-347, August.
    2. DeGroff, Amy & Schooley, Michael & Chapel, Thomas & Poister, Theodore H., 2010. "Challenges and strategies in applying performance measurement to federal public health programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 365-372, November.
    3. Youtie, Jan & Corley, Elizabeth A., 2011. "Federally sponsored multidisciplinary research centers: Learning, evaluation, and vicious circles," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 13-20, February.
    4. McLaughlin, John A. & Jordan, Gretchen B., 1999. "Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 65-72.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Tim Benijts, 2014. "A Business Sustainability Model for Government Corporations. A Belgian Case Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 204-216, March.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Alison Bullock & Zoё Slote Morris & Christine Atwell, 2013. "Exchanging knowledge through healthcare manager placements in research teams," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(13-14), pages 1363-1380, October.
    5. Matt Andrews, 2022. "This is How to Think About and Achieve Public Policy Success," CID Working Papers 413, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    6. Wifo, 2021. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 10/2021," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 94(10), October.
    7. 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.
    8. Rebecca, E. & Sangarandeniya, Y. M. S. W. V., 2023. "The Impact of Trainee Characteristics, Training Design, and Work Environment on the Transfer of Training: A Study of Executive Level Employees of a Selected Tea Manufacturing Company in Sri Lanka," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 7(4), pages 648-656, April.
    9. 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.
    10. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    11. Jürgen Janger & Agnes Kügler, 2018. "Innovationseffizienz. Österreich im internationalen Vergleich," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61111, January.
    12. Fangyuan Chang & Andrea Eriksson & Britt Östlund, 2020. "Discrepancies between Expected and Actual Implementation: The Process Evaluation of PERS Integration in Nursing Homes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-18, June.
    13. Louise R. Manfredi & Meriel Stokoe & Rebecca Kelly & Seyeon Lee, 2021. "Teaching Sustainable Responsibility through Informal Undergraduate Design Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-13, July.
    14. Laura Kreiling & Ahmed Bounfour, 2020. "A practice-based maturity model for holistic TTO performance management: development and initial use," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1718-1747, December.
    15. Hyun-Kyu KANG, 2015. "Development of Guideline for Preliminary Feasibility Study on Government R&D Programs in Korea," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 2805212, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    16. Carlos Vallejo & David Romero & Arturo Molina, 2017. "Implementation of best manufacturing practices using logic models and system dynamics: project design and project assessment views," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 535-575, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Antonella Cifalin? & Irene Eleonora Lisi, 2015. "La misurazione delle performance dei servizi domiciliari e residenziali tra riforme istituzionali e applicazioni locali," MECOSAN, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(93), pages 9-32.
    19. Ninni Singh & Vinit Kumar Gunjan & Amit Kumar Mishra & Ram Krishn Mishra & Nishad Nawaz, 2022. "SeisTutor: A Custom-Tailored Intelligent Tutoring System and Sustainable Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-24, March.
    20. Collins, Mary Elizabeth, 2008. "Evaluating child welfare training in public agencies: Status and prospects," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 241-246, August.

    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:37:y:2013:i:c:p:50-57. 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.