IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v92y2022ics0149718922000210.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Appreciative inquiry and the co-creation of an evaluation framework for Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) implementation: a two-country experience

Author

Listed:
  • Ghosh, Smita
  • Struminger, Bruce B.
  • Singla, Neeta
  • Roth, Brenna M.
  • Kumar, Anil
  • Anand, Sunil
  • Mtete, Emmanuel
  • Lusekelo, Jacob
  • Massawe, Irene
  • Jarpe-Ratner, Elizabeth
  • Seweryn, Steven M.
  • Risley, Kris
  • Moonan, Patrick K.
  • Pinsker, Eve

Abstract

Persistent gaps exist in healthcare workers’ capacity to address HIV and tuberculosis in Asia and Africa due to constraints in resources and knowledge. Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) leverages video-enabled technology to build workforce capacity and promote collaboration through mentorship and case-based learning. To understand current perceptions of ECHO participants and develop a comprehensive evaluation framework for ECHO implementation, we utilized modified appreciative inquiry guided focus group discussions (FGD) in India and Tanzania and called it SCORE (Strengths, Challenges, Opportunities, Results, and Evaluation). Content and thematic analysis of transcripts from FGDs and key-informant interviews triangulated perceptions of diverse stakeholders about ECHO implementation and identified key elements for development of the framework. The perceived strengths (S) were capacity building and establishing communities of practice. The perceived challenges (C) included securing resources, engaging leadership, and building systems for monitoring impact. Improved internet connectivity, addressing logistical challenges, encouraging session interactivity, and having strategic scale-up plans were perceived opportunities (O). Additionally, gathering measurable results (R) led to development of a comprehensive evaluation (E) framework. Contextualizing and facilitating SCORE with qualitative analysis of findings 6–12 months post-ECHO implementation may serve as a best practice to assess mid-course corrections to improve ECHO implementation quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghosh, Smita & Struminger, Bruce B. & Singla, Neeta & Roth, Brenna M. & Kumar, Anil & Anand, Sunil & Mtete, Emmanuel & Lusekelo, Jacob & Massawe, Irene & Jarpe-Ratner, Elizabeth & Seweryn, Steven M. &, 2022. "Appreciative inquiry and the co-creation of an evaluation framework for Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) implementation: a two-country experience," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:92:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000210
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718922000210
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102067?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. Chouinard, Jill Anne & Milley, Peter, 2018. "Uncovering the mysteries of inclusion: Empirical and methodological possibilities in participatory evaluation in an international context," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 70-78.
    2. Cornwall, Andrea & Jewkes, Rachel, 1995. "What is participatory research?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 41(12), pages 1667-1676, December.
    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. Caroline Patsias & Anne Latendresse & Laurence Bherer, 2013. "Participatory Democracy, Decentralization and Local Governance: the Montreal Participatory Budget in the light of ‘Empowered Participatory Governance’," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 2214-2230, November.
    2. Lauren Arundell & Kate Parker & Jo Salmon & Jenny Veitch & Anna Timperio, 2019. "Informing Behaviour Change: What Sedentary Behaviours Do Families Perform at Home and How Can They Be Targeted?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-12, November.
    3. Mike Kesby, 2007. "Spatialising Participatory Approaches: The Contribution of Geography to a Mature Debate," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(12), pages 2813-2831, December.
    4. Ines Testoni & Irene Nencioni & Maibrit Arbien & Erika Iacona & Francesca Marrella & Vittoria Gorzegno & Cristina Selmi & Francesca Vianello & Alfonso Nava & Adriano Zamperini & Michael Alexander Wies, 2021. "Mental Health in Prison: Integrating the Perspectives of Prison Staff," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Zemadim, B. & McCartney, Matthew & Langan, Simon & Sharma, Bharat, 2013. "A participatory approach for hydrometeorological monitoring in the Blue Nile River Basin of Ethiopia," IWMI Reports 201009, International Water Management Institute.
    6. Lisa M. Vaughn & MaryAnn Lohmueller, 2014. "Calling All Stakeholders," Evaluation Review, , vol. 38(4), pages 336-355, August.
    7. Ana Luiza Fontenelle & Erik Nilsson & Ieda Geriberto Hidalgo & Cintia B. Uvo & Drielli Peyerl, 2022. "Temporal Understanding of the Water–Energy Nexus: A Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-21, April.
    8. Azad, Md Javed & Pritchard, Bill, 2022. "Financial capital as a shaper of households' adaptive capabilities to flood risk in northern Bangladesh," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    9. Ebitu, Larmbert & Avery, Helen & Mourad, Khaldoon A. & Enyetu, Joshua, 2021. "Citizen science for sustainable agriculture – A systematic literature review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    10. San Sebastián, Miguel & Hurtig, Anna Karin, 2005. "Oil development and health in the Amazon basin of Ecuador: the popular epidemiology process," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 799-807, February.
    11. So Pyay Thar & Thiagarajah Ramilan & Robert J. Farquharson & Deli Chen, 2021. "Identifying Potential for Decision Support Tools through Farm Systems Typology Analysis Coupled with Participatory Research: A Case for Smallholder Farmers in Myanmar," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, June.
    12. Theresia Krieger & Sandra Salm & Antje Dresen & Anna Arning & Kathrin Schwickerath & Andrea Göttel & Stefanie Houwaart & Holger Pfaff & Natalia Cecon, 2022. "Optimizing Patient Information Material for a New Psycho-Oncological Care Program Using a Participatory Health Research Approach in Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-17, January.
    13. Bessell, Sharon, 2019. "Money matters…but so do people: Children's views and experiences of living in a ‘disadvantaged’ community," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 59-66.
    14. Sollis, Kate & Yap, Mandy & Campbell, Paul & Biddle, Nicholas, 2022. "Conceptualisations of wellbeing and quality of life: A systematic review of participatory studies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    15. Hollynd Boyden & Mayela Gillan & Javier Molina & Ashok Gadgil & Winston Tseng, 2023. "Community Perceptions of Arsenic Contaminated Drinking Water and Preferences for Risk Communication in California’s San Joaquin Valley," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Bernard Amadei, 2020. "A Systems Approach to Building Community Capacity and Resilience," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-23, October.
    17. Chung, Kimberly & Lounsbury, David W., 2006. "The role of power, process, and relationships in participatory research for statewide HIV/AIDS programming," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(8), pages 2129-2140, October.
    18. Alexandra Lenis Escobar & Ramón Rueda López & Jorge E. García Guerrero & Enrique Salinas Cuadrado, 2020. "Design of Strategies for the Implementation and Management of a Complementary Monetary System Using the SWOT-AHP Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-23, August.
    19. Nugus, Peter & Greenfield, David & Travaglia, Joanne & Braithwaite, Jeffrey, 2012. "The politics of action research: “If you don't like the way things are going, get off the bus”," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(11), pages 1946-1953.
    20. Victoria Tischler & Karen D'Silva & Anna Cheetham & Mervin Goring & Tim Calton, 2010. "Involving Patients in Research: the Challenge of Patient-Centredness," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 56(6), pages 623-633, November.

    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:92:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000210. 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.