ARCHIVED - Integrated Strategy on Healthy Living and Chronic Diseases - Community Based Programming Functional Component

 

Annex C: Community-Based Programming and Community Capacity Building Functional Component Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

Issues/Questions Indicators Data Sources

A) Relevance – Does the Component continue to be consistent with departmental-wide priorities, and does it realistically address an actual need?

A.1 Is there a continued need for the Community-based Programming Functional Component?

  • stakeholders identify need
  • Diabetes Policy Review
  • evidence of Pan-Canadian nature and magnitude of problem
  • Diabetes project proposals
  • Surveillance reports
  • theoretical evidence in population health literature of potential impact of programming

 

  • Diabetes Policy Review

A.2 Is there overlap and duplication across Functional Components?

  • components are developed strategically in coordination and are defined as complementary but distinct
  • ISHLCD Program Documentation
  • First and Second ISHLCD Implementation Reviews

A.3 Are there any elements that should or could be transferred in whole or in part to:

  • the Provinces/Territories?
  • the private sector?
  • voluntary sector?
  • role of federal government defined and supported by evidence

 

  • Diabetes Policy Review
  • Strategic Review
  • understanding of like-type programs in public and private sector, and how program contribution does not duplicate or work at cross-purposes with other programs or policies
  • Results from the Diabetes Policy Review Stakeholder Consultations

B) Design and Delivery – Are the most appropriate and effective means being used to achieve objectives?

B.1
Are there any key gaps in the Community-based Program Functional Component?

  • Achieved outcomes reflected planned outcomes
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • Diabetes Policy Review
  • Report: Diabetes Community-based Program Annual Evaluation Report for 2006-07 funded projects
  • Report: A Regional View: Diabetes Community-based Program regional summaries, promising practices and lessons learned

B.2
What have been the key lessons learned to date?

  • Results of:
    • 2006-07 PERT
    • Final 2006-07 project evaluations
    • National and Regional annual reports
    • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
    • Diabetes Policy Review
    • First and Second Implementation Reviews (ISHLCD)
  • Report: Diabetes Community-based Program Annual Evaluation Report for 2006-07 funded projects
  • Report: A Regional View: Diabetes Community-based Program regional summaries, promising practices and lessons learned
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • Diabetes Policy Review
  • First and Second ISHLCD Implementation Reviews

B.3
Is the current monitoring system for the Functional Component effective?

  • Key outcomes are tracked using information management system
  • File Review

C) Success / Progress – Is the Component effective and without unwanted outcomes?

C.1
What have been the key activities and outputs achieved?
Key results include:

Enhancing community capacity:
C.1.1

  • To what extent have interventions been planned, implemented and evaluated using evidence to address multiple risk factors (among high-risk populations within various social, economic and physical environments)?
  • Number of proposals
  • Project proposals (solicitation file)
  • types of evidence used
  • Project planning questions
  • PERT: Q1
  • description of project objectives
  • Project planning questions
  • PERT: Q1
  • description of evaluation plans and use of lessons learned
  • Project planning questions
  • PERT: Q19
  • Exploration of root causes of issues targeted by projects
  • PERT: Q1
  • Involvement of target population in asking why / identifying root causes
  • PERT: Q8 & Q9
  • Involvement of target population in finding solutions to root causes
  • PERT: Q8 & Q9
  • Access to resources needed for project success
  • PERT: Q3
  • Volunteers and other in-kind contributions
  • PERT: Q3 & Q6
  • Education, awareness and outreach activities offered to target population
  • PERT: Q9 & Q10
  • Project team member skill and knowledge development (e.g., in evaluation, best practices, policy influence)
  • PERT: Q12b & Q13b
  • Links made with diverse sectors
  • PERT: Q7, Q8, Q11 & Q20
  • Increase in information sharing between organizations
  • PERT: Q7, Q11 & Q20
  • Collaborative partnerships formed
  • PERT: Q7
  • Collaborative action with partners
  • PERT: Q7

C.1.2

  • To what extent have partnerships been formed among health practitioners, planners, researchers, and policy-makers within and across organizations, sectors and jurisdictions?
  • # of links and # of new links by sector/type
  • PERT Q7

C.1.3

  • To what extent has collaboration occurred within systems of prevention, detection and management of diabetes?
  • # of links and # of new links by sector/type
  • PERT: Q7

C.1.4

  • To what extent have healthier public policies addressing prevention, early detection and management of diabetes attempts to influence?
  • #, type, and description of actions to change or develop policy
  • PERT : Q15

C.2
To what extent have the key (reach) targets been met with:

  • target groups and/or intermediaries?
  • ultimate beneficiaries?
  • reach to target groups and/or intermediaries through funded projects
  • reach to ultimate beneficiaries through funded projects
  • PERT : Q9

C.3
To what extent has progress been made on other direct outcomes?
(see Logic Model for Funded Projects within Community-based Program of the Canadian Diabetes Strategy)

C.3.2

  • To what extent has knowledge of: diabetes related determinants, risk and protective factors, at-risk populations, effective interventions, and promising community-based practices increased?
  • %/# of target population (researchers, practitioners, etc) who report increased knowledge related to diabetes determinants, risk and protective factors, at-risk populations, effective interventions, and promising community-based practices
  • PERT: Q16
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • Diabetes Policy Review

C.3.3

  • To what extent has awareness and improved attitudes of high-risk populations increased?
  • %/# of high-risk target populations who report increased awareness related to diabetes determinants, risk and protective factors, at-risk populations, effective interventions, and promising community-based practices
  • PERT: Q16
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • Diabetes Policy Review

C.3.4

  • To what extent has knowledge of the skills and behaviours necessary to prevent diabetes increased among high-risk populations?
  • %/# of target population (high risk populations) who report increased knowledge related to skills and behaviours necessary to prevent diabetes
  • PERT: Q16
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • Diabetes Policy Review

C.3.5

  • To what extent are healthier public policies in organizations across sectors and jurisdictions addressing high-risk populations, early detection and management of diabetes?
  • # of policies developed and implemented
  • description of outcomes of policy work
  • PERT : Q15
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation

C.3.6

  • To what extent has the capacity to apply best practices and clinical practice guidelines to better screen, educate and counsel improved?
  • # of trained personnel (e.g. front-line service providers) trained in best practices/clinical practice guidelines
  • PERT: Q9, Q13
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • # training or educational products produced and disseminated
  • PERT: Q5, Q11, Q20
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • # of training or educational activities that took place
  • PERT: Q10, Q13
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • enhanced organizational policies to promote the application of clinical practice guidelines
  • PERT: Q15, Q16, Q20
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • Diabetes Policy Review

C.4
To what extent has progress been made on ultimate outcomes to date?
(see Logic Model for Funded Projects within Community-based Program of the Canadian Diabetes Strategy)

C.5
What have been the unintended positive or negative impacts, if any, of the Community-based Programming Functional Component to date?

  • Results of:
    • 2006-07 PERT
    • Final 2006-07 project evaluations
    • National and Regional annual reports
    • NCR and Ontario Region Project Sharing Meeting
    • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
    • Diabetes Policy Review
    • First and Second Implementation Reviews (ISHLCD)
  • Report: Diabetes Community-based Program Annual Evaluation Report for 2006-07 funded projects
  • Report: A Regional View: Diabetes Community-based Program regional summaries, promising practices and lessons learned
  • Report from NCR/Ontario Region Information Sharing Meeting
  • Diabetes Outcome Evaluation
  • Diabetes Policy Review
  • First and Second ISHLCD Implementation Reviews

Report a problem or mistake on this page
Please select all that apply:

Thank you for your help!

You will not receive a reply. For enquiries, contact us.

Date modified: