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

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.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

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.3.2

• 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.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