PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Goldie MacDonald

Publications and source records attributed to Goldie MacDonald.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Steps to a HealthierUS Cooperative Agreement Program: foundational elements for program evaluation planning, implementation, and use of findings.

The Steps to a HealthierUS Cooperative Agreement Program (Steps Program) enables funded communities to implement chronic disease prevention and health promotion efforts to reduce the burden of diabetes, obesity, asthma, and related risk factors. At both the national and community levels, investment in surveillance and program evaluation is substantial. Public health practitioners engaged in program evaluation planning often identify desired outcomes, related indicators, and data collection methods but may pay only limited attention to an overarching vision for program evaluation among participating sites. We developed a set of foundational elements to provide a vision of program evaluation that informs the technical decisions made throughout the evaluation process. Given the diversity of activities across the Steps Program and the need for coordination between national- and community-level evaluation efforts, our recommendations to guide program evaluation practice are explicit yet leave room for site-specific context and needs. Staff across the Steps Program must consider these foundational elements to prepare a formal plan for program evaluation. Attention to each element moves the Steps Program closer to well-designed and complementary plans for program evaluation at the national, state, and community levels.

Benchmarking↗

Participatory research and evaluation: from best practices for all states to achievable practices within each state in the context of the Master Settlement Agreement.

Because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) already assisted state tobacco control initiatives, many state health departments turned to CDC for guidance on how to use Master Settlement Agreement monies. This article describes how CDC funded participatory research to establish local evidence and provided technical assistance for participatory program evaluation. The article (a) presents a telephone interview study of principal investigators (PIs) to determine how CDC could best facilitate participatory research and (b) identifies factors CDC considered to devise evaluation technical assistance that reflected local context. The interview study identified 8 areas where PIs needed CDC's support to undertake participatory research: continuity, timeliness, flexibility, clear and explicit expectations, appropriate and instructive accountability, creation of a vision for participatory research, tailored technical assistance, and enhancement of partner collaboration and support. These findings are being used to inform CDC's research funding. Meanwhile, user-driven technical assistance for participatory evaluation is being accessed by many states.

Benchmarking↗