Community health improvement processes are diverse and complex, and evaluation methods to gain generalizable knowledge across community settings are limited by available data, and the need for deep contextual knowledge. This article describes an innovative participatory approach to evaluation of a transformation initiative involving up to eighteen communities nationwide. The approach blends two qualitative research synthesis methods: participatory action synthesis and meta-ethnography and applies them to the pragmatic evaluation of a program in real-life settings. In this article, we present the justification for and details about the evaluation process. The approach presented here will be useful to both researchers and practitioners interested in evaluating community-based health and well-being initiatives and other complex interventions conducted in complex settings.
Background: Community health improvement processes are diverse and complex, and evaluation methods to gain generalizable knowledge across community are limited by available data, and the need for deep contextual knowledge. Methods: This article describes an innovative participatory approach to evaluation of a community transformation initiative involving up to eighteen communication nationwide. The approach blends two qualitative research synthesis methods: participatory action synthesis and meta-ethnography and applies them to the pragmatic evaluation of a program in real-life settings. Results: In this article, we present the justification for and details about the evaluation process. Four cycles of synthesis and engagement resulted in development of concepts to describe community actions for transformation.Conclusion: The approach presented here will be useful to both researchers and practitioners interested in evaluating community-based health and well-being initiatives and other complex interventions conducted in complex settings.
Introduction
This paper explores the capabilities that contribute to community transformation and the common pathways followed by communities in the 100 Million Healthier Lives SCALE (Spreading Community Accelerators through Learning and Evaluation) initiative in their transformation journeys towards a “Culture of Health”.
Methods
Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), from 2016 to 2020, between 18 to 24 community coalitions nationwide participated in SCALE, the goal of which was to co‐design, implement, test, and scale up a model called the Community of Solutions (COS) Framework, that built community capacity around a set of skills and behaviors to advance culture change and create sustainable improvement in health, well‐being, and equity. We adapted and applied two qualitative research techniques, meta‐ethnography and participatory action synthesis, to evaluate SCALE initiative data.
Results
Eight concepts emerged that represent the knowledge, capabilities and practices commonly acquired and utilized across the communities. Overall, these concepts emphasize individual and team leadership, quality improvement skills, an intentional focus on equity, and partnerships for spread and sustainment. Concepts were linked into lines of arguments which were unique storylines explaining the transformation pathways. Three stories of the transformation process emerged from the data. Causal Loop Diagrams (CLDs) were created to represent non‐linear system relationships and visually capture some of the most important dynamics of the process of transformation. Even with vast heterogeneity among the SCALE communities and the diversity of activities that the communities undertook, our analysis showed there were a few basic principles that undergirded the process of building capability for transformation.
Conclusions
The knowledge from our findings should be useful to expand further research and practice in community learning systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.