Framework and tools for planning and evaluating community participation, collaborative partnerships and equity in health promotion

Abstract

Planning and evaluation are regarded as routine in good practice. As health promotion practice and programs are shaped by principles such as partnerships, participation and equity, it is important that we also apply an evaluation lens to these components. Sound planning and evaluation allows practitioners to explain how and why these principles are integrated into their work and what is achieved.

Mental Health Promotion in the Health Care Setting

“…Facilitators for effective collaboration and engagement within health promotion initiatives discussed within existing research are also consistent with the facilitators discussed in this article. These include having an environment where work is valued, having trust and effective communication between partners (Delaney, 1994;Dowling, Powell, & Glendinning, 2004;Jolley et al, 2008), being genuine and flexible in collaborative relationships (Gardner, 2005), having a shared vision (Delaney, 1994;Jolley et al, 2008), and understanding the broader context in which the collaboration is taking place (Delaney, 1994).…”

“…Such participatory strategies have been found to provide opportunities for discussion of an issue from various perspectives, for increased empowerment, and for innovative solutions to be discovered beyond what an individual person or organization could achieve (Jolley, Lawless, & Hurley, 2008). Furthermore, collaboration has been found to be particularly effective in accomplishing system-wide practice change in complex settings (Reinhardt & Keller, 2009).…”

Findings of a Formative Evaluation of a Transitional Housing Program for Forensic Patients Discharged into the Community

“…In partnerships, organizations contribute resources and expertise with the expectation that they can achieve more by working together than if each worked in isolation (Claiborne & Lawson, 2005;Jolley, Lawless, & Hurley, 2008). Because partnerships are complex, changing and contextually derived there is no consensus as to the best way to assess them ( Jolley et al, 2008).…”

“…In partnerships, organizations contribute resources and expertise with the expectation that they can achieve more by working together than if each worked in isolation (Claiborne & Lawson, 2005;Jolley, Lawless, & Hurley, 2008). Because partnerships are complex, changing and contextually derived there is no consensus as to the best way to assess them ( Jolley et al, 2008). Three key dimensions are relevant to the TRHP partnership: (a) partners' understandings of the purpose and benefits of partnership, (b) communication and information sharing among partners, and (c) clarity of roles and responsibilities within the partnership (Blue-Banning, Summers, Frankland, & Beegle, 2004;Hosley, Gensheimer, & Yang, 2003;Reback, Cohen, Freese, & Shoptaw, 2002).…”

Partnership in knowledge creation: lessons learned from a researcher–policy actor partnership to co-produce a rapid appraisal case study of South Australia’s Social Inclusion Initiative

“…Our reflections are synthesised in a framework derived from other empirical work about what makes for successful researcher-policy actor collaborations. These are: the "four tiers" of linkage and exchange identified by Goering et al (2003), the social processes of knowledge creation and the "communicative perspective" identified by Golden-Biddle et al (2003), the facilitators reported in a systematic review by Innvaer et al (2002 ) of 24 studies, a qualitative study of facilitators and hindrances by Jewell & Bero (2008), a short theoretical review by Locock & Boase (2004), and the principles of partnership evaluation as outlined above including Jolley, Lawless & Hurley (2008). From these we have synthesised six key elements which we found to be crucial to the success of our researcher-policy actor partnership and its output:…”