Empowerment evaluation applied to public health practice
Abstract
This paper describes the details of a strategy developed to evaluate intervention outcomes of a number of community-based programmes. The rationale for the development of the strategy and its reception into practice is also described. This paper contributes to the debate about qualities and characteristics of appropriate evidence for health promotion by detailing the package of tools developed. These drew on health impact assessment, theories of change and participatory appraisal. In particular, the impact of context on evaluation is highlighted. Although this work is focused on community health promotion officers in the UK, the issues are relevant to a wide range of workers such as public health nurses and community development workers internationally. Alongside the description of the evaluation process is an exploration of power and empowerment of stakeholders in public health services' planning and evaluation. Power, in terms of that afforded by tools and language, held by the different stakeholders is one of the key determinants shaping a service. This makes for a rather ambitious and complex paper; however, the authors consider it is a timely and worthy challenge to address.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Indicators in ToC were often developed from the short-, medium- or long-term outcomes described in the ToC.
“The indicators were often developed from the short-, medium- or long-term outcomes described in the ToC [27, 35, 38, 58, 65, 74, 81, 84].”
From Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review (2015) · cites this paper as [38]
There were clear overlaps with other theory-driven evaluation approaches, in particular, realist approaches and logic models.
“However, there were clear overlaps with other theory-driven evaluation approaches, in particular, realist approaches [32, 36, 38, 56] and logic models [12, 26, 31, 52, 54, 61, 65, 66, 68, 69, 76, 82].”
From Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review (2015) · cites this paper as [38]
Cites
A Ladder Of Citizen Participation
Arnstein, S. R. (1969) · Journal of the American Institute of Planners · doi:10.1080/01944366908977225 · Cited by 17,064 · see citing works
The independent inquiry into inequalities in health
Smith, G. D., Morris, J. N., & Shaw, M. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.317.7171.1465 · Cited by 963 · see citing works
Evaluating health promotion—progress, problems and solutions
Nutbeam, D. (1998) · Health Promotion International · doi:10.1093/heapro/13.1.27 · Cited by 671 · see citing works
Empowerment evaluation : knowledge and tools for self-assessment & accountability
Fetterman, D. M., Kaftarian, S. J., & Wandersman, A. (1996) · Sage eBooks · Cited by 554 · see citing works
Hardeman, W., Sutton, S., Griffin, S., Johnston, M., White, A., Wareham, N. J., & Kinmonth, A. L. (2005) · Health Education Research · doi:10.1093/her/cyh022 · Cited by 311 · see citing works
Foundations of empowerment evaluation
Fetterman, D. M. (2000) · Cited by 284 · see citing works
Foundations of empowerment evaluation
Chatterji, M. (2001) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/s0149-7189(01)00030-1 · Cited by 283 · see citing works
The Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life (SEIQoL)
O’Boyle, C. A. (1994) · International Journal of Mental Health · doi:10.1080/00207411.1994.11449285 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
Troubling ruling discourses of health: Using institutional ethnography in community-based research
Mykhalovskiy, E., & McCoy, L. (2002) · Critical Public Health · doi:10.1080/09581590110113286 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
Robson, C. (2000) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781849209885 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Public Health – Power, Empowerment and Professional Practice
(2005) · International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance · doi:10.1108/ijhcqa.2005.06218gae.001 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Unpacking the Participatory Process
Weaver, L. M., & Cousins, J. B. (2004) · Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation · doi:10.56645/jmde.v1i1.144 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Appropriate approaches to the evaluation of health promotion
Springett, J. (2001) · Critical Public Health · doi:10.1080/09581590110039856 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Small-Scale Evaluation: Principles and Practice
Robson, C. (2017) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781526417930 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Health Literacy as an Empowerment Tool for Low-Income Mothers
Porr, C., Drummond, J. E., & Richter, S. M. (2006) · Family & Community Health · doi:10.1097/00003727-200610000-00011 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
A review of the Public Health White Paper – Choosing Health: making healthy choices easier
Foster, R., & Buttriss, J. L. (2005) · Nutrition Bulletin · doi:10.1111/j.1467-3010.2005.00479.x · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Health inequalities in Canada: Current discourses and implications for public health action
Raphael, D. (2000) · Critical Public Health · doi:10.1080/713658246 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Empowering Community Health Initiatives Through Evaluation
Fawcett, S. B., Paine‐Andrews, A., Francisco, V. T., Schultz, J. A., Richter, K. P., Lewis, R. K., Harris, K. J., Williams, E. L., Berkley, J. Y., Lopez, C. M., et al. (2012) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781452243573.n8 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
A basic guide to program evaluation.
McNamara, C. (2007) · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Moulster, G. (2006) · Learning Disability Practice · doi:10.7748/ldp.9.3.23.s15 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Population Health as a Framework for Public Health Practice: A Canadian Perspective
Cohen, B. E. (2006) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2005.075192 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Building knowledge in literacy and health.
Hemming, H., & Langille, L. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Améliorer nos connaissances sur l’alphabétisation et la santé
Hemming, H., & Langille, L. (2006) · Canadian Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1007/bf03405371 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review
Breuer, E., Lee, L., De Silva, M., & Lund, C. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6 · Cited by 425 · see citing works
- Authors
- Carr, S. M., Lhussier, M., Wilkinson, J., & Gleadhill, S.
- Affiliations
- Northumbria University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Carr, Susan M.
- Venue
- Critical Public Health
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 161-174
- ISSN
- 0958-1596 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-3682
- OpenAlex
- W2086486707
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Critical Public Health (publishedVersion)
- Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
- Keywords
- empowerment evaluation, community-based programs, health promotion evaluation, health impact assessment, theory of change, participatory evaluation, stakeholder power
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
