Cited by 1,031Health Policy Implementation ScienceEvaluation and Performance AssessmentPublic Health Policies and Education

Developing a Process-Evaluation Plan for Assessing Health Promotion Program Implementation: A How-To Guide

Saunders, Ruth P., Evans, Martin H., Joshi, Praphul·2005·Health Promotion Practice

Abstract

Process evaluation is used to monitor and document program implementation and can aid in understanding the relationship between specific program elements and program outcomes. The scope and implementation of process evaluation has grown in complexity as its importance and utility have become more widely recognized. Several practical frameworks and models are available to practitioners to guide the development of a comprehensive evaluation plan, including process evaluation for collaborative community initiatives. However, frameworks for developing a comprehensive process-evaluation plan for targeted programs are less common. Building from previous frameworks, the authors present a comprehensive and systematic approach for developing a process-evaluation plan to assess the implementation of a targeted health promotion intervention. Suggested elements for process-evaluation plans include fidelity, dose (delivered and received), reach, recruitment, and context. The purpose of this article is to describe and illustrate the steps involved in developing a processevaluation plan for any healthpromotion program.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1524839904273387

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saunders, R. P., Evans, M. H., & Joshi, P.
Affiliations
  • University of South Carolina (US)
  • South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (US)
Venue
Health Promotion Practice
Published
2005-04
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
134-147
ISSN
  • 1524-8399 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6372
OpenAlex
W2156843619
Cited by
1,031
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 40 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 107 · 2020: 77 · 2019: 65 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 81 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 72 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 37
FWCI
12.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Promotion Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
Keywords
process evaluation, health promotion programs, program implementation, evaluation planning, fidelity, dosage, REACH regulation, recruitment (clinical trials), context, targeted interventions, evaluation framework
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Health Plan Implementation, Health Promotion, Humans, Planning Techniques, School Health Services, United States, Process Assessment, Health Care, Community Health Planning

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