Striking a Balance between Program-Specific and Portfolio-Level Evaluation: Lessons Learned from a Multi-Site Evaluation on the Texas-Mexico Border |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Health Resources in Action, 2 Boylston Street, Boston, MA, 02116, United States;2. Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA;3. Steuck & Associates, San Antonio, TX;4. Project Y Evaluation Services, LLC, Steamboat Springs, CO;5. Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas, Inc., San Antonio, TX;1. Texas A&M University, College of Education and Human Development, Department of Health and Kinesiology, MS 4243, College Station, TX 77843-4243, United States;2. Baylor University, College of Health and Human Sciences, Department of Health, Human Performance, and Recreation, One Bear Place #97343, Waco, TX 76798, United States;3. Baylor University, Division of Student Life, One Bear Place #97016, Waco, TX 76798, United States;1. School of Economics and Management, Xidian University, No. 2 South Taibai Street, Xi’an, Shaanxi Province, PR China;2. Shaanxi Xi ''an Yanta District, Shida Road, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an, Shaanxi Province, PR China;1. Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA;2. Gilling School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA;3. Kilimanjaro Clinical Research Institute, Moshi, Tanzania;4. Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre, Moshi, Tanzania;5. Kilimanjaro Christian Medical University College, Moshi, Tanzania;6. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK;7. Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA;1. School of Social Sciences, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith NSW, 2751, Australia;2. School of Business, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith NSW, 2751, Australia;3. School of Allied Health, Australian Catholic University, 25A Barker Rd., Strathfield, NSW, Australia;1. Claremont Graduate University, United States;2. California State University, Los Angeles, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | Funders are increasingly making strategic investments across multiple grantees, aiming for their portfolio to improve targeted outcomes in a specific issue area. To this end, funders might use multi-site evaluation (MSE) approaches to examine the impact of their collective investments. However, it is important to recognize that each program—and its own program evaluation—must be tailored to its setting, population, and local context to best meet the needs of its target population. Therefore, multi-site evaluations need to account for this complexity. This paper describes the Sí Texas project, a large initiative of eight grantees implementing different integrated behavioral health models to improve physical and mental health outcomes along the Texas-Mexico border. With over 4,200 MSE study participants, the evaluation for Sí Texas used a partnership-centered approach to both enhance the evidence base and build local organizational capacity. This paper describes this approach, the process of tailoring evaluation practices to the grantees’ context, and the challenge of balancing consistency at the grantee-level for the portfolio multi-site evaluation. Successes, challenges, and lessons learned related to study design, data collection, grantee partnership, and capacity building are discussed. |
| |
| Keywords: | multi-site evaluation behavioral health public health health care capacity-building |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
