Academic journal article International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology

Reporting a Program Evaluation: Needs, Program Plan, Intervention, and Decisions

Academic journal article International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology

Reporting a Program Evaluation: Needs, Program Plan, Intervention, and Decisions

Article excerpt

KEYWORDS

Report;

Program evaluation;

Needs;

Design;

Theoretical study

Abstract The approach to intervention programs varies depending on the methodological perspective adopted. This means that health professionals lack clear guidelines regarding how best to proceed, and it hinders the accumulation of knowledge. The aim of this paper is to set out the essential and common aspects that should be included in any program evaluation report, thereby providing a useful guide for the professional regardless of the procedural approach used. Furthermore, the paper seeks to integrate the different methodologies and illustrate their complementarity, this being a key aspect in terms of real intervention contexts, which are constantly changing. The aspects to be included are presented in relation to the main stages of the evaluation process: needs, objectives and design (prior to the intervention), implementation (during the intervention), and outcomes (after the intervention). For each of these stages the paper describes the elements on which decisions should be based, highlighting the role of empirical evidence gathered through the application of instruments to defined samples and according to a given procedure.

© 2012 Asociación Española de Psicología Conductual. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.

All rights reserved.

PALABRAS CLAVE

Informe;

Evaluación de programas;

Necesidades;

Diseño;

Estudio teórico

Resumen Se encuentran diferentes posturas respecto a programas de intervención en función de la perspectiva metodológica adoptada, por lo que el profesional de la salud no dispone de unas directrices claras de actuación, dificultándose la acumulación del conocimiento. El objetivo propuesto es concretar los aspectos básicos/mínimos y comunes a explicitar en el informe de evaluación de cualquier programa, útil para el profesional, independientemente de la opción procedimental que se elija, fomentando de este modo la integración y la complementariedad entre metodologías, como respuesta a las circunstancias reales del contexto de intervención en cambio continuo. Estos aspectos se encuadran en las principales fases de evaluación: necesidades, objetivos y diseño (antes de la intervención), implementación (durante esta) y resultados (después de la intervención). En cada una de ellas, se explicita en qué elementos basar la toma de decisiones a partir de evidencias empíricas registradas mediante instrumentos en unas muestras siguiendo un procedimiento determinado.

© 2012 Asociación Española de Psicología Conductual. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.

Todos los derechos reservados.

The approach to intervention programs varies depending on the methodological perspective adopted (Anguera, 2003; Wallraven, 2011), and this means that the health professional lacks clear guidelines regarding which designs and implementation and evaluation procedures to use in what are constantly changing intervention contexts. This situation hampers the integrated accumulation of knowledge. The aim of this paper is to set out the essential and common aspects that should be included in any program evaluation report, thereby providing a useful guide for professionals regardless of the procedural approach used (i.e., qualitative or quantitative, experimental, quasi-experimental, or observational).

The premise of the paper is that the design and evaluation facets are in constant interaction with one another, and the conclusions drawn are set out below in operational terms. It is argued that from the initial needs assessment through to the final evaluation of outcomes there is a continuum of decision making that must be based on empirical evidence gathered by means of scientific methodology (Anguera & Chacón, 2008), regardless of the specific methodological or procedural approach that is chosen at any given stage of the process. By setting out the decision-making criteria for the whole intervention process, the aim is to provide professionals with a useful resource based on common principles, thereby fostering the integration of scientific knowledge in the health context. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.