If a program evaluation has research-caliber rigor then the results are more likely to be credible. We use a case example to explore the key practical issues involved in doing a rigorous program evaluation.
HRSA's Bureau of Primary Health Care is implementing a 6-year Breakthrough Series program to improve the quality of care and outcomes in community health centers. The program is based on principles of rapid quality improvement (Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Breakthrough Series methodology) and chronic disease management (Wagner Chronic Care Model). During the first year of a Diabetes Breakthrough Series program, the Bureau invited the University of Chicago to perform an evaluation of the initiative in 19 Midwestern health centers.
We will discuss the: 1) Types of data that the formal evaluation added. We used multiple research methods, including chart review, provider and patient surveys, and qualitative interviews. 2) Conceptual model that guided the evaluation. We used clinical and organizational process and outcome measures. 3) Additional effort that was necessary to ensure that the data and analysis were valid and representative. 4) Skills the research team needed to complete the project successfully. 5) Advice on ways to facilitate a collaborative community-academic evaluation effort.
Our primary goal is to help the audience recognize the key issues and questions involved in designing and implementing research-caliber program evaluation.
Learning Objectives: 1) To learn how to make evaluation projects have research-caliber rigor 2) To learn the practical challenges of doing research-caliber evaluation.
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Organization/institution whose products or services will be discussed: Bureau of Primary Health Care
Institute for Healthcare Improvement
Disclosure not received
Relationship: Not Received.