A Guide to Developing a TB Program Evaluation Plan
Return to Guide Main Menu
Appendix A: A Sample Evaluation Plan
In October 2002, health commissioners in the fictional
Lull County funded a program to address the rising incidence
of TB among the Salvadoran community. The following year,
they asked for an evaluation to be done to show whether or
not the program was working, and based on this evaluation
future program funding will be decided in April. The following
evaluation plan, using the template presented in A Guide to
Developing a TB Program Evaluation Plan, was developed to
answer their questions. |
TB Support Program - Evaluation Plan for January – March 2004
Prepared by: Ana Garcia
TB Nurse
Department of Health and Human Service
Division of TB Control & Prevention
Lull County
November 15, 2003
Note: The scope of this evaluation
plan is based on a small size program. TB program staff is
encouraged to start their evaluation small, focusing on areas
or program components where improvements may be needed most. |
INTRODUCTION
Tuberculosis was not a major concern in Lull County until in the
recent years. According to the county report, an average of 3 cases
was reported per year from 1995 to 2001. In 2002, six new cases
of TB were identified within three month period. Unlike previous
years, the infected suspects were new immigrant Salvadoran men rather
than the predominant white population. In response to this epidemic,
“TB Support Program” was implemented by the county health department
director, Henry Evans, to control and prevent further transmission
of TB in Lull County.
Evaluation Goal
The goal of this evaluation is to determine the effectiveness of
“TB Support Program” in preventing transmission of TB among Salvadoran
immigrants. This evaluation will investigate components of the TB
Support Program that are performing optimally and should be expanded
and replicated in future initiatives. In addition, this evaluation
will help determine the funding needs of TB Support Program for
the following year.
Evaluation Team
Our team consists of TB Support program staff and a nurse from
the TB clinic who works within the system and can access clinic/program
data easily. A member of the county commission was asked to participate
on the team to review plans and ensure needs for information are
met. Carlos, a leader from the local community who has a background
in the social sciences, was also asked to participate to ensure
the evaluation is culturally appropriate to the target community.
Table 1. Roles and Responsibilities of the Evaluation Team Members
Individual |
Title or Role |
Responsibilities |
Ana (TB nurse) |
Lead Evaluator |
Oversight of all evaluation activities to ensure the evaluation
is conducted as planned
Coordinate meetings for the team |
Libby (Program manager) |
Data Analysis |
Analyze quantitative data Coordinate the analysis of qualitative data Ensure implementation of findings |
Don (County health commissioner) |
Stakeholder/advisor |
Provide support and guidance and dissemination of results
|
John (Outreach worker) |
Data collection |
Gather and review data (QA?) |
Carlos (Health outreach projects director,
Latin American Association, (CBO)) |
Community liaison |
Coordinate data collection with community members |
Return to Table of
Contents
I. STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT
Note that stakeholders can be divided into 3 major categories:
persons involved in program operations, persons served or
affected by the program, and intended users of evaluation
findings. Organize the list of stakeholders to make sure no
one is left out. |
At the monthly TB program staff meeting, the evaluation of TB Support
Program was discussed. The following stakeholders were identified,
along with their interests and perspectives and how each stakeholder
should be involved in the process. After the meeting, Carlos was
also contacted to give perspective on how patients and the community
should be engaged. The following table summarizes the plan for stakeholder
engagement.
Table 2. Stakeholder Assessment and Engagement Plan
a. Persons involved in program operations
Stakeholder categories |
Interests/
perspectives |
Role in the evaluation |
How to engage |
Libby, John, Ana and other staff |
Fear program (and jobs) may be negatively changed See program evaluation as a personal judgment |
Defining program and context
Identifying data sources
Collecting data
Interpreting findings
Disseminating and implementing findings |
Meetings
Direct roles in conducting evaluation |
b. Persons served or affected by the program
Stakeholder categories |
Interests/
perspectives |
Role in the evaluation |
How to engage |
Patients of the TB clinic |
May fear or reject clinic/health system
Want better and accessible services |
Providing customer perspective
Interpreting findings |
Survey |
The foreign born community in general |
May be suspicious of outsiders to neighborhoods, especially
if illegal immigration is an issue |
Providing community context |
Inform of findings |
Other service programs in the area (employers, hospitals) |
May or may not be coping with similar challenges |
Disseminating findings to community audiences |
Inform of findings |
c. Intended users of evaluation findings
Stakeholder categories |
Interests/
perspectives |
Role in the evaluation |
How to
engage |
Libby |
To show effectiveness
Use findings to enhance the program |
Defining information needed from the evaluation
Developing and implementing recommendations |
Direct role in conducting evaluation |
County Health Commissioners
Clinical staff |
Know if the program is effective: best use county funds
Provide effective and acceptable treatment and care interventions
for TB |
Providing administrative/ funding context
Interpreting findings
Interpreting findings
Modifying practice (if needed) |
Don, direct role; others through a meeting
Meeting |
CBOs and community planning board- Carlos |
Improve community health, well being |
Disseminating findings |
Inform of findings |
Return to Table of
Contents
II. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE
TB PROGRAM AND PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL
Need
Most of this description comes from program materials (i.e.
grant application, reports and other program promotional materials). |
A culturally competent TB prevention program such as TB Support
Program is needed to combat the rise of TB incidence among the Salvadoran
immigrant community of Lull County. Newly arrived persons from a
high TB incidence country to Lull County are a major concern. Persons
with TB disease and infection are not being reached for timely treatment.
Consequently, TB cases are found on hospital admission after extensive
health damage has occurred and community transmission demonstrated.
Some newly discharged TB patients are lost to follow-up. Treatment
cost increases along with the rising morbidity, ill-health, and
suffering of the community members. The need for immediate attention
to TB is great. If the problem is left unattended, backlash against
foreign born population is possible.
Context
Historically, Lull County has been a low TB incidence area. Recent
surge in the number of TB cases has raised concerns in the community.
TB prevalence among the large number of newly arrived immigrants
was fairly high. Although the need for TB elimination and prevention
in this community is great, the capacity and resources needed to
address the magnitude of these surging TB issues in Lull County
is limited. TB Support program, an outreach program using “lay health
advisors” (LHAs) to target new immigrants in the community, is implemented
in response to this need. Under TB Support program, Spanish-speaking
lay health advisors are to provide directly observed therapy (DOT)
and social support in the immigrant community to increase targeted
testing and treatment adherence and promote early case finding in
the community.
Target Population
The target population for TB Support Program is newly arrived Salvadoran
immigrants who cannot speak English, have limited resources, a small
pool of family and friends if any at all, and may possibly have
legal problems with their immigration status.
Objectives
The goal of TB Support Program is to eliminate TB transmission
in the Salvadoran community, improve quality of life, and ultimately,
to eliminate TB in Lull County. In order to achieve this overarching
goal, program objectives were identified for the first year of the
program.
- Increase percentage of newly arrived, foreign born Salvadoran
TB patients who adhere to treatment to 100% by December 2003.
- Increase the number of newly arrived, foreign born Salvadoran
patients being treated for TB or LTBI by December 2003.
- Increase percentage of Salvadoran community members who understand
what to do if someone has a productive cough for 3 weeks or more
by March of 2004.
Because the program and problem are new, specific baselines, i.e.,
how much of an increase can be expected, is unknown.
Stage of Development
The program is relatively new; in operation for less than a year.
Resources/Inputs
Lay heath advisors (LHAs), TB staff, funding, community based organizations
and community health centers serving the Salvadoran community are
key inputs of TB Support program.
Activities
Lay health advisors (LHAs) training, community outreach/education,
TB screening/testing, prescribing treatment, and DOT visits make
up the major activity categories.
Outputs
As a result of the efforts done in TB Support Program, LHAs were
hired and trained, counseling provided, TB outreach/education conducted,
test conducted, referrals made, a treatment plan developed, and
DOT was administered.
Outcomes
A list of short-term outcomes include: patient’s knowledge increased,
trust is built, patients accept treatment for TB or LTBI, patients
identify contacts and possible source of cases, and patients use
TB and other services. Intermediate outcomes: patients adhere to
treatment, complete treatment, reduce hospital admissions for TB
among Salvadorans, and reduce transmission of TB. Long-term outcomes:
Salvadoran patients are healthier; eliminate TB in Salvadoran community,
and healthier community.
The resources, activities, outputs and outcomes are listed
in sequence in the following table. The logic model, after
drawing arrows, “fleshes out” how the components link together
and interconnected to produce results. |
Table 3. Project Description of TB Support Program
Logic Model
Return to Table of
Contents
III. FOCUS OF THE EVALUATION
Stakeholder Needs
What the stakeholders need to learned from the evaluation
is explored in stakeholder assessment in section I under intended
users of evaluation findings. Information from that section
can be refined and adopted for assessing stakeholder’s needs
here. |
From the beginning, four groups of people were identified as the
core users of the evaluation findings. They will be using the findings
in different ways and for different purposes. The table below summarizes
the users of this evaluation, what information they need or would
like to get from the evaluation, and how they intend to use that
information to achieve what they need or set out to do.
Users |
Need/Want to Know |
Uses |
County administrators |
Whether the program is working or not |
Determine whether the program should be funded to continue
or expand its services |
Program Manager |
How to enhance or refine the program |
Implement change to increase effectiveness of the program |
Clinical staff |
Clinical outcomes |
Adjust clinical practice if needed |
CBO representatives |
Social health outcomes |
Advocacy to community |
Evaluation Questions
Note that the evaluation questions do not address all of
the program objectives. Priorities must be set based on need
for information and resources available. |
Although the evaluation team generated many possible questions
in a brainstorming session, the evaluation team prioritized the
following as representing the most important aspects of the program
that could be examined at this time.
To determine if the program has been implemented as planned:
- Has appropriate (Spanish-speaking with a good understanding
of Salvadoran culture) staff been recruited?
- Has the staff (all TB program employees) been trained appropriately
(in TB practice and cultural competency)?
To determine if the program is meeting its objectives:
- Have more Salvadoran persons been tested and treated appropriately
(clinically sound, in Spanish, in a culturally sensitive manner)
for LTBI or TB?
- Are Salvadoran patients adhering to treatment (not lost to
care and follow-up)?
Evaluation Design
The evaluation team decided to use multiple data sources because
the program was small (few number of people served), the need to
obtain information to improve the program was high, and in-depth
information was needed. No control or comparison group seemed appropriate. The
team discussed reviewing records for Salvadoran patients in the
past and comparing these data to current program information, but
realized that it would be difficult since data in the files were
incomplete. The decision was made to assess the data against the
benchmarks the program has set. Further, it was decided that the
data collected for this evaluation would serve as a baseline for
later evaluations.
Resource Consideration
Assessing the treatment adherence rate of Salvadoran patients
will tell us whether the program is reaching its objective.
However, the logic model shows that addition data may be needed
to provide us with important information and insight into
why the objective is achieved or not, and what can be done
to improve the program. |
Resource available for evaluation is limited. Manpower consists
of 1 full time staff member who is only able to devote a few hours
a week to the evaluation. The other evaluation team members are
able to devote only a limited amount of time to the evaluation. However,
several of the evaluation team members work together and most stakeholder
groups meet regularly. Thus, some evaluation work can be done as
part of existing routines. Personnel records, training curriculum
and clinical records are available as existing data sources.
Additional data collection measuring patients’ perception will
be needed to understand whether patients feel trust is built with
their health care providers and whether their TB knowledge has increased.
Evaluation Standards
The evaluation team agreed that the evaluation data will be useful,
and should be feasible to collect. Propriety will be addressed through
consent form and all data will be kept confidential. While the
group agreed that there may be some issues regarding record keeping
or patient willingness to answer honestly, the accuracy of the strategy
was judged to be acceptable.
Return to Table of
Contents
IV. GATHERING CREDIBLE EVIDENCE: DATA
COLLECTION
Indicators
The evaluation team recognized that the terms used the evaluation
questions, e.g., “appropriately,” needed to be operationalized,
and the following list of indicators show the team’s decisions.
Since several program objectives were vague, the evaluation team
had to determine benchmarks that seemed reasonable, given the limited
information available. Each member of the evaluation team informally
talked with other stakeholders to ensure consensus.
Table 4. Indicators and Program Standards for Evaluation
Questions
Indicators |
Program
Benchmarks |
Number of qualified (bilingual/bi-cultural) staff |
Two LHAs of different gender are on staff, both speak
Spanish and are familiar with the Salvadoran culture |
LHAs received appropriate/adequate training in TB, interviewing
and DOT Other clinic staff were trained in working with LHAs
and TB competency strategies for Salvadorian culture |
All staff attended trainingTraining covered essential topics |
# Salvadoran persons treated by clinic for TB or LTBI Clinical treatment standards
Signs, forms available in Spanish
Clerks/staff know to access translators/LHA
Patient’s attitude of trust for TB program staff recommendations |
Each month of program operations has shown an increase
in the number of Salvadoran patients Clinical standards met
Patient education signs and forms in Spanish
Staff knows how to access and use translators
90% of Salvadoran patients report they believe what their
provider tells them about TB and trust their provider’s
recommendations. |
Attendance at DOT and clinic visits |
100% Salvadoran TB and LTBI patients who miss an appointment
are immediately rescheduled and keep appointment; no one
is lost to care |
Data Collection
The evaluation utilizes several methods of data collection in various
ways: interview, survey, observation, and record review. Staff interview
will be conducted to assess knowledge and behavior in accessing
translators and LHAs. Written survey (in Spanish) will be administered
to the patients in the clinic waiting room to assess patients’ perception
of the clinic (access to care, hours, acceptable environment/staff)
and their comfort level (attitudes and beliefs) about the staff
(a compromise due to limited funding). Observation will be conducted
to assess staff behaviors and language used in TB awareness signs.
Lastly, review of records, charts and training materials will be
conducted. Table 5 summarizes the data source and data collection
methodology that will be used to gather evidence for evaluation.
Table 5. Data Collection Plan
Indicators |
Data source |
Data Collection Method |
Number of qualified (bilingual/bi-cultural)
staff |
LHA staff
Personnel records |
Observe presence of staff
Review records if staff not present
|
LHAs received training in TB, interviewing
and DOT Other clinic staff were trained in working with LHAs
and cultural competency |
Training attendance records Curriculum |
Review records of training sessions and attendance, materials
presented
|
# Salvadorian immigrants treated by
clinic for TB or LTBI Clinical treatment standards (calendar
of standard appointment dates based on initiation of TB drugs)
Signs, forms available in Spanish Clerks/staff know to access
translators/LHA Patients feel they can trust the TB program |
Clinic records, interviews with staff
Clinic charts
Signs and forms
Staff knowledge and behaviors
Patient perceptions |
Review records for country of origin and date of arrival
in US, notes in file, ask staff to identify from client
list
Chart review
Observation
Interviews/observations
Survey sample of patients (forms and drop box in clinic
waiting room, in Spanish, no identifiers asked)
|
Attendance at DOT and clinic visits
(appointment system and missed appointment follow-up) |
Program visit records |
Review records, noting if any patients are lost of care
|
Plan Timeline
Table 6. Illustrative Timeline for Evaluation Activities
Evaluation
Activities |
Timing of Activities
for Jan – Mar. 2004 |
Jan |
Feb |
Mar |
April |
Evaluation planning |
+ |
|
|
|
Data collection |
|
+ |
|
|
Analysis/interpretation |
|
|
+ |
|
Report/dissemination |
|
|
|
+ |
Return to Table of
Contents
V. JUSTIFY CONCLUSIONS: ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Analysis
Both quantitative and qualitative methods will be used to analyze
the data. Simple counts of frequency will be use for quantitative
data analysis. Qualitative methods such as content analysis will
be used to review training curriculum, patient charts and records
for themes and patterns.
Table 7. Analysis Plan
Data Analysis Technique |
Responsible
Person |
Quantitative – frequency/counts |
Libby |
Qualitative – content analysis |
Libby, Ana and staff |
Interpretation
Stakeholders including the county administrator, program manager/staff,
LHAs, medical staff and CBO representatives will be included in
a scheduled meeting to interpret the findings. The data from the
evaluation will be compared to the established program benchmarks.
Stakeholders and those involved in program operations will be given
an opportunity to justify the findings and make recommendations
accordingly.
Return to Table of
Contents
VI. ENSURE USE AND SHARE LESSONS LEARNED:
REPORT & DISSEMINATION
Dissemination
Evaluation finding will be disseminated via various channels. Presentations
will be given at the program staff meeting and to the health care
providers at regular staff meetings. A short report will be drafted
and a presentation offered for the county health commissioners.
An article will also be added to the newsletter the health department
periodically compiles. Carlos will also write an article to go in
a local Spanish newspaper and offer to present at community meetings.
Table 8. Dissemination Plan
Yes |
Dissemination
Medium |
Responsible
Person |
|
Presentations at staff meeting
Presentation to health care providers |
Libby |
|
Report and briefing to county administrator
and commissioners |
Ana |
|
Article in HD newsletter |
Libby/John |
|
Article for community newsletter,
briefings to community groups |
Carlos |
Use
Libby, the program manager, and staff will use the findings to
refine program strategies for TB Support Program. The findings will
help guide the program to focus on areas that are most crucial for
effective service delivery. Health care professional will use the
finding to improve their medical practices in serving Salvadoran
community. County health department administrators, led by Don,
will use the findings to determine the future funding distribution
for the program. The community liaison, Carlos, will use the findings
in advocacy efforts. Finally, findings from this evaluation will
be used for future evaluations.
Last Reviewed: 05/18/2008 Content Source: Division of Tuberculosis Elimination
National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention
|