ECUR 809 Assignment #2

An over funded pilot research project financed by the National Health Research and Development Program (NHRDP) was designed to examine the feasibility and results of an exercise program for pregnant aboriginal women with a history of gestational diabetes. The pilot project led to the spontaneous creation of a side program promoting exercise for all pregnant aboriginal women. This program is the subject of a potential evaluation; however, I found the information given in the article describing the program to be too basic. There were gaps in the details that are needed for a potential evaluator to formulate a plan. What does the client hope to accomplish by performing an evaluation?  Who is the audience for the evaluation? Evaluation could attempt to find answers for a number of questions; for example, did the women find exercise more accessible through using the program or did the program have an impact on the incidence of diabetes among the women who enrolled? Knowing more details would help to focus the evaluation and better assess the program. Gaining more information would be one of the first steps in the evaluation process. Assuming the purpose of the evaluation is to guide the stakeholders in decisions regarding the future of the program and considering Stufflebeam’s advocacy for a decision-oriented approach to evaluation (Fitzpatrick et al, 2004), it seems appropriate to use the CIPP evaluation model.    

CIPP Begins with ‘C’ - context evaluation.  At first glance it would appear that the programs objectives are obvious and stem from the facts: gestational diabetes is common in pregnant aboriginal women; we know that the increased activity is instrumental in the prevention of gestational diabetes; making a program available to promote increased activity levels in aboriginal women will help these women to have healthier pregnancies;  and increasing the activity of pregnant aboriginal women will decrease the incidence of gestational diabetes.  However, after reading the brief description of the program I felt uneasy about accepting the seemingly apparent objective.  I came up with a list of other possible objectives. Did the exercise program decrease the occurrence of type II diabetes? Promote health in the participants? Determine the feasibility of conducting an exercise program for pregnant aboriginal women?, provide a partnership and foster relationships with the aboriginal community?  Since the program was a bit of a spontaneous effort as an aside to a pilot program that was experiencing limited clientele, the context evaluation component of the CIPP evaluation model should not be overlooked or trivialized.  The objectives can be defined more concretely, proceeding through the evaluation to gain a deeper understanding of the program.

As opposed to the Tylerian objectives oriented style approach, where the evaluator seeks purely to answer the question of goal attainment, the CIPP model can be used to examine the program and guide the development through recommendations provided by the evaluator; this helps the stakeholders gain valuable information and insight.  Starting with clarifying the objectives of the program, the context evaluation could include a needs assessment and a gap analysis.  The input evaluation could help the program planners to consider the alternative ways of meeting the objectives.  It could be revealed that there are more effective delivery strategies that would provide a higher cost-benefit ratio.  Investigation into the implementation could look at participation rates and ways to increase them. This component of the evaluation would help to facilitate improvements to the delivery.  Finally, product evaluation could determine the value of the program in it’s many aspects including the overall experience for the women.  Exploration of the long term effects would be beneficial but could be costly; the budget would determine the depth at which each component could be explored and which additional tools could be employed.  Overall, the CIPP model is effective in helping decision makers determine the next step for the program.     

References

Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2004). Program Evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Klomp, H., Dyck, R., and Sheppards, S. (2003). Description and evaluation of a prenatal exercise program  for urban Aboriginal women. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 27 : 231-238.