Dataset Information

Evaluability assessment of "growing healthy communities," a mini-grant program to improve access to healthy foods and places for physical activity.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Mini-grants have been used to stimulate multisector collaboration in support of public health initiatives by funding non-traditional partners, such as economic development organizations. Such mini-grants have the potential to increase access to healthy foods and places for physical activity through built environment change, especially in small and rural towns in the United States. Although a promising practice, few mini-grant evaluations have been done. Therefore, our purpose was to conduct an Evaluability Assessment (EA), which is a process that can help promising programs that lack evidence advance toward full-scale evaluation. Specifically, we conducted an Evaluability Assessment of a statewide mini-grant program, called "Growing Healthy Communities" (GHC), to determine if this program was ready for evaluation and identify any changes needed for future implementation and evaluation that could also inform similar programs. METHODS:Telephone interviews with directors of six past mini-grant recipient organizations were conducted to assess implementation and evaluability. The six interviews were split equally among agencies receiving funding for food-oriented projects and physical activity-oriented projects. Within- and cross-case thematic analyses of interview transcripts were conducted. RESULTS:Organizational capacity was a universal theme, reflecting other key themes (described in detail in the manuscript) that affected program implementation and evaluation, including collaboration, limited time and measurement integration. CONCLUSIONS:The EA process provided pilot data that suggest that other state, regional, and national funders should provide centralized assistance for data collection and evaluation from the outset of a mini-grant award program.

SUBMITTER: Abildso CG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6585124 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluability assessment of "growing healthy communities," a mini-grant program to improve access to healthy foods and places for physical activity.

Abildso Christiaan G CG Dyer Angela A Daily Shay M SM Bias Thomas K TK

BMC public health 20190620 1

<h4>Background</h4>Mini-grants have been used to stimulate multisector collaboration in support of public health initiatives by funding non-traditional partners, such as economic development organizations. Such mini-grants have the potential to increase access to healthy foods and places for physical activity through built environment change, especially in small and rural towns in the United States. Although a promising practice, few mini-grant evaluations have been done. Therefore, our purpose ...[more]

PMID: 31221120

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPolicies that improve access to healthy, affordable foods may improve population health and reduce health disparities. In the United States most food access policy research focuses on urban communities even though residents of rural communities face disproportionately higher risk for nutrition-related chronic diseases compared to residents of urban communities. The purpose of this study was to (1) identify the factors associated with access to healthy, affordable food in rural communities in the United States; and (2) prioritize a meaningful and feasible rural food policy research agenda.MethodsThis study was conducted by the Rural Food Access Workgroup (RFAWG), a workgroup facilitated by the Nutrition and Obesity Policy Research and Evaluation Network. A national sample of academic and non-academic researchers, public health and cooperative extension practitioners, and other experts who focus on rural food access and economic development was invited to complete a concept mapping process that included brainstorming the factors that are associated with rural food access, sorting and organizing the factors into similar domains, and rating the importance of policies and research to address these factors. As a last step, RFAWG members convened to interpret the data and establish research recommendations.ResultsSeventy-five participants in the brainstorming exercise represented the following sectors: non-extension research (n = 27), non-extension program administration (n = 18), "other" (n = 14), policy advocacy (n = 10), and cooperative extension service (n = 6). The brainstorming exercise generated 90 distinct statements about factors associated with rural food access in the United States; these were sorted into 5 clusters. Go Zones were established for the factors that were rated highly as both a priority policy target and a priority for research. The highest ranked policy and research priorities include strategies designed to build economic viability in rural communities, improve access to federal food and nutrition assistance programs, improve food retail systems, and increase the personal food production capacity of rural residents. Respondents also prioritized the development of valid and reliable research methodologies to measure variables associated with rural food access.ConclusionsThis collaborative, trans-disciplinary, participatory process, created a map to guide and prioritize research about polices to improve healthy, affordable food access in rural communities.

Project description:BackgroundFoundations and public agencies commonly fund focused initiatives for individual grantees. These discrete, stand-alone initiatives can risk failure by being carried out in isolation. Fostering synergy among grantees' initiatives is one strategy proposed for promoting the success and impact of grant programs. We evaluate an explicit strategy to build synergy within the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Southern Rural Access Program (SRAP), which awarded grants to collaboratives within eight southeastern U.S. states to strengthen basic health care services in targeted rural counties.MethodsWe interviewed 39 key participants of the SRAP, including the program director within each state and the principal subcontractors heading the program's funded initiatives that supported heath professionals' recruitment, retention and training, made loans to health care providers, and built networks among providers. Interews were recorded and transcribed. Two investigators independently coded the transcripts and a third investigator distilled the main points.ResultsParticipants generally perceived that the SRAP yielded more synergies than other grant programs in which they had participated and that these synergies added to the program's impact. The synergies most often noted were achieved through relationship building among grantees and with outside agencies, sharing information and know-how, sharing resources, combining efforts to yield greater capacity, joining voices to advocate for common goals, and spotting gaps in services offered and then filling these gaps. The SRAP's strategies that participants felt fostered synergy included targeting funding to culturally and geographically similar states, supporting complementary types of initiatives, promoting opportunities to network through semi-annual meetings and regular conference calls, and the advocacy efforts of the program's leadership. Participants noted that synergies were sometimes hindered by turf issues and politics and the conflicting perspectives and cultures of participating organizations and racial groups. Inadequate funding through the SRAP, restricting program involvement to only a few needy counties, and instances of over- and under-involvement by the program's leadership were sometimes felt to inhibit synergies and/or their sustainability.ConclusionParticipants of the SRAP generally perceived that the SRAP's deliberate strategies yielded synergies that added to the program's impact.

Project description:BackgroundFor many research teams, the role of community stakeholders is critical. However, community stakeholders, especially those in low-income settings, are at risk of being excluded from research and community engagement initiatives during and after the COVID-19 pandemic because of the rapid transition to digital operations.ObjectiveWe aimed to describe the implementation and feasibility of a program called Addressing the Digital Divide to Improve Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, which was designed to address barriers to technology use, and to examine changes in participants' perceived comfort with digital technology before and after the program.MethodsTo promote full engagement, we worked with 20 existing community leaders to cocreate a training course on using digital technology. We assessed the frequency of technology use and comfort with technology through an adapted 8-item version of the Functional Assessment of Comfort Employing Technology Scale and used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for survey analysis. We also conducted a focus group session with 10 participants and then performed reflective journaling and content analysis to determine emergent themes.ResultsWe found that the program was feasible to implement and worthwhile for participants (15/16, 94%). After the program, the participants perceived an increase in the frequency of technology use (z=2.76, P=.006). The participants reported that the program was successful because of the technology training program, but recommended that the program have a slower pace and include a helpline number that they could call with questions.ConclusionsFuture programs should consider that populations with low literacy view technology training as a core element to decreasing technology disparity. This study demonstrates that through low-cost input, community members can be provided the resources and training needed to virtually participate in research studies or community engagement initiatives.

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the United States and places substantial burden on the health care system. Rural populations, especially women, have considerably higher rates of cardiovascular disease, influenced by poverty, environmental factors, access to health care, and social and cultural attitudes and norms.Methods/designThis community-based study will be a two-arm randomized controlled efficacy trial comparing a multi-level, community program (Strong Hearts, Healthy Communities) with a minimal intervention control program (Strong Hearts, Healthy Women). Strong Hearts, Healthy Communities was developed by integrating content from three evidence-based programs and was informed by extensive formative research (e.g. community assessments, focus groups, and key informant interviews). Classes will meet twice weekly for one hour for 24 weeks and focus on individual-level skill building and behavior change; social and civic engagement are also core programmatic elements. Strong Hearts, Healthy Women will meet monthly for hour-long sessions over the 24 weeks covering similar content in a general, condensed format. Overweight, sedentary women 40 years of age and older from rural, medically underserved communities (12 in Montana and 4 in New York) will be recruited; sites, pair-matched based on rurality, will be randomized to full or minimal intervention. Data will be collected at baseline, midpoint, intervention completion, and six-month, one-year, and eighteen months post-intervention. The primary outcome is change in body weight; secondary outcomes include physiologic, anthropometric, behavioral, and psychosocial variables. In the full intervention, engagement of participants' friends and family members in partnered activities and community events is an intervention target, hypothesizing that there will be a reciprocal influence of physical activity and diet behavior between participants and their social network. Family members and/or friends will be invited to complete baseline and follow-up questionnaires about their health behaviors and environment, height and weight, and attitudes and beliefs.DiscussionStrong Hearts, Healthy Communities aims to reduce cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality, improve quality of life, and reduce cardiovascular disease-related health care burden in underserved rural communities. If successful, the long-term goal is for the program to be nationally disseminated, providing a feasible model to reduce cardiovascular disease in rural settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02499731 Registered on July 1, 2015.

Dataset Information

Evaluability assessment of "growing healthy communities," a mini-grant program to improve access to healthy foods and places for physical activity.

Publications

Evaluability assessment of "growing healthy communities," a mini-grant program to improve access to healthy foods and places for physical activity.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets