Process Evaluation and Lessons Learned From Engaging Local Policymakers in the B’More Healthy Communities for Kids Trial

Cyd S. Nam, Alexandra Ross, Cara Ruggiero, Marie Ferguson, Yeeli Mui, Bruce Y. Lee, Joel Gittelsohn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Partnerships linking researchers to the policymaking process can be effective in increasing communication and supporting health policy. However, these policy partnerships rarely conduct process evaluation. The Policy Working Group (Policy WG) was the policy-level intervention of the multilevel B’More Healthy Communities for Kids (BHCK) trial. The group sought to align interests of local policymakers, inform local food and nutrition policy, introduce policymakers to a new simulation modeling, and sustain intervention levels of BHCK. We conducted an evaluation on the Policy WG between July 2013 and May 2016. We evaluated process indicators for reach, dose-delivered, and fidelity and developed a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. The policy intervention was implemented with high reach and dose-delivered. Fidelity measures improved from moderate to nearly high over time. The number of health-related issues on policymakers’ agenda increased from 50% in the first 2 years to 150% of the high standard in Year 3. SWOT analysis integrated a stakeholder feedback survey to consider areas of strength, weakness, opportunity, and threats. Although the fidelity of the modeling was low at 37% of the high standard, stakeholders indicated that the simulation modeling should be a primary purpose for policy intervention. Results demonstrate that process evaluation and SWOT analysis is useful for tracking the progress of policy interventions in multilevel trials and can be used to monitor the progress of building partnerships with policymakers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalHealth Education and Behavior
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jul 1 2018

Fingerprint

Nutrition Policy
Health Policy
Politicians
Evaluation
Research Personnel
Health
Threat
Fidelity
Dose
Stakeholders
Simulation Modeling
Surveys and Questionnaires
Modeling
Food
Policy Making
Nutrition
Monitor
Communication
Agenda

Keywords

  • chronic disease
  • community health intervention
  • health policy
  • multilevel intervention
  • obesity
  • process evaluation
  • urban

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Process Evaluation and Lessons Learned From Engaging Local Policymakers in the B’More Healthy Communities for Kids Trial. / Nam, Cyd S.; Ross, Alexandra; Ruggiero, Cara; Ferguson, Marie; Mui, Yeeli; Lee, Bruce Y.; Gittelsohn, Joel.

In: Health Education and Behavior, 01.07.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c40b791bd75e4dcfb710a4396bde6789,
title = "Process Evaluation and Lessons Learned From Engaging Local Policymakers in the B’More Healthy Communities for Kids Trial",
abstract = "Partnerships linking researchers to the policymaking process can be effective in increasing communication and supporting health policy. However, these policy partnerships rarely conduct process evaluation. The Policy Working Group (Policy WG) was the policy-level intervention of the multilevel B’More Healthy Communities for Kids (BHCK) trial. The group sought to align interests of local policymakers, inform local food and nutrition policy, introduce policymakers to a new simulation modeling, and sustain intervention levels of BHCK. We conducted an evaluation on the Policy WG between July 2013 and May 2016. We evaluated process indicators for reach, dose-delivered, and fidelity and developed a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. The policy intervention was implemented with high reach and dose-delivered. Fidelity measures improved from moderate to nearly high over time. The number of health-related issues on policymakers’ agenda increased from 50{\%} in the first 2 years to 150{\%} of the high standard in Year 3. SWOT analysis integrated a stakeholder feedback survey to consider areas of strength, weakness, opportunity, and threats. Although the fidelity of the modeling was low at 37{\%} of the high standard, stakeholders indicated that the simulation modeling should be a primary purpose for policy intervention. Results demonstrate that process evaluation and SWOT analysis is useful for tracking the progress of policy interventions in multilevel trials and can be used to monitor the progress of building partnerships with policymakers.",
keywords = "chronic disease, community health intervention, health policy, multilevel intervention, obesity, process evaluation, urban",
author = "Nam, {Cyd S.} and Alexandra Ross and Cara Ruggiero and Marie Ferguson and Yeeli Mui and Lee, {Bruce Y.} and Joel Gittelsohn",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1090198118778323",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Health Education and Behavior",
issn = "1090-1981",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Process Evaluation and Lessons Learned From Engaging Local Policymakers in the B’More Healthy Communities for Kids Trial

AU - Nam, Cyd S.

AU - Ross, Alexandra

AU - Ruggiero, Cara

AU - Ferguson, Marie

AU - Mui, Yeeli

AU - Lee, Bruce Y.

AU - Gittelsohn, Joel

PY - 2018/7/1

Y1 - 2018/7/1

N2 - Partnerships linking researchers to the policymaking process can be effective in increasing communication and supporting health policy. However, these policy partnerships rarely conduct process evaluation. The Policy Working Group (Policy WG) was the policy-level intervention of the multilevel B’More Healthy Communities for Kids (BHCK) trial. The group sought to align interests of local policymakers, inform local food and nutrition policy, introduce policymakers to a new simulation modeling, and sustain intervention levels of BHCK. We conducted an evaluation on the Policy WG between July 2013 and May 2016. We evaluated process indicators for reach, dose-delivered, and fidelity and developed a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. The policy intervention was implemented with high reach and dose-delivered. Fidelity measures improved from moderate to nearly high over time. The number of health-related issues on policymakers’ agenda increased from 50% in the first 2 years to 150% of the high standard in Year 3. SWOT analysis integrated a stakeholder feedback survey to consider areas of strength, weakness, opportunity, and threats. Although the fidelity of the modeling was low at 37% of the high standard, stakeholders indicated that the simulation modeling should be a primary purpose for policy intervention. Results demonstrate that process evaluation and SWOT analysis is useful for tracking the progress of policy interventions in multilevel trials and can be used to monitor the progress of building partnerships with policymakers.

AB - Partnerships linking researchers to the policymaking process can be effective in increasing communication and supporting health policy. However, these policy partnerships rarely conduct process evaluation. The Policy Working Group (Policy WG) was the policy-level intervention of the multilevel B’More Healthy Communities for Kids (BHCK) trial. The group sought to align interests of local policymakers, inform local food and nutrition policy, introduce policymakers to a new simulation modeling, and sustain intervention levels of BHCK. We conducted an evaluation on the Policy WG between July 2013 and May 2016. We evaluated process indicators for reach, dose-delivered, and fidelity and developed a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. The policy intervention was implemented with high reach and dose-delivered. Fidelity measures improved from moderate to nearly high over time. The number of health-related issues on policymakers’ agenda increased from 50% in the first 2 years to 150% of the high standard in Year 3. SWOT analysis integrated a stakeholder feedback survey to consider areas of strength, weakness, opportunity, and threats. Although the fidelity of the modeling was low at 37% of the high standard, stakeholders indicated that the simulation modeling should be a primary purpose for policy intervention. Results demonstrate that process evaluation and SWOT analysis is useful for tracking the progress of policy interventions in multilevel trials and can be used to monitor the progress of building partnerships with policymakers.

KW - chronic disease

KW - community health intervention

KW - health policy

KW - multilevel intervention

KW - obesity

KW - process evaluation

KW - urban

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049775085&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85049775085&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1090198118778323

DO - 10.1177/1090198118778323

M3 - Article

C2 - 29969930

AN - SCOPUS:85049775085

JO - Health Education and Behavior

JF - Health Education and Behavior

SN - 1090-1981

ER -