Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Claire Galligan - CAAP 2015 Evaluation Report


Published on

Community Action on Alcohol Pilot Project

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Claire Galligan - CAAP 2015 Evaluation Report

  4. 4. COMMUNITY ACTION ON ALCOHOL, PROJECT GOALS • To introduce a model of community mobilisation • To build awareness of alcohol related harm • To raise awareness of community mobilisation measures as part of the National Substance Misuse Strategy • To promote community engagement • To ensure evaluation measures are built into the development of plans
  5. 5. GOALS OF THE EVALUATION To carry out a process evaluation to explore … • The Quality of Training • Assess the knowledge/awareness of alcohol related harms • Identify the number of action plans developed • Assess how the project can contribute to current research and development
  6. 6. OVERVIEW OF APPROACH Literature review Early focus group with trainees Overview of documents Observation of training sessions Observation of facilitated sessions Focus groups with sub committees Interview with stakeholder Overview of materials Interview with project leader
  7. 7. METHODOLOGY • Process Evaluation - concerned with HOW a programme is actually delivered • Takes into account, the process and the context in which it took place • Qualitative evaluation – provides a rich description • Range of methods used, including observation and focus groups • Analysis of data was carried out in a systematic way, to lessen the bias of the researcher • Questions designed around the goals of the evaluation
  8. 8. LITERATURE REVIEW • Draws from peer reviewed studies about community mobilisation and good practice in adult/public health education Formation of a community coalition, involving key stakeholders Training in areas of alcohol related harm and evidence based measures Local research to inform actions Identifying approach to address harms identified (Includes a media strategy) Implementing plan (including policy change)and evaluating progress
  9. 9. KEY FINDINGS OF LITERATURE REVIEW • Community mobilisation has been effective in reducing alcohol related harms • While projects adopt a similar approach, the processes used can differ • Limited data about training for community mobilisation on alcohol, however one model shows that training is linked to more effective community coalitions and fidelity to science based approaches • Aspects of effective models include: engaging a wide range of stakeholders, good leadership capacity, a functioning community coalition, availability of resources, full time coordinator, adoption to science based approaches and using the media. • Community mobilisation can take place in communities where there is resistance to seeing alcohol as a problem • The timeframe of a community mobilisation process can be around 5 years
  10. 10. KEY FINDINGS OF LIT REVIEW (CONTD.) • Key strategies employed by coalitions include grass roots organising, building leadership capacity in the community, working to enforce existing laws, direct action, negotiating with store owners and education/training (including training community members to conduct research) • Community mobilisation is most effective in a supported policy environment • Community mobilisation is measured using already available statistics, utilising control communities, proxy buyers and self assessment measures • Training is delivered onsite with leadership boards • Technical assistance from university staff, to carry out research and analysis is also seen as a supportive factor
  11. 11. LIT REVIEW: QUALITY TRAINING • Adults need to know why they are learning • Adults are motivated to learn by the need to solve problems • Adults previous experience must be respected and built upon • Learning approaches should match adults background and diversity • Adults need to be actively involved in the learning process • DEWF standards are similar to above, but also need to contextualise programme within current drug strategies
  12. 12. PROJECT NARRATIVE Taskforces invited to apply. Five selected Selected Taskforces informed of project requirements Taskforces establish Alcohol Sub Committees Representatives take part in 5 formal training days Taskforces facilitated to develop alcohol action plans
  13. 13. PRIMARY RESEARCH FINDINGS: TRAINING • Training objectives mirror key priorities outlined in the literature review • Training materials are organised, easy to follow and link closely with session objectives • Training explores participants ‘socialisation’ in relation to alcohol • Training methodologies mirror best practice in adult education (re drug prevention) • Training perceived as very high quality by all trainees • Some trainees have prior knowledge of some training objectives, however it gives them confidence and validates them in their approach
  14. 14. PRIMARY RESEARCH FINDINGS: LEARNING OUTCOMES (2) • Trainees increased their knowledge of alcohol related harm, the policy environment and community mobilisation approaches • Structure/location of training was difficult for groups outside of Dublin • Not always easy for trainees to ‘feed back’ to their sub committees • All trainees report the positive impact of networking and the project having a national focus • Facilitated sessions viewed positively by all groups, in particular, the knowledge and expertise of trainer
  15. 15. PRIMARY RESEARCH FINDINGS: IMPACT ON WORK PRACTICES • Questionnaire data shows that training was impacting on work practices • The project puts the focus on alcohol for all participant groups • Challenges groups to adopt a ‘public health model’ approach to drug use • Trainees apply learning to other aspects of their work • Stakeholder attendance at training may impact on the adoption of work practices. Higher fidelity to approach where larger range of stakeholders attend training. • Not all groups establish a leadership group with a range of stakeholders • All projects report that alcohol work is a strain on their resources and takes away from other work
  16. 16. COMMUNITY ACTION PLANS TO ADDRESS ALCOHOL MISUSE • Four out of five Task Force Groups completed action plans that included monitoring, review and evaluation measures • Stakeholder engagement in the planning process varied between groups
  17. 17. ENABLING FACTORS • High quality training increases knowledge of alcohol related harms • Facilitated sessions help groups to apply learning and adopt lessons • Participants gain from the networking experience • Knowledge and expertise of trainer • High and consistent level of attendance • Full participation and enjoyment
  18. 18. CRITICAL BARRIERS AND STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS THEM • Additional supports given by trainer, above and beyond the project brief • Training gaps for some participants, are addressed through additional inputs by trainer • Some projects do not engage a range of stakeholders, despite supports given • Location and time needed seen as a barrier by some participants • Resources to implement seen as a barrier by all participants • Project is very early in the mobilisation process, projects with limited growth to date still intend to adopt lessons
  19. 19. DETERMINANTS OF SUSTAINABILITY AND TRANSFERABILITY • Training has supported the process of ‘embedding’ alcohol work within the taskforces • Ongoing support for groups following the formal training process has also supported sustainability • Limited resources may affect sustainability in the longer term • The wider policy environment does not always support the proposed changes to address alcohol harm at a community level • Some boards did not engage a range of stakeholders .. Indicates limited community ownership, may impact on sustainability • Engagement with university researchers may also support sustainability
  20. 20. FURTHER RESEARCH • Limited research available on community mobilisation processes and very little on community mobilisation on alcohol in Ireland • Factors that lead to effective change are wider than training, further research may explore this • Evidence from this project shows that community mobilisation can address policy implementation processes – this could be further explored • Research to explore community mobilisation in an Irish context, including the measurement of risk and protective factors could be undertaken.
  21. 21. RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) FACTORS FOR STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT • Implementation of the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill can potentially support community mobilisation measures and vice versa. • Build supports to ensure fidelity to evidence based approaches in local action planning • Encourage cooperation between practitioners and researchers (e.g. through universities) in the public health field
  22. 22. RECOMMENDATIONS: (2) INVESTING IN COMMUNITY ACTION AT A LOCAL LEVEL • Establish community coalitions and engage them in induction/training early in the process • There should be full participation of leaders in the training process, along with the other stakeholders • Managing resources/funding to enable community mobilisation on alcohol
  23. 23. RECOMMENDATIONS: (3) DELIVERY OF TRAINING • Materials were of a very high standard overall – however, increase materials on evidence based community mobilisation processes • Deliver the bulk of training/facilitation on site with groups to enhance collective leadership capacity and tailor it to group needs • Retain a networking element to the project • Extend the time available to groups to get established and develop plans (18 months) • Maintain technical support for groups after plans have been completed.
  24. 24. FINALLY … • Thanks to Anne Timoney Meehan, the steering committee and all of the participating Task Forces and their stakeholders who helped to inform this evaluation. • Thank you all for listening!