Critical connections between participatory approaches to evaluation research

The objective of this symposium is to establish some conceptual and operational links between participatory approaches to evaluation research (PAER) principles and organizational change processes. In order to discover some of these critical connections we propose to open a discussion to explore the paradigmatic dimensions of PAER. Essentially, PAER start out from a recognition that evaluation research develops within a pluralistic society and allows evaluation projects to be built upon the ideas, values and aspirations of those taking part at all levels and throughout the whole evaluation process (Diez et al., 2005). In this sense, Gregory (2000) points out how participation allows people to be aware of the rationality behind the evaluation process, and in doing so, increases their involvement in the implementation of an evaluation research project, both in an effective and efficient way. In other words, PAER is a Capacity Building to Evaluation (CBE) strategy. CBE is a context-dependent, organized action system of guided processes and practices for bringing about and sustaining a state of affairs in which quality evaluation and its appropriate uses are ordinary and ongoing practices within and/or between one or more organizations. Evaluation here is understood as a learning process around a social project evaluated from the perspective of all the stakeholders. Therefore, evaluation becomes an exercise stimulating the appearance of an organizational learning (OL) process. The very essence of OL is to adapt to and to take part of organizational change processes

Evaluating community engagement as part of the public health system.

Community participation and leadership is a central tenet of public health policy and practice. Community engagement approaches are used in a variety of ways to facilitate participation, ranging from the more utilitarian, involving lay delivery of established health programmes, to more empowerment-oriented approaches. Evaluation methods within public health, adapted from clinical medicine, are most suited to evaluating community engagement as an 'intervention', in the utilitarian sense, focusing on the health impacts of professionally determined programmes. However, as communities are empowered and professional control is relinquished, it is likely to be harder to capture the full effects of an intervention and so the current evidence base is skewed away from knowledge about the utility of these approaches. The aim of this paper is to stimulate debate on the evaluation of community engagement. Building on current understandings of evaluation within complex systems, the paper argues that what is needed is a paradigm shift from viewing the involvement of communities as an errant form of public health action, to seeing communities as an essential part of the public health system. This means moving from evaluation being exclusively focused on the linear causal chain between the intervention and the target population, to seeking to build understanding of whether and how the lay contribution has impacted on the social determinants of health, including the system through which the intervention is delivered. The paper proposes some alternative principles for the evaluation of community engagement that reflect a broader conceptualisation of the lay contribution to public health

An evidence-based framework on community-centred approaches for health: England, UK

Community participation is a central concept for health promotion, covering a breadth of approaches, purposes and activities. This paper reports on a national knowledge translation project in England, UK, which resulted in a conceptual framework and typology of community-based approaches, published as national guidance. A key objective was to develop a conceptual framework linked to sources of evidence that could be used to support increased uptake of participatory methods across the health system. It was recognised that legitimacy of community participation was being undermined by a scattered evidence base, absence of a common terminology and low visibility of community practice. A scoping review, combined with stakeholder consultation, was undertaken and 168 review and conceptual publications were identified and a map produced. A ‘family of community-centred approaches for health and wellbeing’ was then produced as way of organising the evidence and visually representing the range of intervention types. There are four main groups, with sub-categories: (i) Strengthening communities (ii) Volunteer and peer roles (iii) Collaborations and partnerships and (iv) Access to community resources. Each group is differentiated using key concepts and theoretical justifications around increasing equity, control and social connectedness. An open access bibliography is available to accompany the framework. The paper discusses the application of the family of community-centred approaches as a flexible planning tool for health promotion practice and its potential to be used as a framework for organising and synthesising evidence from a range of participatory methods

Towards a methodology for cluster searching to provide conceptual and contextual "richness" for systematic reviews of complex interventions: case study (CLUSTER)

Background Systematic review methodologies can be harnessed to help researchers to understand and explain how complex interventions may work. Typically, when reviewing complex interventions, a review team will seek to understand the theories that underpin an intervention and the specific context for that intervention. A single published report from a research project does not typically contain this required level of detail. A review team may find it more useful to examine a “study cluster”; a group of related papers that explore and explain various features of a single project and thus supply necessary detail relating to theory and/or context. We sought to conduct a preliminary investigation, from a single case study review, of techniques required to identify a cluster of related research reports, to document the yield from such methods, and to outline a systematic methodology for cluster searching. Methods In a systematic review of community engagement we identified a relevant project – the Gay Men’s Task Force. From a single “key pearl citation” we conducted a series of related searches to find contextually or theoretically proximate documents. We followed up Citations, traced Lead authors, identified Unpublished materials, searched Google Scholar, tracked Theories, undertook ancestry searching for Early examples and followed up Related projects (embodied in the CLUSTER mnemonic). Results Our structured, formalised procedure for cluster searching identified useful reports that are not typically identified from topic-based searches on bibliographic databases. Items previously rejected by an initial sift were subsequently found to inform our understanding of underpinning theory (for example Diffusion of Innovations Theory), context or both. Relevant material included book chapters, a Web-based process evaluation, and peer reviewed reports of projects sharing a common ancestry. We used these reports to understand the context for the intervention and to explore explanations for its relative lack of success. Additional data helped us to challenge simplistic assumptions on the homogeneity of the target population. Conclusions A single case study suggests the potential utility of cluster searching, particularly for reviews that depend on an understanding of context, e.g. realist synthesis. The methodology is transparent, explicit and reproducible. There is no reason to believe that cluster searching is not generalizable to other review topics. Further research should examine the contribution of the methodology beyond improved yield, to the final synthesis and interpretation, possibly by utilizing qualitative sensitivity analysis

The mechanics of urban land development in Huddersfield 1770-1911

The land development process involves decision-making by landowners, developers and builders in the context of a changing socioeconomic environment. Essential to that process is the transfer of property rights either wholly (freehold) or partly (leasehold) from landowners to builders. This process is examined in Huddersfield between 1770 and 1911. Development from 1770 to 1850 was dominated by, the Ramsden Estate. Building was undertaken in an ad, hoc and informal manner by small capitalists from all ranks of society. Some limited building took place on freehold land but most houses were built on leasehold tenure or tenancy at will, the latter being available on the Ramsden Estate. After 1850 an increasing number of landowners participated in land development as suburbanisation took place, firstly amongst the upper middle classes and after 1880 amongst the lower middle classes. Consequently the Ramsden Estate's near monopoly of development land declined" and that Estate found it increasingly difficult to let land on the terms and conditions it wished. Builders, however, had a widening choice of locations in which to build and exhibited a preference for land available on long-term leasehold. By 1867 this had become the tenure on which land was available throughout Huddersfield. During the final years of the nineteenth century a number of changes were manifest in the mechanics of land development. Construction costs rose, primarily as a result of the introduction of byelaws governing house-building. Thus, not only did builders increasingly concentrate on building for the lower middle classes at the expense. of the working classes, but they also increased the size of building projects. Moreover, house building was now chiefly initiated by members of the lower middle classes or building contractors on a speculative basis rather than the contractual basis that had been the practice. Meanwhile, landowners found themselves in increasing competition with each other in the supply of land. By the beginning of the twentieth century some of the smaller landowners were offering land for development on freehold as well as leasehold tenure, whichever a builder preferred

Integrating values: research and knowledge development through the use of participatory evaluation in community based health promotion

This paper argues that health promotion and within that health communica­tion are themselves a particular type of social practice that attempt to disrupt day to day pattems of living to bring about change for better individual and collective health. lnherently relational and dialogical, they reguire a different approach to evaluation from the experimental approach commonly promul­gated as the gold standard in the health sciences. At the centre ofall research but particularly evaluation, he a set ofvalues and particular paradigm. The way any evaluation is done reflects and imposes a particular set ofvalues and in doing so either recreates and reinforces a particular social world or makes a contribution to changing it