Critical evaluation of international health programs: Reframing global health and evaluation.

Clicks: 216
ID: 29522
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #28 of 32 articles by views in the international journal of health planning and management

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Striking changes in the funding and implementation of international health programs in recent decades have stimulated debate about the role of communities in deciding which health programs to implement. An important yet neglected piece of that discussion is the need to change norms in program evaluation so that analysis of community ownership, beyond various degrees of "participation," is seen as central to strong evaluation practices. This article challenges mainstream evaluation practices and proposes a framework of Critical Evaluation with 3 levels: upstream evaluation assessing the "who" and "how" of programming decisions; midstream evaluation focusing on the "who" and "how" of selecting program objectives; and downstream evaluation, the focus of current mainstream evaluation, which assesses whether the program achieved its stated objectives. A vital tenet of our framework is that a community possesses the right to determine the path of its health development. A prerequisite of success, regardless of technical outcomes, is that programs must address communities' high priority concerns. Current participatory methods still seldom practice community ownership of program selection because they are vulnerable to funding agencies' predetermined priorities. In addition to critiquing evaluation practices and proposing an alternative framework, we acknowledge likely challenges and propose directions for future research.
Reference Key
chi2018criticalthe Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Chi, Chunhuei;Tuepker, Anaïs;Schoon, Rebecca;Núñez Mondaca, Alicia;
Journal the international journal of health planning and management
Year 2018
DOI
10.1002/hpm.2483
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.