Goal Area 2: Eliminating Nonsmokers’ Exposure to Secondhand Smoke

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ACAP DATA January 13, 2009 Anita Fervaha and Suzanne Hindmarch
Advertisements

Goals, Outcomes and Program Evaluation Community Memorial Foundation March 5, 2014.
Strategy Maps for Structuring Program Operating Plans: Tobacco Examples Public Health Foundation Paul Epstein, Results That Matter Team Kentucky Public.
Logic Models and Evaluation Glen W. White 1 Jamie Simpson 2 1 University of Kansas, Research and Training Center on Independent Living 2 Kansas Department.
Board Goals. Goals for Presentation Restate Board Goals (short) Why Long-Range Planning is Essential Nancy et al on details of planning (processes, resources,
Risk and Protective Factors for Substance Use Steve Delaronde, MSW, MPH University of Connecticut Health Center The Governor’s Prevention Initiative for.
The Evaluation of Canada’s Health Warning Messages: 18 Month Follow-Up Murrray Kaiserman 1, Eva M. Makomaski Illing 1, Donna Dasko 2 1 Tobacco Control.
Natasha M. Jamison, MPH, CHES Health Scientist, Epidemiology Branch Office on Smoking and Health TM Utility of Key Outcome Indicators: Future Directions.
Office of Health Promotion Tobacco Use Prevention Program The Kansas Tobacco Use Prevention Program provides resources, technical assistance and education.
Committee Request November 4,  2000 ◦ Smoking prohibited within 20 feet from the entrance to residence halls. Smoking allowed in offices.  2003.
HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE CALIFORNIA TOBACCO SURVEYS Elizabeth A. Gilpin, MS Principal Investigator 1999 California Tobacco Surveys Cancer Prevention and Control.
Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks   What is an M&E Framework?   Why do we use M&E Frameworks?   How do we develop M&E Frameworks? MEASURE Evaluation.
Role of Result-based Monitoring in Result-based Management (RBM) Setting goals and objectives Reporting to Parliament RBM of projects, programs and.
Basics: 2As & R Clinical Intervention Artwork by Nancy Z. © 2010 American Aca0emy of Pediatrics (AAP) Children's Art Contest. Support for the 2010 AAP.
Key Terms for Monitoring and Evaluation. Objectives Explain the difference between monitoring and evaluation. Introduce the most common M&E terms. Review.
May 20, am May 21, 1:30-2:30 pm Logic Models in MYAP: Web-based teleconference Instructors: Ellen Taylor-Powell and Jennifer Leahy University of.
Taking a Public Health Approach to Tobacco Control
CDC Evaluation Process Harlen Hays, MPH Office of Health Promotion, KDHE.
Kansas Tobacco-Related Data Resources and Performance Measures Harlen Hays, MPH Office of Health Promotion, KDHE.
 2007 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Section B A Look Ahead: Summary of Main Findings.
Peel Health Using Research Evidence to Develop a Comprehensive Tobacco Control Strategy in the Region of Peel Aimee Hindle Supervisor, Chronic Disease.
Washington Communities for Tobacco Prevention Spokane Regional Health District Board of Health September 27, 2012.
Edward Anselm, MD Medical Director Public Health Perspectives of Accountable Care: Opportunities for Alignment.
Presentation to: Presented by: Date: Burden of Tobacco Use in Georgia: Surveillance Update Tobacco Advisory & Coalition Board Alina Chung, MPH, Epidemiologist.
TOBACCO PREVENTION AND CONTROL PROGRAM Mike Maples, Assistant Commissioner Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services.
Preparing for the Main Event Using Logic Models as a Tool for Collaboratives Brenda M. Joly Leslie M. Beitsch August 6, 2008.
Evaluation Assists with allocating resources what is working how things can work better.
Governor Pat Quinn B UDGETING FOR R ESULTS Budgeting for Results Funding Priorities, Improving Outcomes March
UIC University of Illinois at Chicago RTC: Randomized Community Trial Community-Based Tobacco Control Program.
Global Adult Tobacco Survey Office on Smoking and Health CDC.
Julie R. Morales Butler Institute for Families University of Denver.
Tobacco Use In Kansas Healthy Kansans 2010 Steering Committee Meeting May 12, 2005.
Evaluating Local Tobacco Control Organizations. David Ahrens, Research Program Manager Research conducted by: Barbara.
Why Indicators Matter Using Outcome Indicators to Plan and Evaluate Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs Todd Rogers, PhD California Tobacco Control.
Outcomes, Outputs & Context Tammy Horne, Ph.D. WellQuest Consulting Ltd. (780)
“Analytical Tools and Data Collection” April 2009 EuropeAid/125317/D/SER/TR Session 1 Introduction to Role of Impacts Assessment in RIAs.
Citizens of Harvestland Against Tobacco (CHAT) Coalition Harvestland, Missouri Teaming Up To End Tobacco Use.
State Comprehensive Tobacco Program Evaluation Plans: A Multi-State Scan September 5, 2007 Kim S. Kimminau, Ph.D. Consultant to KDHE/TUPP.
Tobacco 101. Evolution of Tobacco Evolution of Tobacco.
 2007 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Section C Case Study: Ireland.
CDC Recommendations for Comprehensive Programs. Comprehensive Programs CDC, Office on Smoking and Health.
National Program for Tobacco Control in the Republic of Uzbekistan for Mr.Mamutov R.Sh. Director, National Centre for Tobacco Control.
 2007 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Section B Logic Models: The Pathway Model.
LOGIC MODEL ACTIVITY: EXAMPLES to be distributed as paper handouts (one for each group of 5 to 8 people) for the logic model activity.
Comprehensive Tobacco Action Group Summary December 16, 2005.
Outcome-based Planning and Evaluation Gloria Latimer, Ed.S, Director of Community Programs Jason Vahling, M.P.H., Community Program Specialist.
Georgia Comprehensive Cancer Control Program 3/10/2015 Program Monitoring and Evaluation Activities Short-Term Outcomes Long-Term Outcomes Intermediate.
Richard Edwards on behalf of the Smokefree Amendment Act Evaluation Team Health Promotion and Policy Research Unit (HePPRU) Department of Public Health.
A STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK FOR IMPROVING RACIAL & ETHNIC MINORITY HEALTH & ELIMINATING RACIAL & ETHNIC HEALTH DISPARITIES Garth N. Graham, MD, MPH, Valerie.
Infrastructure—more than platforms for moving vehicles! Kim Snyder, ICF International René Lavinghouze, CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health Patricia Rieker,
Clean Air and Bill of Health Proposal By: Maria Jorgensen MPH 515: Health Behavior Theory Dr. Hartigan February 25, 2015.
Paul Hunting, MPH Health Education Specialist Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Office on Smoking and Health TM Session #: EVAL 111 National Conference.
TIFFANY COMER COOK, M.S. LAURA L. FELDMAN, ED.S. WYOMING SURVEY & ANALYSIS CENTER EVALUATION 2010: EVALUATION QUALITY SAN ANTONIO, TX NOVEMBER 13, 2010.
BUILDING TEAMS: A TOBACCO EVALUATION AND MONITORING SYSTEM Leah Ranney, PhD: Tobacco Prevention Evaluation Program, UNC School of Medicine Leigh Welper.
GATS المسح العالمي لاستهلاك التبغ بين البالغين GLOBAL ADULT TOBACCO SURVEY.
Theory of Change Jon Kolko Professor, Austin Center for Design.
Adding the Second Story: Building Evaluation Capacity in the Field
APHA Annual Meeting, Washington D.C., November 5, 2007
Intermediate Outcomes
Strategic Prevention Framework – Planning
Short term Medium term Long term
PRECEDE – PROCEED THEORY
شاخصهای عملکردی بیمارستان
مدل زنجیره ای در برنامه های سلامت
فرق بین خوب وعالی فقط اندکی تلاش بیشتر است
Effect combined IMPACT on achieving outcomes Organizational OUTPUTS
Target Tobacco Coalition
Continue Increasing Taxes on Tobacco Products
A Look Ahead: Summary of Main Findings
Goal Area 1: Preventing Initiation of Tobacco Use Among Young People
Presentation transcript:

Goal Area 2: Eliminating Nonsmokers’ Exposure to Secondhand Smoke

Outputs Complete activities to disseminate information about secondhand smoke and tobacco-free policies Complete activities to create and enforce tobacco-free policies

Short-term Outcomes Increased knowledge of, improved attitudes toward, and increase support for the creation and active enforcement of tobacco-free policies (10 = # of Indicators) Creation of tobacco-free policies (6) Enforcement of tobacco-free public policies (3)

Intermediate Outcomes Compliance with tobacco-free policies (5)

Long-term Outcomes Reduced exposure to secondhand smoke (5) Reduced tobacco consumption (3) Reduced tobacco related morbidity and mortality Decreased tobacco related disparities

Group Discussion How does this logic model directly impact your organization? How does this logic model indirectly impact your organization? Do you currently collect information related to any outputs or outcomes? What vital information is missing with regards to tobacco use prevention?