Kegeles Susan M, Rebchook Gregory M
Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, AIDS Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA.
AIDS Educ Prev. 2005 Aug;17(4):284-99. doi: 10.1521/aeap.2005.17.4.284.
We have been collaborating with many community-based organizations (CBOs) to increase their capacity to implement our evidence-based HIV prevention intervention. A frequent issue in these collaborations is how CBOs can evaluate their implementation of the intervention using feasible and sound methods. This study sought to provide the foundation for evaluation recommendations, tools, training, and technical assistance to help CBOs build their evaluation capacity. We conducted a qualitative study of 21 CBOs, 12 funders, and 11 technical assistance providers regarding beliefs and attitudes about evaluation, preferences and requirements for evaluation, evaluation methods that are currently being used at CBOs, and recommendations regarding feasible and effective evaluation that CBOs can use. The themes that arose in the telephone interviews are organized around three major topics: facilitators and barriers to conducting evaluation, evaluation methods that CBOs use, and how to increase CBOs' capacity to conduct evaluations.
我们一直在与许多社区组织(CBO)合作,以提高它们实施我们基于证据的艾滋病毒预防干预措施的能力。这些合作中经常出现的一个问题是,社区组织如何能够使用可行且合理的方法来评估其干预措施的实施情况。本研究旨在为评估建议、工具、培训和技术援助提供基础,以帮助社区组织建立其评估能力。我们对21个社区组织、12个资助者和11个技术援助提供者进行了一项定性研究,内容涉及对评估的信念和态度、评估的偏好和要求、社区组织目前正在使用的评估方法,以及关于社区组织可以采用的可行且有效的评估的建议。电话访谈中出现的主题围绕三个主要话题展开:进行评估的促进因素和障碍、社区组织使用的评估方法,以及如何提高社区组织进行评估的能力。