eCite Digital Repository
Evaluate the impacts of the Healthy Communities Project on the Cradle Coast community Tasmania
Citation
Auckland, SRJ and Le, Q and Nguyen, HB, Evaluate the impacts of the Healthy Communities Project on the Cradle Coast community Tasmania, Department of Health of Ageing (2013) [Contract Report]
![]() | PDF Not available 3Mb |
Abstract
The Healthy Communities Initiative (HCI) has been established and funded through the
Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) to help promote healthy lifestyle choices. The
Cradle Coast Authority (CCA) was successful in securing HCI funding to support local
government and community networks in the delivery of health and lifestyle programs and
activities to residents of the nine municipal council areas on the northwest coast of
Tasmania. In January 2013, The University Department of Rural Health (UDRH) was
engaged by the CCA to undertake the evaluation over a five-month period. Findings from
evaluation would provide the funding body and key stakeholder organisations with a
greater understanding of the factors that influence health promotion activity within local
government on the northwest coast of Tasmania.
Survey, interviews/focus group discussions were used for collecting information
pertaining to the capacity and attitude of the nine participating municipal councils to the
delivery of health promotion activities within their respective communities. The follow up
survey questionnaire, modelled on the initial Heart Foundation Survey sought, responses
specific to health promotion initiatives and associated processes within their municipal
council or organisation. A total of 33 participants were either interviewed (n=18) or
participated in a focus group (n=15).
Results from the evaluative study pointed to some key findings such as a strong
preference by participating councils to maintain their current level of commitment to
health promotion. Most of the survey respondents rated their council’s health promotion
initiatives as effective. While an emphasis was found to be placed on initiatives to
promote physical activities, moderate attention was paid to healthy food and other
health promotion initiatives such as quit smoking programs. The evaluation also revealed
that there was a lack of council policy to orient and guide current health promotion
activity within their local communities. Generally, the findings from the survey were
consistent with findings from 2011 Heart Foundation survey. Specifically, the main
findings of the evaluation study are as follows:
The stakeholders had a very clear perception of health promotion and how to
translate the underpinning theory driving health promotion into specific on
ground actions.
§ Health promotion could be manifested in a number of ways such as awareness
raising, providing access to information and services, or providing means and skills
so that the community is actively engaged in managing their health.
§ The majority of the respondents indicated that their council had a specific non-HCI
funded (60%) and HCI funded (62%) health promotion program currently in place.
4 respondents (31%) reported that their council had recently completed a specific
HCI funded health promotion program.
§ Nearly 40% of the respondents indicated that their council had currently in place
governance structures such as a general council committee (or similar) to oversee
and coordinate health promotion initiatives within the council area;
§ Just over half of the respondents (55%) said that their Council’s Strategic Plan
currently includes health promotion objectives, with one council indicating that
this was being developed.
§ Responses to the provision of physical activity initiatives were quite positive. The
large majority of the respondents indicated that their council currently had
programs and events that encourage participation in physical activity in place.
§ Similarly, the large majority of the respondents indicated that their council
currently had in place sport, recreation, and active transport infrastructure to
support physical activity.
§ Around half of the respondents indicated that their council had in place a
dedicated budget/resource allocation to support initiatives that promote physical
activity (46%).
§ Less positive was the response about planning and design initiatives or schemes
that support physical activity.
The evaluation revealed that there were a lesser number of participating councils
involved with promoting and coordinating initiatives to support healthy and safe
food, compared to the number of councils involved in promoting and coordinating
physical activities.
§ Similar to the initiatives to promote healthy and safe food, other health
promotion initiatives were indicated to receive moderate attention from
participating councils.
§ Regarding future priorities, the respondents indicated a preference for putting a
focus on "other" health promotion initiatives rather than physical and healthy
food activities.
§ None of the respondents indicated their council had any intention to increase or
decrease commitment towards health promotion. Meanwhile, nearly three
fourths of all respondents (69.2%) stated that their councils would maintain
current level of commitment to health promotion.
§ With regard to the level of formality associated with councils’ health promotion
agenda 61.5%of respondents indicated that there were specific written objectives
for all of the health promotion initiatives conducted by their council. The
remaining respondents indicated either some (30.8%) or none (7.7%) of the
council’s health promotion initiatives had specific written objectives.
§ With regard to feedback on community involvement and collaboration with other
organisations around health promotion, the response was generally positive, with
the large majority of the respondents rating community involvement (91%) and
collaboration (83%) as either good or very good.
§ Program coordination of council and training/guidance provided by council was
considered to be either satisfactory (50%), good (8%), or very good (33%) by the
respondents.
§ Respondents showed a strong appreciation for the value and application of some
of the other outputs from the HCI such as the HCI Toolkit. However, there was no
specific comment relating to the use and application of QIPPS when referencing
monitoring and evaluation systems
§ Comments from the interview/focus group participants on the HCI program
outputs were generally positive. Of particular note was the acknowledgement
and appreciation of the value of the HCI toolkit; confidence in partnerships among
the nine local councils; and a greater sense of the increased capabilities of local
government in delivering health promotion activities.
§ Regarding the general effectiveness of health promotion initiatives, 61.5% of the
respondents rated their council’s health promotion initiatives as effective with the
remaining respondents (38.5%) rating them as just right. This is a relatively
positive evaluation.
§ Critical success factors relating to the delivery of health promotion initiatives by
councils that were most often mentioned by the survey respondents were listed
as follows (in order of frequency): participation/engagement of the target groups;
sufficient funding; support from the community and local councils; active and
engaging facilitators; and collaboration with other stakeholders/partners.
§ Similarly, the interview and focus group data was focused around the following
success factors: engagement of the target groups; support from community and
local councils; opportunities for building community capacity; consistency and
appropriateness of the program; and promotion of the health promotion
initiatives by local media.
§ Accordingly, the most common barriers to the successful delivery of health
promotion initiatives by councils as mentioned by the survey participants was as
follows (in the following order of frequency): Lack of funding, and resources (n =
11); lack of time and staff (n = 9); lack of engagement from the target group (n =
4).
§ Responses from the interviews and focused groups highlighted similar issues
around limited funding and the risk of not being re-funded; lack of resources,
including infrastructure and staff; the challenge in engaging the target groups; and
the arduous reporting requirements.
§ With regard to what the respondents considered as important in ensuring the
successful delivery of health promotion initiatives the responses were closely
related to the identified success factors and barriers, including: eEnsuring
sustainability; building better partnerships with local governments, NGOs and
service agencies; developing appropriate methods in engaging the target groups;
§ The survey respondents strongly agreed or agreed with the following statements
relating to council’s role and health promotion: Councils role is one that is
associated with the provision of linkages/networks for the implementation of
initiatives (100%); the provision of advice to other organisations involved with the
delivery of health promotion initiatives (82%); the provision of environments
which support healthy lifestyles for the community (82); the development and
implementation of health promotion initiatives for its local community(82%); and
the identification of community needs regarding healthier lifestyles (91%).
§ Most respondents (64%) agreed or strongly agreed that health promotion is a core
council business.
§ A significant majority of the respondents believed that the three tiers of
government should play a lead role in matters pertaining to the planning,
infrastructure and resourcing of health promotion initiatives. A preference was
shown for the role of local government over State and Federal government in
relation to leadership of these aspects of delivering health promotion initiatives.
§ Regarding the programs and events that encourage participation in physical
activity, most respondents considered local council (26%) or NGOs (26%) as having
the lead responsibility.
§ The respondents saw local council or state/federal government as having the lead
responsibility into planning, infrastructure, and resources.Regarding the delivery of programs and events that provide or support healthy
food options, most respondents considered local council (30%), state/federal
government (23%) or NGOs (23%) as having the lead responsibility.
The following recommendations are put forward in relation to the delivery of health
promotion initiatives, physical activity initiatives, healthy and safe food initiatives, and
other health promotion initiatives:
§ Attention is paid to the integration of health promotion strategies into the policy
of all local government to ensure consistency in commitment.
§ Capacity building through partnerships and collaborations with other service
providers and community partners is a key success factor in the delivery of health
promotion initiatives. Structures and models that support the sharing of skills and
knowledge between participating agencies should be incorporated in future
programs.
§ Provision of training and knowledge/skills generation should be regarded as part
of, not separate to, the overarching objectives of the health promotion
intervention
§ Consideration should be given to how council resources, including finance,
infrastructure, and human, can be utilised in the support of health promotion
initiatives. Policies that help ensure the stability of staff/positions in lead agencies
eg local councils, service providers etc will help contribute to the sustainability of
health promotion initiatives.
§ Processes that facilitate access to funding for community based health promotion
funding initiatives should be supported as this funding is important in maintaining
local momentum for health promotion efforts and can act as a lever for attracting
new sources of funding.
§ Sustainability is a critical element, which should be built on the basis of
empowering the community, building capacity for the community, or building on
available skills or resources in the community.
§ Given the differential in local councils capacity to support health promotion
initiatives consideration should be given to adopting program delivery models
based on sharing or pooling of resources towards a common objective.
§ In addition to the focus on physical activities, local government should take a
more active role in driving their community towards healthier and safer food by
working with state/federal government and NGOs in enhancing availability, access
and consumption.
§ The findings indicated that health promotion initiatives had been generally well
oriented, coordinated, and monitored. This model is an example of good practice
that should be further considered for application in future community based
health promotion initiatives.
§ Consideration for the socio-economic and cultural landscapes of the target
communities be taken into account to ensure the appropriate allocation of
resources.
§ It is recommended that initiatives that facilitated improved access in terms of
physical and financial access be developed to target the socio-economically
disadvantaged groups.
§ As proposed by the program logic framework, there is a logical connection
between program elements (inputs, activities, and outputs) and desired outcomes.
It is suggested that similar framework and evaluation, both qualitatively and
quantitatively, be carried out in a systematic way to produce more reliable and
robust evaluative evidence.
Item Details
Item Type: | Contract Report |
---|---|
Keywords: | Health promotion initiative, physical activities, healthy food |
Research Division: | Health Sciences |
Research Group: | Public health |
Research Field: | Health promotion |
Objective Division: | Health |
Objective Group: | Public health (excl. specific population health) |
Objective Field: | Public health (excl. specific population health) not elsewhere classified |
UTAS Author: | Auckland, SRJ (Mr Stuart Auckland) |
UTAS Author: | Le, Q (Dr Quynh Le) |
UTAS Author: | Nguyen, HB (Dr Hoang Nguyen) |
ID Code: | 86157 |
Year Published: | 2013 |
Deposited By: | UTAS Centre for Rural Health |
Deposited On: | 2013-08-27 |
Last Modified: | 2014-03-20 |
Downloads: | 3 View Download Statistics |
Repository Staff Only: item control page