Impact Evaluation of Three Health Equity Impact Assessments
•Télécharger en tant que PPT, PDF•
1 j'aime•583 vues
Presentation for IAIA'10 International Association for Impact Assessment Conference in Geneva. http://iaia.org/iaia10/
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
En vedette
En vedette (6)
Similaire à Impact Evaluation of Three Health Equity Impact Assessments
Similaire à Impact Evaluation of Three Health Equity Impact Assessments (20)
Plus de Ben Harris-Roxas
Plus de Ben Harris-Roxas (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Impact Evaluation of Three Health Equity Impact Assessments
- 1. Impact Evaluation of Three Health Equity Impact Assessments B Harris-Roxas, P Bazeley, L Kemp Centre for Health Equity Training, Research and Evaluation (CHETRE) Part of the UNSW Research Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity Sydney, Australia
- 2. Page 29 Page 22 Page 30 Page 30
- 10. Parameters Decision-making processes Decision-makers Type of HIA Broader Context Inputs Proposal Capacity and experience Resources Time Organisational arrangements Process Procedural fidelity Involvement of decision-makers and stakeholders Transparency Trade-offs Review Proximal Impacts Informing decisions Changing decisions and implementation Changes in health determinants Predictive efficacy Achieving goals Distal Impacts Understanding Participatory learning Influencing other activities Engagement Perception of HIA Values, Purpose and Goals
- 11. Parameters Decision-making processes Decision-makers Type of HIA Broader Context Inputs Proposal Capacity and experience Resources Time Organisational arrangements Process Procedural fidelity Involvement of decision-makers and stakeholders Transparency Trade-offs Review Proximal Impacts Informing decisions Changing decisions and implementation Changes in health determinants Predictive efficacy Achieving goals Distal Impacts Understanding Participatory learning Influencing other activities Engagement Perception of HIA Values, Purpose and Goals
Notes de l'éditeur
- HEIA is being increasingly promoted as a mechanism to prevent and redress health inequities, notably in the WHO Commission on the Social Determinants of Health final report.
- but little is known about its effectiveness and under which circumstances it is most useful.
- This study looked at the impact of three HEIAs on decision-making and implementation.
- The HEAIs were rapid and conducted on health sector plans.
- The impact evaluations were conducted between 18 and 24 months after the HEIAs were completed.
- Data came from narrative interviews and document analysis.
- Analysis was conducted using Colaizzi's analytic appriach.
- The HEIAs did change decision-making and implementation in all three cases, but these changes were hard to attribute solely to the HEIA.
- This conceptual framework shows the factors that are important to look at in evaluating HIAs.
- And this shows the factors that we can see in these three HEIAs, in terms of both direct and indirect changes and the factors that determine those changes.
- All three HEIAs identified potential health inequity impacts that had not been previously considered in planning.
- We also found that it was hard for people to recognise that their understanding of potential health equity impacts had changed,
- For example "I’m not convinced that [the HEIA] made people do things differently, because I think that they probably, should’ve, would’ve, hopefully would’ve, done those things anyway."
- To paraphrase Dick Cheney, we may be dealing with thing we don’t know we didn't know?
- There was not necessarily consensus about the purpose of doing of doing the HEIA,
- For example, "We didn’t have a shared understanding of why we were undertaking it. Our purposes were probably different from [the other group's] purposes, and maybe that’s where they don’t work, but if you have two differing purposes, unless you can fully appreciate what those two different purposes are, maybe it doesn’t work out as well as it could."
- My observation (and this is not the purpose of this study), having done several impact evaluations now of HIAs and HEIAs, is that there is more explicit conflict and discomfort about values in HEIAs, which may be expected due to the more explicit examination of the values underpinning a proposal. This requires further investigation.