MENTORSHIP PROGRAM

Evaluation Training Resources

Evaluation Overview/General:

  • Comprehensive Cancer Control Branch Program Evaluation Toolkit June 2010 http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/ncccp/pdf/CCC_Program_Evaluation_Toolkit.pdf
  • American Evaluation Association
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1999). Framework for program evaluation in public health. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 48 (RR-11), 1-40.
  • Green, L. W., & Kreuter, M. W. (2005). Health program planning: An educational and ecological approach (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
  • Green, L. W., & Lewis, F. M. (1986) Measurement and evaluation in health education and health promotion. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.
  • McKenzie, J. F., Neiger, B. L., & Thackeray, R. (2009). Planning, implementing & evaluating health promotion programs: A primer (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Benjamin Cummings.
  • Windsor, R., Clark, N. Boyd, N. R. & Goodman, R. M. (2004). Evaluation of health promotion, health education, and disease prevention programs (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  • W.K. Kellogg Foundation (1998). Evaluation handbook. Battle Creek, MI.

Mixed Methods:

  • Creswell JW, Klassen AC, Plano Clark VL, Smith KC for the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research. Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. August 2011. National Institutes of Health. http:/obssr.od.nih.gov/mixed_methods_research

Focus Groups:

  • Krueger, R.A. (2000). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, Third Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Morgan, D.L., Krueger, R.A. (1998). The Focus Group Kit. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Marczak, M., Sewell, M. Using Focus Groups for Evaluation. Retrieved May 2, 2006. From the University of Arizona: Cyfernet Evaluation. Website: http://ag.arizona.edu/fcs/cyfernet/cyfar/focus.htm

Logic Models:

  • University of Wisconsin–Extension. (2002). Logic model. Retrieved December 19, 2011, from www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/evallogicmodel.html
  • W.K. Kellogg Foundation (2004). Logic model development guide. Battle Creek, MI.

Qualitative Analysis:

  • Catterall, M., Maclaran, P. (1997). Focus Group Data and Qualitative Analysis Programs: Coding and Moving Picture as Well as the Snapshots. Retrieved May 2, 2006. Sociological Research Online, 2(1). Website:
  • Lewis, B. (2004). NVivo 2.0 and ATLAS. ti 5.0: A Comparative Review of Two popular Qualitative Data-Analysis Programs. Field Methods. 16(4):439-469.
  • MacQueen, K., McLellan, E., Kelley, K., Millstein, B. Codebook Development for Team-Based Qualitative Analysis. Cultural Anthropology Methods 10(2):31-36. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/software/pubs/codebook.pdf
  • Miles M.B., Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd Edition. Sage Publications
  • Comparing qualitative software:
  • Workshops on the use of qualitative software:
  • ATLAS:ti:
  • NVivo:
  • CDC EZ-text: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/resources/software/ez-text/

Cancer Data Resources:

 State Cancer Profiles (Cancer Control P.L.A.N.E.T.): http://statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/

 CDC – Cancer Data and Statistics: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/index.htm

 Tools: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/tools.htm

 Other Data Sources:

 Complete Listing: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/other.htm

 Electronic Health Records

 BRFSS

 Your State’s Office of Minority Health – good for disparities data

 State Tobacco Program – the data for this usually goes beyond BRFSS.

 The NIH Grid-Enabled Measures (GEM) Database - http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/brp/gem.html

 This has a listing of measures and constructs that are tested, reliable, and valid and could be useful instruments if there is not secondary data sources already available. At the end of March, Dissemination and Implementation measures will be added.

 Talk with peer’s in other topics areas (outside cancer, e.g. nutrition, physical activity) since they may have available data related to risk factors or prevention.