Increasing Access to Healthy Food in the Central Valley through Farmers Markets and Produce Stands
This May 2010 brief discusses strategies for improving nutrition environments through farmers markets and produce stands including challenges and lessons learned. It also includes findings from environmental assessments of The Central California Regional Obesity Prevention Program (CCROPP) farmers markets and produce stands conducted from 2007-2009. |
|
|
Engaging Communities in Changing Nutrition and Physical Activity Environments
|
|
|
Obesity Prevention Programs: Evaluation Findings
The California Endowment's Healthy Eating Active Communities program of The California Endowment is working toward the reduction of the childhood obesity epidemic through policy and environmental change strategies. The Central California Regional Obesity Prevention Program (CCROPP) address childhood and adult obesity through place-based policy changes that support access to physical activity and healthy foods in California’s Central Valley region. The following reports provide a summary of each program's key findings that have emerged from evaluation efforts to date. |
|
|
Clinic Consortia Policy and Advocacy Program - Evaluation Executive Summary 2004-2006
The Evaluation Executive Summary describes the consortia program’s evaluation results for the years 2004-2006.The evaluation focuses on the program outcomes by the grantee population as a whole. |
|
|
Clinic Consortia Policy and Advocacy Program - Evaluation Fact Sheet 2004-2006
The two-page Evaluation Fact Sheet highlights grantee activities and accomplishments including increasing clinical financial stability, strengthening clinical operations and developing innovative solutions to address unique problems in their communities. |
|
|
Clinic Consortia Policy and Advocacy Program Evaluation - Achieving Clinical Financial Stability: Follow the Money
This four-page issue brief highlights how the clinic consortia successfully increased their financial and operational stability and that of their member clinics. The brief concludes from 2001-2006, grantees increased funding secured on behalf of clinics and consortia by a total of $753 million. |
|
|
Clinic Consortia Policy and Advocacy Program Evaluation - Best Practices
This 32-page Community Clinic Consortia compilation of issue briefs describes best practices from 16 health organizations. Each issue brief includes challenges, successes and lessons learned. |
|
|
Clinic Consortia Policy and Advocacy Program Evaluation - Policymaker Relationships: From Education to Partnerships
This four-page issue brief describes how the clinic consortia created successful partnerships with policymakers, resulting in policy changes that benefited member clinics and underserved Californians. |
|
|
Clinic Consortia: Policy and Advocacy Program Evaluation
The purpose of this paper is to describe the evaluation results of the Clinic Consortia Policy and Advocacy Program for the years 2001-2003, conducted by the Institute for Health Policy Studies at the University of California, San Francisco. Together and individually, clinic consortia are targeting policymakers and clinic policy issues using a variety of strategies including grassroots mobilization and media advocacy to establish themselves as an important voice at the federal, state and county levels. |
|
|
Storytelling Approaches to Program Evaluation: An Introduction
There is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to program evaluation. Evaluating the impact of programs aimed at social change and involving diverse constituents demands especially innovative and culturally appropriate approaches. This document, Storytelling Approaches to Program Evaluation: An Introduction, shows how to give program participants a good framework to tell their own stories in their own ways. |
|
|
Transforming Principles into Practice: A Funder-Evaluator Dialogue on Foundation Commissioned Multicultural Evaluations
The California Endowment's Evaluation Department recently presented this PowerPoint on multicultural evaluations at a meeting of the Association for Professional Grantwriters. It outlines guiding principles for multicultural evaluations. |
|
|
Evaluation of The Agricultural Worker Health and Housing Program: Volume I Program Summary and Analysis Findings, Lessons Learned and Promising Practices
Here are two additional reports that provide further background reading on The Endowment's Agricultural Worker Health and Housing. |
|
|
Evaluation of The Agricultural Worker Health and Housing Program: Volume II Project Reports
Here are two additional reports that provide further background reading on The Endowment's Agricultural Worker Health and Housing. |
|
|
The Challenge of Assessing Policy and Advocacy Activities: Strategies for a Prospective Evaluation Approach
Prepared by Blueprint Research and Design for The California Endowment, the report The Challenge of Assessing Advocacy: Strategies for a Prospective Approach to Evaluating Policy Change and Advocacy, provides an overview of the challenges of evaluating policy change, establishes guiding principles for policy change evaluation and makes recommendations for a prospective approach to conducting an evaluation. |
|
|
Commissioning Multicultural Health Evaluation: A Foundation Resource Guide
This report provides guidelines for foundations and other organizations who are considering conducting a multicultural health evaluation. The publication also addresses the issues of monitoring and assessing the evaluation. |
|
|
Evaluation of the California Cares Media Campaign
A follow-up survey of the 2001 year-end fund raising efforts by nonprofit organizations shows that the California Cares public awareness campaign helped energize lagging donations to the state's nonprofit safety-net providers. |
|
|
Study Examines Cultural Factors and Assistive Technology
This study funded by The California Endowment was the first of its kind to look beneath the surface at how cultural factors determine how assistive technology is viewed by underserved disabled populations. The study was based on grants made to five Bay Area organizations and found that the assistive technology community can engage and work together effectively with organizations to create and support opportunities for underserved populations with disabilities to achieve their goals. |
|
|
Overview of Multicultural and Culturally Competent Program Evaluation: Issues, Challenges & Opportunities
This paper reflects on the history and significance of the current “movement” that incorporates multiculturalism and cultural competence into the field of evaluation. |
|
|
Toward Culturally Competent Evaluation in Health and Mental Health
This paper applies culturally competent methods to the research and evaluation of treatment and care. |
|
|
Foundation Leaders’ Perspectives on Culturally Competent Evaluation
Communities are being called upon to absorb, integrate and embrace people from different races and cultures. To help learn from and better support organizations working with different communities, foundations are demanding and/or developing internal capacity for culturally competent evaluation. |
|
|
Voices From the Field: Health and Evaluation Leaders on Multicultural Evaluation
Culled from expert interviews, this report was created to capture the perspectives, knowledge and expertise of health and evaluation leaders on culturally competent evaluation, as well as elicit implications for advancing this new approach to evaluation. |
|
|
Multicultural Health Evaluation: Literature Review and Critique
|
|
|
Multicultural Health Evaluation: An Annotated Bibliography
This annotated bibliography is meant to serve as a resource guide for those interested in deepening their understanding of multicultural health evaluation in the health field. |
|
|
Shifting Our Thinking: Moving from Traditional to Multicultural Evaluation in Health
This piece documents the proceedings from a “Shifting Our Thinking: Moving from Traditional to Multicultural Evaluation in Health” roundtable held in August 2003 at The California Endowment. Panel presentations, reprints of select speeches and a “fishbowl” discussion with the project’s advisory group are included. |
|
|
