Evaluation of the SDHU Ontario Public Health Standards Planning Path: Executive Summary

In 2013, the Resources, Research, Evaluation and Development Division (RRED) led the evaluation of the SDHU Ontario Public Health Standards (OPHS) Planning Path, in consultation with other key stakeholders within the organization. The evaluation focused on what was or was not working well and what needed to be in place to improve the Path.

Interviews were conducted with division management teams, senior management, select RRED staff and management team, the Evidence-Informed Practice Working Group, and former OPHS Path Task Force members. Additional consultations were held between the fall of 2013 and February 2014 to validate the findings and develop recommendations.

Overall, the report reveals that the Path means different things to different people within the organization. There were many variations in opinions related to using the Path and planning in general. In all divisions, planners and managers are using the Path in some capacity, however, there may be some misunderstandings or knowledge gaps relating to processes for program planning and application of evidence-informed decision making principles.

The data revealed that although there are positive benefits to utilizing the Path for planning, we urgently need to “stop using the Path, for the sake of doing it”. The current Path is time intensive, complicated, inconsistent, non-responsive and lacking buy-in from those who utilize it. Further, the Path should tie in better with the strategic priorities of the organization. While the Path may have been set up to set priorities and help inform decisions, this does not seem to be happening.

Most key informants support the Evidence-Informed Decision-Making process laid out in the Path, however, some challenges include a perception that evidence is not always making its way to senior management to help inform decisions. Also, evidence may be collected to help support existing programs rather than being collected to help assess and respond to local need.

Most tools are regarded as helpful to ensure accountability. However, there seems to be inconsistencies in use of Logic Models, Activity Plans and other tools and this may be a barrier to collaboration outside of a team. Furthermore, the completed documents are not always updated and therefore not reflective of the actual work underway.

There are three main messages as a takeaway from the evaluation:

Program managers are the leads for planning, and are supported by specialists, health promoters, nutritionists, and in rare instances front line staff (PHNs, PHIs).
There is a need for flexibility with products and tools, but there cannot be the same flexibility with timelines.
There is a need to consider continued enhancement of skills for planning and evidence-informed practice.

The resulting recommendations are comprehensively outlined in the final section of this report. For a copy of this report, please contact the Information Resource Centre: resourcecentre@sdhu.com, 705.522.9200, ext. 350.

Authors

Suzanne Lemieux
Joanne Beyers
Shannon Dowdall-Smith
Renée St Onge

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank members of the Evidence-Informed Practice Working Group for helping conceptualize the evaluation. Thanks to Stephanie Bale for assisting with organizing the project, and collecting and analyzing the data. Thank you also to Ido Vettoretti, Sandra Laclé, Shelley Westhaver, and members of the Core Management Team, for providing insightful feedback, and to Laurie Gagnon for formatting the report.

Contact for More Information

Information Resource Centre
Sudbury & District Health Unit
1300 Paris Street
Sudbury, ON, P3E 3A3
705.522.9200, ext. 350
resourcecentre@sdhu.com

Citation

Sudbury & District Health Unit. (2015). Evaluation of the SDHU Ontario Public Health Standards Planning Path: Executive Summary. Sudbury, ON: Author.

Ce document est disponsible en français.

This item was last modified on June 12, 2015