|
Measuring the Effectiveness of Safety Training in the Mining Industry: A Mixed-methods Evaluation Report
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Lori Matthews,
Spokane Research Laboratory,
lmatthews@cdc.gov
|
| Abstract:
Ten safety training videos were produced as part of a 1998 project to develop and evaluate effective training for the mining industry by the Spokane Research Laboratory (SRL), part of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). This paper presents the mixed-methods evaluation results of the two most recent NIOSH/SRL training videos: Aggregate Training for the Safety Impaired (2003) and The Sky is Falling! (2004). Quantitative measures indicated that the videos were effective in educating and entertaining miners, as well as providing good reminders to work safely. The qualitative data illustrated the transferable nature of the evaluation results; safety trainers from the mining industry reported using surface videos for training in underground operations. In addition, other occupational industries including fire-fighting, construction, and logging have reported using the mining videos to communicate and promote the common goal of working safely.
|
|
Striking a Balance: Guiding Local Evaluations From a Federal Program Perspective
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Melanie Besculides,
Mathematica Policy Research Inc,
mbesculides@mathematica-mpr.com
|
| Charlotte Hanson,
Mathematica Policy Research Inc,
chanson@mathematica-mpr.com
|
| Heather Zaveri,
Mathematica Policy Research Inc,
hzaveri@mathematica-mpr.com
|
| Ryan Loo,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
rloo@cdc.gov
|
| Lisa Levy,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
lrl2@cdc.gov
|
| Abstract:
Funding agencies recognize the importance of program evaluation and require their grantees to conduct evaluations. However, evaluation guidance typically lacks enough detail, which can be detrimental, as evaluation expertise can vary greatly among grantees. Conversely, too much guidance can tie the hands of evaluators and inhibit the development of appropriate evaluations for a given setting, context, and purpose. We will present a 'how to' paper with our approach to achieving the appropriate balance between these issues, using the Well-Integrated Screening and Evaluation Program for Women Across the Nation (WISEWOMAN) federal program's evaluation guidance and evaluation plan as examples. The developmental process we will present can be used by a multitude of other grantees and funding agencies. As a grantee, participants will apply the lessons learned by facilitating change in their funding agency's evaluation policy. As a funding agency, participants will apply the lessons learned by improving evaluation guidance and policy.
|
|
Conducting a Utilization-focused Evaluation in Government Contract Work: Perspectives From the Contractor and the Government Client
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Sarah Shoemaker,
Abt Associates Inc,
sarah_shoemaker@abtassoc.com
|
| Claire Kendrick,
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality,
claire.kendrick@ahrq.hhs.gov
|
| Meg Hargreaves,
Abt Associates Inc,
meg_hargreaves@abtassoc.com
|
| Rachel Sayko Adams,
Abt Associates Inc,
rachel_adams@abtassoc.com
|
| Tricia Trinite,
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality,
tricia.trinite@ahrq.hhs.gov
|
| Janice L Genevro,
MasiMax Resources Inc,
janice.genevro@ahrq.hhs.gov
|
| Harmon Jordan,
Abt Associates Inc,
harmon_jordan@abtassoc.com
|
| Abstract:
Abt Associates Inc. was contracted to evaluate a government agency's research Portfolio. Abt submitted a proposal that embodied a utilization-focused evaluation (UFE) framework, which differs from traditional evaluation in that it requires clarifying the intended uses of the evaluation and being particularly responsive to the client's current evaluation needs. Abt worked collaboratively with the client during the initial months of the project to clarify and prioritize the study objectives. The evaluation evolved from a summative evaluation to a formative, developmental evaluation to understand better what Portfolio-related work has been conducted and to identify gaps in the research area. This presentation will summarize the evaluation methods and techniques; the UFE process; and the successes and challenges for both the contract research firm and the government client.
|
| | |