The document discusses approaches to evaluating systems and initiatives aimed at improving wellbeing. It covers evaluating individual programs, policies, culture, and their interactions in a complex system. For policies and culture, it recommends assessing quality, understanding, enactment, and impacts on outcomes. Cultural evaluation involves measuring influencers' beliefs and actions, as well as perceptions of the culture. The document provides examples of logic models and discusses challenges like attribution. The overall aim is to build an understanding of what is working to improve wellbeing at both the individual and population level.
2. Introduction
What are people hoping to get out of today?
Current roles and interests
Past Experience with evaluation
2
3. Overview
Overview of “normal” evaluation
Logic of change in individual focused social
programming
Building a shared understanding of the outcomes
we are trying to achieve, and the logic of what we
are doing to achieve it
And how we will know whether we are being
successful
Systems thinking
Evaluation in a complex policy area
Evaluating Policy and Culture initiatives
What are we trying to achieve?
How would we know if we are achieving it?
How do we know if what we are doing is achieving
it?
3
4. Shortest
overview of
evaluation
ever
Types of Evaluation
Summative
Formative
Developmental
How we can do it
Range of approaches
Action research to Randomized ControlTrials
How we are going to talk about it today:
Agnostic on “best way” – the best way is the one that
answers the questions that you have, in a way that you
and your stakeholders can trust to the level that can
help you make the best decision
Your context, with broader context
Support learning from others, but recognize that much
of this is going to be context specific
Importance of benchmarks – so you know if your 70% is
bad
4
5. “Evaluative
thinking” in a
complex
social policy
environment
YOU ARE GOINGTO GET IT
WRONG…
SO LEARN QUICKLY*
*Applies to both your interventions, and your
evaluation approach
5
6. Key tool:
the general
logic model
for
individual-
focused
interventions
Input or
Individuals
Activity
and
outputs
Immediate
individual
outcomes
Individual
Long-term
outcomes
Population
Outcomes
6
7. What are the
Population
outcomes we
are trying to
achieve with
wellbeing
initiatives in
a post-
secondary
setting?
At the POPULATION OUTCOMES level
How would we know whether we are achieving
those outcomes?
What data do we have?
What data do we need?
Brief table discussion
7
8. General
Types of
Population
Outcomes
Within the post-secondary setting:
Academic outcomes
Wellbeing outcomes
Organizational outcomes
Career outcomes (for staff/faculty)
Post-post-secondary
Life outcomes for students
Societal outcomes
8
10. Activity
evaluation
for individual
focused
initiatives
Program/intervention level evaluation, e.g.:
Quality
Relevance
Satisfaction
Effectiveness at driving the short term outcomes
Brief discussion of program level evaluations
Who regularly does these?
What tools do they use?
What are some best practices?
10
12. Building the
links
Drivers of outcomes
Connections and drivers
Can lead to mid level measures to simplify
evaluation
X changes y, y is more likely to lead to desired
outcome
Do more x, and ensure it achieves change in y
E.g. more connections on campus leads to sense of
belonging leads to improved mental health leads to
improved academic and life success
Based on one time connection, or knowledge from
literature
Farther out you go, the more factors affect
achievement of outcomes
12
13. What works
for who?
Input or
Individuals
Activity
and
outputs
Input or
Individuals
Activity
and
outputs
Immediate
individual
outcomes
Individual
Long-term
outcomes
Population
Outcomes
13
14. Program
impact on
population
outcomes
If the world was easy… just a question of math
Number of participants in program X
Program outcomes for that participant group
= Population level outcomes
14
15. Discussion
Who has done a logic model for their programs?
Benefits of doing a logic model
Issues/barriers to doing so
Have you ever “run the math” for your Executive?
15
17. But, the
world isn’t
easy.
Input or
Individuals
Activity
and
outputs
Input or
Individuals
Activity
and
outputs
Immediate
individual
outcomes
Individual
Long-term
outcomes
Population
Outcomes
Culture
Policy
Environment
Physical
Environment
Fiscal
Environment
Access to
Services
Competing
Priorities
External
Factors
17
18. Why think
about
systems?
Interconnectedness of different components
Key to being collectively effective, especially on
population outcomes
Addresses non-program issues which can be
barriers or causes to try and turn them into
supports
If one frog was sick, we would treat the frog. If
every frog in a pond was sick, we would treat the
pond
Opens up other avenues for addressing issues, of
individuals within systems
Especially in post-secondary situations, where the
population changes every 5-7 years
18
19. Ways of
thinking
about
systems
Activity focused models
Healthy University self-assessment checklist
ISO style approach
At this level, doesn’t show you whether they are
good or not
BUT – useful for some – e.g. fiscal environment;
availability of wellbeing supports; physical
environment, etc.
And those can be evaluated in other ways
Deep interconnected contingent models
Down the rabbit hole
Can lead to paralysis if not directed well
Understand interconnected driver models
E.g. Structural Equation model approach
OR, assume interconnection, look to your ability to
influence where there are fundamental
opportunities, and learn as you go
19
22. Today’s
Focus:
Culture and
Policy
In many ways, they are fundamental
Other pieces of the system (funding, built
environment, activities, etc.) can flow from cultures
and policy
Interlinked
Culture can drive policy change
Policy can drive culture change
22
23. Assessing
Policy
Understanding policy framework
Types of policy (rule vs. suggestion vs. norm vs.
strategic direction vs. strategic program direction)
Levels of policy (external, corporate, local)
Differentiating between statement of policy and
enactment of policy
And enactment of unstated policy (strongly linked
to culture)
Assessing key components of policy and their
impacts on key desired outcomes
Evaluating approaches to changing policy and its
enactment
Evaluating net impacts of initiative to changing
policy and its enactment
23
24. Challenges in
assessing
policy
Challenge #1 – unless the target individual has had
direct interaction in a bad situation, they will not
knowWHICH policy is affecting them
Can’t ask them “What do you think of policy #14?”
Look to the EFFECT of the policy that is driving the
issue
Can have target assess effect – e.g. stress related to
exam schedules can point to policies around exam
scheduling
Challenge #2: Implicit/murky policies – may not be
clear that there is a capital P policy, but a strong
practice-based policy
Challenge #3: Enactment - need to look at policies
in PRACTICE, rather than just policies in word
Challenge #4: Interactions of policies –start looking
at NET, and then tease apart which particular ones
are driving
24
26. Opportunities
to Evaluate
Policy
Quality of policy itself
Technical reading – does it give the tools, is it clear
enough, does it clearly state purpose, etc.
Power/ability to address the issue
Implementers understanding and enacting
Policy translation
Look for unintended consequences
Things that don’t go with the PURPOSE of the policy,
or have bad interaction effects with other policies
Implementers perception of the policy framework for
supporting the policy intentions/or the issue of
interest (i.e. wellbeing)
Individuals perception of the effects
Go backwards
Ask about the drivers and issues affecting their
wellbeing, and then move backwards to address
whether it is an enacting issue or an issue with the policy
itself.
26
27. Assessing
policy
CHANGE
Look at it before and after policy change
Change in how policy implementers act?
Change in how target group perceives?
Attribution issues
Is it just a natural change happening?Try a control
group or ask for direct attribution
27
28. Trying it out
Think of a policy you would like to make to support wellbeing
Make one up – your fantasy policy to improve wellbeing
What is it intended to do?
How will it work?
What levers does it use?
Who or what is the intended target?What changes do you want to
see in the target?
Who is going to implement?
Example:
Policy to require Senate proposals to have completed a wellbeing
checklist
Intention: build curriculum that is supportive of/not detrimental to
student wellbeing and student learning
How it will work logic: Intended to increase consideration of
wellbeing in curriculum design leading to wellbeing-supporting
academic programs leading to better student wellbeing and
student learning outcomes.
LEVER: Mandated checklist form/Senate requirement
Intended target: curriculum designer; real consideration of
wellbeing
Implementer: Senate
10 minutes at your table
28
29. And pass it to
another table
How would you assess its implementation and its
effectiveness?
What factors would you have to consider in your
evaluation?
What questions would you ask, and to who?
And are there other data you would want to know if
it is effective?
How would you address attribution issues – is it this
causing the effect?
29
32. Assessing
Culture
Understanding culture
What do we mean by a culture of wellbeing?
Dimensions of culture
Different sub-cultures
Assessing key components of culture and their
impacts on key desired outcomes
Evaluating approaches to changing culture
Evaluating net impacts of initiatives to change
culture
32
33. Discussion
What is a culture of wellbeing?
What are the dimensions of that culture?
How does that culture fit with/compete with other
cultures?
33
34. Issues and
approaches
to assessing
culture
A person can be in many cultures at once
Different people interpret the same culture
differently
Culture in a vacuum
Social response bias in some direct questions
Need for comparative value
Manifestation of Culture
How are people walking the talk
Culture may not always be clearly EXPRESSED, or
understood in its expression, but it is often clearly
FELT
34
36. Types of
activities
Directed attempts at changing the culture through
influencers.
Broad public education/messaging to change
culture
Types of levers of influence:
Build understanding of importance
Build understanding of how to
Incentivize
Requirements
Tone setting
36
37. Assessing
Culture:
Ask the shore
(students,
staff, faculty,
etc.)
Culture is the sum of all the rocks and ripples…So
ask the shore what the waves feel like
Direct questions
Culture
Supports
Priorities on campus (comparative)
Indirect questions
The types of things you would expect someone who
is in the culture to say if there is a culture of
wellbeing
Sense of belonging
Community
Supported to succeed
Confident in ability to succeed
Link to personal, population and organizational
outcomes
37
38. Example of
building the
links to
organizational
outcomes…
Strongest predictor of willingness to
recommend UBC: Feeling that you
belong on campus
There is a strong correlation between feelings of
belonging on campus and willingness to
recommend UBC to others (r = .707, p < .001)
1% 2% 7% 9%
25%
84%
6%
14%
18%
37%
63%
12%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Somewhat
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Agree Strongly
Agree
I feel that I belong at this campus
AllYear Levels: I would encourage others to enroll
at UBC
Agree
Strongly Agree
38
39. Assessing
changes to
Culture
Pre/Post
If something dramatic/large scale, can do
perception, and perception of change related to
that intervention
Over time, look for different patterns
Recognizing that for students at least, will be a
substantially different cohort
39
40. Assessing
Cultural
Influencers
Stage
What we think cultural influencers should do?
Believe it is important
Understand their role in influencing culture
Act like it is important/take actions that reflect a
commitment to wellbeing and reflect their role in
culture
Be supported in incorporating wellbeing
SIZE OF ROCK ANDTHE EXTENT OFTHE RIPPLE
how much influence each has on culture
How much they believe and act on it
And can they move other cultural influencers
People can be both the target and an influencer
Link to culture perceptions by the shore
40
41. How to
measure
Cultural
Influencers
Direct measures
Ask them about it
Survey
Key informant interview (also a cultural intervention)
Relative importance questions
Surprisingly honest
To what extent do they consider wellbeing of their
community?
And, if applicable, in their decision making?
Actions they have taken to promote
Triangulating measures
Perception of cultural influencers and how they enact
culture
Values, beliefs, actions
N.B.: Perception of cultural influencers and resulting
culture is going to be driven both by word and by
action
If broad public communication is not taken up, rings
hollow
41
42. Assessing
NET change
to cultural
influencers
over time
Cultural influencers can change as a result of many
different interventions, and their own evolution
Over time, monitor
Perceptions
Values
Actions
And same for triangulation by shore
(students/staff/faculty)
Attribution issues
Is it just a natural change happening?Try a control
group or ask for direct attribution
42
43. Assessing
activities to
affect culture
Modified Kirkpatrick model
Reaction
Learning
Behaviour
Change (usually measured in terms of change in the
environment/organization/culture later)
43
44. Evaluating
Reaction
Satisfaction measures
Relevancy/usefulness measures
Process measures
Felt it was tailored for/spoke to them
Try to use a common set across different
implementations and different types of activities to
facilitate understanding of best practice, and what
is working for who.
Different for broad public education or comms
strategies, but can be done in a similar way
Assessment of quality of campaign
Assessment of visibility of campaign
Assessment of whether or not it “spoke to them”
Assessment of whether or not it rang true
44
45. Measuring
Learning
If distinct, testable learning outcomes, use those.
IF NOT…
Self-perception of learning
For cultural influencers, can include:
Belief it is important
Understanding of the issue, and what they can do
to affect
“Post-hoc pre-post”
Self assessment of the gains that they have made,
based on where they were when they started, and
where they are now
Allows for measures of GAIN
Addresses the issue of preaching to the choir
Different for broad public education or comms
strategies, but can be done in a similar way
Focus on whether they feel it gave them new
information/new understanding
45
47. Measuring
Behaviour
Set a baseline: prior to intervention, ask them about
their behaviour
Done the types of action you were hoping for?
Immediate outcomes: predicted behaviour
Likelihood that they will do something different as a
result of the intervention; do the type of behaviour you
were hoping they would
Whether they are more likely to do this behaviour than
they would have before the training
Different for broad public education or comms
strategies, but can be done in a similar way for
immediate outcomes
Will they answer the “call to action”
Longer term – 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
Ask them about their behaviour (if they have done the
prior to…
if they have done anything different
Pre-post on the perception of the influencer’s behavior
by the shore…
47
48. Evaluating
Culture
Activity
Develop an intervention to develop a culture of
wellbeing… or choose one that you are already
trying
Spell out the logic of how you believe it will shift
culture, and the effect that that shift will have on
the personal and population wellbeing outcomes
Write it down
10 minutes
48
49. And pass it to
the right.
How would you evaluate the proposed approach?
Write out an evaluation plan, showing the steps you
would take.
How would you measure effectiveness?
How would you address attribution issues?
30 minutes
49
51. Final
Thoughts
Apply evaluative thinking, but don’t get hung
up on perfection
YOUARE GOINGTO GET ITWRONG… SO LEARN
QUICKLY*
*Applies to both your interventions, and your
evaluation approach
Support learning across, and aggregation of results
Build tools that support comparison
Common and specific components
Don’t overdo it.You can get into some serious
rabbitholes in getting the PERFECT evaluation.
And your results may not hold in the next version,
given the number of factors at play in complex
There are many off the shelf that you can modify to
your needs
Be constantly learning and adjusting.
51
52. A quick pitch
UBC would like to work with other institutions
across BC to develop a student population
wellbeing tool that provides a combination of
epidemiological and more conceptually linked data
(e.g. culture of wellbeing, broader outcomes)
designed to support wellbeing initiatives, and
better comparative data across BC and Canada
Opportunity for tailoring by institution
And cheaper too!
52