HCA is a prominent, experienced research evaluator of government and non government, not for profit programs. These programs include pilot and ongoing project initiatives/reviews of organisations and services in whole or part.
There are many conceptual models that support evaluation research practice. HCA’s evaluation approach is eclectic and flexible, drawing on the strengths of many different sources. In this way, HCA can deliver the most appropriate evaluation efforts and provide recommendations that are proactive, innovative and practical.
For each evaluation consultancy, HCA is guided by the needs and desired outcomes of our clients and a set of key factors:
- the stage of the program life cycle;
- audience for whom the evaluation outcome is targeted for;
- the primary purpose of the evaluation;
- timeframe of the evaluation outcome;
- budget for the evaluation.
HCA believes an investment in a program ideally deserves a proportionate investment in evaluation. Further we believe even more strongly that useful, valid evaluation can be conducted within short timeframes with appropriate methodologies selected to meet the needs.
A simple conceptual model looking at the desired outcomes,a method promoted by the Australian National Office of Audit (ANOA), covers four main elements – intention, effort, effect and efficiency. HCA uses this model for evaluation tasks and different ways of gathering evidence. Some of the practical tools used by HCA include:
Intention: stakeholder consultations; literature review; document review; program logic
Effort: management audit; document analysis; management operations; data analysis
Effect: time series analysis; interviews / focus group discussions; surveys; before/after assessments
Efficiency: ‘value for money’ assessment; cost benefit analysis; cost effectiveness analysis.
HCA’s Evaluation Record
HCA has completed over 50 evaluation research projects which have involved:
HCA is a member of the Australasian Evaluation Society, the primary professional association for Australian evaluation practitioners. As such, HCA conducts all evaluation activities in line with the Society’s Guidelines for the ethical conduct of evaluation and maintains its currency of practice through participating in its educational activities.
Most evaluation studies do not result in a published report. Rather, the client uses the report in a confidential way to make funding decisions or seek program/organisation improvements. Some of our evaluation reports though are available for release from the Projects and Publications page.
HCA evaluated the Coonamble Family Wellbeing Program which is aimed at providing holistic, family directed health care to Aboriginal clients. The first step involved seeking feedback from program staff on the evaluation plan to ensure it was culturally appropriate and to provide advice on engagement processes with the program’s stakeholders. A workshop was held with stakeholders to clarify the objectives of the program and the end points the program should have reached, numerous interviews, a case study and an social network analysis. A literature review and management audit of the implementation of the project was also conducted.
Human Capital Alliance was engaged by NTML to evaluate Commonwealth funded preventive health projects in Lake Nash (Alpurrurulam) and Utopia (Urapuntja) Homelands. The initial stages of the project involved the identification of a cultural broker in each community who was employed as part of the project team to assist in developing meaningful engagement and consultation strategies and identifying interviewees. Evaluation methodology included purposeful interviews with targeted persons instrumental in the implementation of the projects, community level interviews and observations at project sites and a document review. Data collection methods varied somewhat between the two sites according to the differing community requirements, project objectives and expected outcomes. An impact evaluation attempted to gather evidence on the achievement of each of the stipulated preventive health project objectives. Project results were fed back to the communities for discussion and agreement reached for future enhancements to the projects. In Utopia the feedback was innovatively designed to successfully enhance communication and involvement of the community. Download a summary here or the full report here.
The main aim of the Hepatitis B s100 Community prescribers program is to facilitate the effective, safe management of patients with chronic hepatitis B in a community setting in order to increase access to care for chronic hepatitis B. HCA designed a methodology to conduct an evaluation of the program which included an understanding of its implementation and it’s workforce. The methodology included numerous stakeholder interviews that were conducted in March and April 2014, and a review of program documentation and analysis of program statistics. A final evaluation report was delivered in June 2014.
The overall Program as well as its individual 17 components required HCA to determine if priorities were set correctly for the Guild as well as meeting the needs of the project and individual stakeholder organisations. HCA provided information about the program, determined if overall goals and objectives were being met, promoted oversight and compliance, and demonstrated the merit and worth of the program. HCA completed this through the distribution of survey to 700 rural pharmacists to collect data on their use of the Rural Pharmacy Initiatives Program. The report included recommendations about the continuation of the Program as well as effective mechanisms for continuously maintaining and improving rural and remote access to community pharmacy services for the next five-years.