» Articles » PMID: 29357930

What Are the Barriers and Facilitators for Third Sector Organisations (non-profits) to Evaluate Their Services? A Systematic Review

Overview
Journal Syst Rev
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2018 Jan 24
PMID 29357930
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The third sector is becoming a more common provider of social and health services, but little is known about how third sector organisations (TSOs) evaluate their activities. Past research has reported that the third sector is under increasing pressure to evaluate its impact and performance by government and other commissioning bodies. However, in responding to this increased pressure to undertake evaluation, research suggests that many TSOs struggle to evaluate their activities following the principles of evidence-based practice (EBP). Yet, there has been no systematic effort to investigate why the third sector is struggling to provide good quality evidence of its effects.

Methods: This systematic review is reported following the PRISMA guidelines. Ten interdisciplinary databases were searched using a search string developed following best practice and in consultation with an information systems expert. Included studies were primary research of any research design investigating barriers to and facilitators of the evaluation process of TSOs as identified by practitioners. All studies were quality appraised, and the results were synthesised as a thematic summary.

Results: Twenty-four studies were included, which mainly investigated TSOs working within health and social services. The thematic summary identified the main barriers for TSOs to undertake evaluation to be related to the (1) lack of financial resources, (2) lack of technical capability and evaluation literacy and (3) challenges around identifying relevant evaluation systems and outcome indicators. Key facilitating factors involved (1) getting the appropriate support, (2) having an organisational culture that supports evaluation and (3) the motivation to be accountable to stakeholders. These findings were robust to study quality.

Conclusions: This review constitutes the first systematic effort to synthesise existing literature on factors supporting and preventing evaluation by TSOs. The prevalence of factors revolving around the lack of support, resources and clarity on appropriate outcome indicators suggests that many of the identified challenges may be met by applying evidence-based and stakeholder-inclusive strategies to develop shared evaluation requirements. Future efforts should address the application of EBP as part of the commissioning process of TSOs.

Citing Articles

Differing conceptual maps of skills for implementing evidence-based interventions held by community-based organization practitioners and academics: A multidimensional scaling comparison.

Ramanadhan S, Cruz J, Weese M, Kirk S, Rivard M, Eisenkraft A Transl Behav Med. 2024; 15(1.

PMID: 39566021 PMC: 11756311. DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibae051.


Ensuring equitable access, engagement and ability of socially and ethnically diverse participants to benefit from health promotion programmes: a qualitative study with parent carers of disabled children.

Harniess P, McGlinchey C, McDonald A, Boyle F, Garrood A, Logan S Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1445879.

PMID: 39403435 PMC: 11472851. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1445879.


Speaking the same language - a scoping review to identify the terminology associated with social prescribing.

Newstead S, Elliott M, Cavanagh D, Tetlow S, Wallace C Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2023; 24:e67.

PMID: 38014624 PMC: 10689092. DOI: 10.1017/S1463423623000567.


Similar skills, different frames: a thematic analysis exploring conceptualizations held by community-based organization practitioners and academics regarding skills to use evidence-based interventions to address cancer inequities.

Ramanadhan S, Cruz J, Weese M, Naveed N, Kirk S, Rivard M Implement Sci Commun. 2023; 4(1):86.

PMID: 37496041 PMC: 10373222. DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00472-w.


Application of the child community health inclusion index for measuring health inclusion of children with disabilities in the community: a feasibility study.

Yejong Yoo P, Majnemer A, Wilton R, Ahmed S, Shikako K BMC Pediatr. 2023; 23(1):86.

PMID: 36803575 PMC: 9939852. DOI: 10.1186/s12887-023-03884-8.


References
1.
Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman D . CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts. Lancet. 2008; 371(9609):281-3. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61835-2. View

2.
Napp D, Gibbs D, Jolly D, Westover B, Uhl G . Evaluation barriers and facilitators among community-based HIV prevention programs. AIDS Educ Prev. 2002; 14(3 Suppl A):38-48. DOI: 10.1521/aeap.14.4.38.23884. View

3.
Akintobi T, Yancey E, Daniels P, Mayberry R, Jacobs D, Berry J . Using evaluability assessment and evaluation capacity-building to strengthen community-based prevention initiatives. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2012; 23(2 Suppl):33-48. PMC: 3916137. DOI: 10.1353/hpu.2012.0077. View

4.
Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A . Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002; 7(4):239-44. DOI: 10.1258/135581902320432778. View

5.
Ramanadhan S, Crisostomo J, Alexander-Molloy J, Gandelman E, Grullon M, Lora V . Perceptions of evidence-based programs among community-based organizations tackling health disparities: a qualitative study. Health Educ Res. 2011; 27(4):717-28. PMC: 3396880. DOI: 10.1093/her/cyr088. View