Select, Implement, and Evaluate Effective and Equitable Policy and Program Strategies

The Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research at Morehouse School of Medicine has a policy evaluation approach to examine and inform policy in terms of health equity. Included in this approach is the identification of policy dilemmas where:

No policies existed to specifically address the health disparities; Policies were adopted but poorly or inequitably implemented; Implementation of existing policies resulted in deleterious consequences for vulnerable populations; or

Existing policies were not sufficiently evaluated to determine differential impacts among vulnerable populations.

These considerations are useful to keep in mind as IVP practitioners evaluate policies in their states to address IVP concerns using a health equity lens. Using this approach, the policy can be analyzed to identify the health issue and specific populations affected, impacts and opportunities for improvement and develop strategies in collaboration with key stakeholders, measure outcomes, and disseminate policy. As with programming, it is important that policy interventions consider vulnerable communities and their needs to truly be effective.

The Role of Evidence

Each day, programmatic and policy interventions are being developed, tested, and vetted by researchers and practitioners alike. State IVP program staff must choose among these interventions and select ones they feel are both likely to be effective and contextually appropriate for the communities involved.

These interventions must also be implemented with fidelity and on a scale that will provide the desired impact.

According to the CDC, evidence-based decision-making requires three complementary forms of evidence to determine whether a prevention program, practice, or policy can achieve its intended outcomes:

Best available research evidence

Contextual evidence Experiential evidence

Evidence Based Decision-Making

IVP program staff can use these four forms of evidence to make decisions about which programs or policies to implement, ensuring they are grounded in research evidence and informed by contextual and experiential evidence from the field.