Through our program evaluation work with jdcPartnerships IHPTP “reframed our work, refined the language we used to talk about and promote a package of products, and ultimately increased the marketability of the program.”
— Temre Uzuncan Psy.D., Project Director, IHPTP

IHPTP: Making Evaluation Meaningful

The Challenge: The time had come for IHPTP to conduct a program evaluation. Temre Uzuncan Psy.D. Project Director, and her colleagues, were concerned that the limited data they had collected and limited resources would be insufficient to thoroughly evaluate the program. “In the past we used evaluators who were more research oriented, and who would crunch the numbers for data that we organized and provided… we needed someone to help us clearly articulate what we were evaluating, organize the data we had, and evaluate an integrated program that was looking at both health outcomes and behavioral health change.”

Background: IHPTP is a program of The Wright Institute and provides practical experience for their Psychology students. It is based on partnerships with primary health clinics and emphasizes integrating psychology into a community-based primary care setting. The 6-year old program had received Federal HRSA funding for 3 years.

The Work: jdcPartnerships started by working with Dr. Uzuncan and her colleagues to identify their core evaluation questions and to align them with overall program goals. Once the evaluation questions were clear, jdcPartnerships reviewed existing data, determined where there were gaps, and developed/refined tools to collect missing information and to provide IHPTP with a clear evaluation structure moving forward.

Dr. Uzuncan explains that jdcPartnerships supported IHPTP in “clearly articulating the kinds of questions that are important, understanding how to collect this data…. It was a very collaborative process.”

Additionally, identifying the core evaluation questions necessitated big-picture conversations about the program. Through these conversations the team unexpectedly and organically began to touch on issues of marketability and the program’s business model. Dr. Uzuncan explains, “We reframed our work, refined the language we used to talk about and promote a package of products, and ultimately increased the marketability of the program.“

Results: Dr. Uzuncan feels that IHPTP now has both a practical set of tools as well as a bigger-picture appreciation for the utility of evaluation data.

  1. jdcPartnerships produced a comprehensive program evaluation by weaving together existing data with information they gathered and organizing it around key evaluation questions. In addition to meeting reporting requirements, Dr. Uzuncan has also used the evaluation report to “reach out to new partners and share the benefits of the program.”
  2. A set of key evaluation questions and related evaluative tools was developed that will allow IHPTP to rigorously evaluate their program moving forward.

In addition to the expected program evaluation, Dr. Uzuncan identifies several additional outcomes that resulted from her work with jdcPartnerships:

  1. Increased marketability — through working with jdcP they became increasingly able to contextualize their program and make it more attractive to potential partners.
  2. Improved communication — conversations with jdcP helped them reframe their work and provided a new and clearer language for internal and external communications.
  3. Improved organizational functioning — through the process gained objectivity to assess internal structures related to program and tighten up those structures to improve overall functioning.