Methodological Framework
The initial aim of the project was to review the available literature around practice and evaluation of arts and health and explore what was happening within projects. This was done as there was no one definitive method for conducting the evaluation available and as the stakeholders involved came from differing and in some cases opposing ideological perspectives.
The study utilises a realistic evaluation approach (Pawson & Tilly, 1997). Realistic evaluation has a goal to explore and develop the theories of practitioners, participants and policy makers. This is useful in understanding how and why programs have the potential to cause change, and understanding the causal potential of individuals and initiatives and the specific resources that encourage participants to change, with a belief that the capacity for change is only triggered in the right circumstances.
Program evaluations such as this one need to understand the context they operate within to have greater appreciation of how the mechanisms introduced might and do inform and alter the balance of the constrained choices of participants, and how this affects and changes all involved, moving them towards particular outcomes that are not always those envisaged.
The overall task of the evaluation is to understand the value and impact of arts activities on the health and well being of older people, on mental health and on NHS staff, environments and health culture. This will be attempted by exploring the 'context', 'mechanisms' and the 'outcomes' of arts activities across a range of projects working broadly towards health promotion aims. In short to explore in depth what works, for whom, and in what conditions.
In addition, to generate the most useful outcome for the stakeholders, we have adopted an approach known as Participatory Evaluation. This is a collaborative approach that focuses on learning, success and action. The key is that through using this method the stakeholders contribute directly to the project and, building on their strengths, they define the evaluation questions and indicators for success and continually inform the evaluation as it develops.
In essence a participatory approach is designed to ensure that the work is of the greatest worth to those people who are doing the work that is being evaluated.
Qualitative methodology
Appreciative inquiry (AI) cycles will be used throughout the evaluation process to encourage a team approach, to develop a shared vision for the aims, objectives and anticipated outcomes, and a means of reflection and learning within and as a result of the ongoing evaluation process.
Semi-structured interviews will be used to explore individual aims, experiences and changes, and to explore emergent themes in more depth.
Semi structured diaries will record details of the development of artists and health workers and will provide ongoing insight into the processes involved.
Quantitative methodology
The overall aim is to record pre, and post intervention data for analysis and comparison of impact, using a combination of validated and purposive tools.
Measurement will be of
- Well being
- General Health
- Depression
- Satisfaction
The measurement criteria has emerged from the stage (1) appreciative inquiry consultation workshops that were held prior to the project data collection process. Once the aims, objectives and anticipated outcomes were clarified, the appropriate tools could be.
Data collection is to be conducted in three phases, each followed by a review workshop so that any learning, adjustments or training needs can be addressed, and project teams can increasingly absorb the evaluation culture.
