Your search found 1 Results
A qualitative evaluation of the impact of the Stepping Stones sexual health programme on domestic violence and relationship power in rural Gambia.
[Unpublished] 2002. Presented at the 6th Global Forum for Health Research, Arusha, Tanzania, November, 2002.  p.The work presented here came from a preliminary evaluation and was followed up by several applications for funding to carry out a prospective community randomised trial. So far none have been accepted. This may be partly due to the fact that such an evaluation runs against current funding culture. Because of it's holistic approach and focus on core skills in couple communication, the Stepping Stones programme is neither just an HIV prevention or just a domestic violence prevention programme, but has something to contribute to both (and would see the two problems as inter-related). Funding on the other hand is often organised 'vertically' by problem, and evaluation criteria may differ from one problem to another. For example donors who fund evaluation of HIV prevention activities usually require a biological outcome, and hence concentrate on geographical areas with high HIV incidence where the epidemic is seen as most severe. Where sociological outcomes are used this tends to be either the use of quantitative tools to assist in risk factor analysis, or qualitative tools which can assist in replication of the intervention. As such they are usually considered secondary to the primary (biological) outcomes. The hope here is that these interventions may provide a 'blueprint' which can subsequently be applied in low prevalence areas. However by concentrating on proximal rather than distal determinants of infection these blueprints may only capture 'half the story', leading to locally inappropriate assumptions about which groups or behaviours HIV prevention programmes should target. An example would be the demand by some donors that interventions should have an exclusive focus on adolescents, when in a polygamous society adolescent's risk is often mediated by the older generation. On the other hand community interventions against domestic violence are forced to rely on self reported behaviour (perhaps backed up by participant observation) as an outcome. If the intervention is also a reflexive process then qualitative studies become essential to describe a process of change which contains empowerment, group dynamic and normative dimensions. The locally appropriate nature of such interventions is used to justify participatory interventions as being more effective than didactic approaches, but at the same time in the epidemiological-evaluation paradigm it can be seen as problematic, because (I would argue incorrectly) a participatory process is assumed to generate a wide spectrum of outcomes (low replicability), which mitigates against quantitative evaluation. (excerpt)