IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v70y2018icp73-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

It’s just the right thing to do: Conceptualizing a theory of change for a school food and beverage sales environment interv ention and implications for implementation evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Levay, Adrienne V.
  • Chapman, Gwen E.
  • Seed, Barbara
  • Wittman, Hannah

Abstract

School food environments are the target of nutrition interventions and evaluations across the globe. Yet little work to-date has articulated the importance of developing a theory of change upon which to base evaluation of both implementation and outcomes. This paper undertakes an interpretive approach to develop a retrospective theory of change for an implementation evaluation of British Columbia’s school food and beverage sales Guidelines. This study contributes broadly to a nuanced conceptualization of this type of public health intervention and provides a methodological contribution on how to develop a retrospective theory of change with implications for effective evaluation. Data collection strategies included document analysis, semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, and participant observation. Developing the logic model revealed that, despite the broad population health aims of the intervention, the main focus of implementation is to change behaviors of adults who create school food environments. Derived from the analysis and interpretation of the data, the emergent program theory focuses on the assumption that if adults are responsibilized through information and education campaigns and provided implementation tools, they will be ‘convinced’ to implement changes to school food environments to foster broader public health goals. These findings highlight the importance of assessing individual-level implementation indicators as well as the more often evaluated measures of food and beverage availability.

Suggested Citation

  • Levay, Adrienne V. & Chapman, Gwen E. & Seed, Barbara & Wittman, Hannah, 2018. "It’s just the right thing to do: Conceptualizing a theory of change for a school food and beverage sales environment interv ention and implications for implementation evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 73-82.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:73-82
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.04.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718917302355
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.04.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ronette R. Briefel & Ander Wilson & Philip M. Gleason, 2009. "Consumption of Low-Nutrient Energy-Dense Foods and Beverages at School Home and Other Locations Among School Lunch Participants and Nonparticipants," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 461c53197c444572b13a4f215, Mathematica Policy Research.
    2. Kaplan, Sue A. & Garrett, Katherine E., 2005. "The use of logic models by community-based initiatives," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 167-172, May.
    3. Rashidian, Arash & Eccles, Martin P. & Russell, Ian, 2008. "Falling on stony ground A qualitative study of implementation of clinical guidelines' prescribing recommendations in primary care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 148-161, February.
    4. McLaughlin, John A. & Jordan, Gretchen B., 1999. "Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 65-72.
    5. Gorski, M.T. & Cohen, J.F.W. & Hoffman, J.A. & Rosenfeld, L. & Chaffee, R. & Smith, L. & Rimm, E.B., 2016. "Impact of nutrition standards on competitive food quality in Massachusetts middle and high schools," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(6), pages 1101-1108.
    6. repec:mpr:mprres:6161 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lam, Steven & Dodd, Warren & Wyngaarden, Sara & Skinner, Kelly & Papadopoulos, Andrew & Harper, Sherilee L., 2021. "How and why are Theory of Change and Realist Evaluation used in food security contexts? A scoping review," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fielden, Sarah J. & Rusch, Melanie L. & Masinda, Mambo Tabu & Sands, Jim & Frankish, Jim & Evoy, Brian, 2007. "Key considerations for logic model development in research partnerships: A Canadian case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 115-124, May.
    2. Ebenso, Bassey & Manzano, Ana & Uzochukwu, Benjamin & Etiaba, Enyi & Huss, Reinhard & Ensor, Tim & Newell, James & Onwujekwe, Obinna & Ezumah, Nkoli & Hicks, Joe & Mirzoev, Tolib, 2019. "Dealing with context in logic model development: Reflections from a realist evaluation of a community health worker programme in Nigeria," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 97-110.
    3. Wasserman, Deborah L., 2010. "Using a systems orientation and foundational theory to enhance theory-driven human service program evaluations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 67-80, May.
    4. Peyton, David J. & Scicchitano, Michael, 2017. "Devil is in the details: Using logic models to investigate program process," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 156-162.
    5. O'Keefe, Christine M. & Head, Richard J., 2011. "Application of logic models in a large scientific research program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 174-184, August.
    6. Vinícius P. Rodrigues & Daniela C. A. Pigosso & Jakob W. Andersen & Tim C. McAloone, 2018. "Evaluating the Potential Business Benefits of Ecodesign Implementation: A Logic Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    7. Park, Chul Hyun & Welch, Eric W. & Sriraj, P.S., 2016. "An integrative theory-driven framework for evaluating travel training programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 7-20.
    8. Cullen, Patricia & Clapham, Kathleen & Byrne, Jake & Hunter, Kate & Senserrick, Teresa & Keay, Lisa & Ivers, Rebecca, 2016. "The importance of context in logic model construction for a multi-site community-based Aboriginal driver licensing program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 8-15.
    9. Volden, Gro Holst, 2018. "Public project success as seen in a broad perspective," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 109-117.
    10. Patterson, Laurie B. & Backhouse, Susan H. & Duffy, Patrick J., 2016. "Anti-doping education for coaches: Qualitative insights from national and international sporting and anti-doping organisations," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 35-47.
    11. Hill, Janice R. & Thies, Jeanie, 2010. "Program theory and logic model to address the co-occurrence of domestic violence and child maltreatment," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 356-364, November.
    12. Phulkerd, Sirinya & Sacks, Gary & Vandevijvere, Stefanie & Worsley, Anthony & Lawrence, Mark, 2017. "Barriers and potential facilitators to the implementation of government policies on front-of-pack food labeling and restriction of unhealthy food advertising in Thailand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 101-110.
    13. Ishdorj, Ariun & Crepinsek, Mary Kay & Jensen, Helen H., 2012. "Children’s Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables: Do School Environment and Policies Affect Choice in School Meals?," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123534, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Ariun Ishdorj & Mary Kay Crepinsek & Helen H. Jensen, 2013. "Children's Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables: Do School Environment and Policies Affect Choices at School and Away from School?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 35(2), pages 341-359.
    15. Neha Rathi & Lynn Riddell & Anthony Worsley, 2018. "Parents’ and Teachers’ Views of Food Environments and Policies in Indian Private Secondary Schools," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-14, July.
    16. Rebecca Pera & Giampaolo Viglia, 2017. "Can snacking be healthy? A comparison between coeliacs and health conscious food consumers," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(3), pages 79-99.
    17. Tim Benijts, 2014. "A Business Sustainability Model for Government Corporations. A Belgian Case Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 204-216, March.
    18. Spyridonidis, Dimitrios & Calnan, Michael, 2011. "Opening the black box: A study of the process of NICE guidelines implementation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 117-125.
    19. Ralston, Katherine & Treen, Katie & Coleman-Jensen, Alisha & Guthrie, Joanne, 2017. "Children’s Food Security and USDA Child Nutrition Programs," Economic Information Bulletin 259730, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    20. Voeten, J.J., 2012. "Understanding responsible innovation in small producers’ clusters in Northern Vietnam : A grounded theory approach to globalization and poverty alleviation," Other publications TiSEM e01da02b-ef2b-47c9-8d06-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:73-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.