Money Matters: A Three-Step Process for Using Budget Data in Program Evaluation to Assess the Design and Management of a Novel Public Health Program

Abstract

We applied a three-step process, abstracting and analyzing program budgets to examine how Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) awardees are structuring their programs and to assess the fidelity of program design to the CRCCP public health model. We reviewed 23 state, one tribal organization, and six university awardee budgets. We assessed resource allocations, staffing structures, and contracted partners and their activities. Awardees allocated 83% of all funds to contracts and personnel. Program managers were the most budgeted personnel type across three measures: number of people, full-time equivalency, and personnel costs. Awardees not only contracted with health care systems and clinics (39% of all contracts) but also contracted other partner types. Contractors were mainly funded to implement evidence-based interventions (25%) and conduct evaluation (24%). Program design varied among awardees in the number of staff (0–22), number of full-time equivalencies (0–5.4), and the number of contracts (1–11) budgeted. State awardees budgeted more resources to contracts, compared with university awardees (57% vs. 31%), while universities budgeted more for total personnel costs (41% vs. 30%). We learned that awardees designed their programs with fidelity to the CRCCP model. Although implementation approaches varied, overall results suggest implementation requires a combination of internal capacities and contracted partners. Budgets provide opportunities to use already existing program data to evaluate program design, partnerships, and planned activities.

Visual Abstract

This is a visual representation of the abstract.

Keywords

colorectal cancer budget data formative evaluation program design public health management quality assurance/quality improvement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bibbins-Domingo

Grossman

D. C.

Curry

S. J.

Davidson

K. W.

Epling

J. W.

García

F. A.

Gillman

M. W.

Harper

D. M.

Kemper

A. R.

Krist

A. H.

(2016). Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA Journal of the American Medical Association, 315(23), 2564–2575. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.5989

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, & Division of Population Health. (2015). BRFSS prevalence & trends data. https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/brfssprevalence/index.html

Cristofoli

Markovic

Meneguzzo

(2014). Governance, management and performance in public networks: How to be successful in shared-governance networks. Journal of Management & Governance, 18(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-012-9237-2

Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Use of colorectal cancer screening tests: 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/colorectal/statistics/use-screening-tests-BRFSS.htm

Koppenjan

(2008). Creating a playing field for assessing the effectiveness of network collaboration by performance measures. Public Management Review, 10(6), 699–714. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030802423061

Lubell

(2015). Collaborative partnerships in complex institutional systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 12, 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2014.08.011

Melitski

Manoharan

(2014). Performance measurement, accountability, and transparency of budgets and financial reports. Public Administration Quarterly, 38(1), 38–70.

Rainey

H. G.

Bozeman

(2000). Comparing public and private organizations: Empirical research and the power of the a priori. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 447–470. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024276

Ryan

Walsh

(2004). Collaboration of public sector agencies: Reporting and accountability challenges. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(7), 621–631. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550410562284

10.

United States Cancer Statistics Working Group. (2019). Colorectal cancer statistics data visualizations tool, based on 2019 submission data (1999-2017). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, & National Cancer Institute. https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/uscs/dataviz/index.htm

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB

0.02 MB

0.03 MB

0.12 MB