The program case study I was asked to choose a model of evaluation for involves a program in Saskatoon that seeks to aide pregnant Aboriginal mothers from contracting Type II Diabetes at younger ages and to also help with incidences of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM). An Aboriginal program facilitator was hired, an elder was approached and a survey of Aboriginal women was conducted to identify what sort of approaches appealed to them and possible locations. The YMCA was chosen as the site for the 45-minute classes. A wide variety of activities were available led by certified instructors.

Of the approximately 500 Aboriginal women the authors estimated who were pregnant in Saskatoon during the 2 years of the program only 11% inquired about the program and 7% actively participated.

In looking at a possible model for evaluation there are obviously several choices. As a means of “objective” evaluation the Stufflebeam – CIPP model is the one I chose to look at the program. The Stufflebeam approach looks at the Context of the program, the Inputs involved, the Process and the Product or output.

The specific context of the Aboriginal prenatal fitness project is easy to delineate. Who qualifies for the program is easy to sort out. The participants are selected based on gender, ancestry and predilection to a particular condition. The larger the sample size, possibly 500 at the time of the program, creates the possibility of seeing if the goals of the program are met.

The inputs to the program are the actual prenatal exercise classes. Their location, their leaders and the resources needed to achieve these are all part of the inputs. Additional resources were part of the actual location that was used in the program. Swimming, low impact aerobics and exercise equipment was available and part of the program. As well, paraprofessional personnel and outside supports are well documented within the program.

The process can be well defined. Where the classes were held, who took them and how they were conducted are detailed within the program’s description. As well, additions dues to participant requests are also detailed in the description.

Lastly, is the product. The end goal of the program was to address particular health concerns within a target population. After evaluating the context, inputs and process, a judgment could be made regarding the product. Did the program result in a reduction of pregnant Aboriginal women contracting either GDM or Type II diabetes? There are other outcomes or products that might result from a program like this that could be outlined, but the end goal of the program is to prevent disease. If that is happening the program could be deemed successful. If not, perhaps not as successful and steps to correct this within the program could be outlined.

I think this model works well for a program like this because it objectively looks at the various parts and passes a judgment on whether it is effective or not. All the components of the Stufflebeam model are met in the program’s description and background material. The “product” is not delineated, but presumably would be something that would be available for the evaluator to access.

A potential problem in this model of evaluation is that there are other products that are less objective oriented than simply whether participants reported less instances of disease. Increased social interaction, good use of public facilities and classes and the possible reasons why a good portion of pregnant Aboriginal women don’t participate in the program may not be examined.