Peer-Reviewed Validation of a Comprehensive Framework for Disaster Evaluation Typologies

INTRODUCTION The Comprehensive Framework for Disaster Evaluation Typologies, developed in 2017 (CFDET 2017), aims to unify and facilitate agreement regarding the identification, structure, and relationships between various evaluation typologies found in the disaster setting. A peer-reviewed validation process sought input from international experts in the fields of disaster medicine, disaster/emergency management, humanitarian/development, and evaluation. This paper discusses the validation process, its results, and outcomes.Research Problem:Previous frameworks, identified in the literature, lack validation and consistent terminology. To gain credibility and utility, this unique framework needed to be validated by international experts in the disaster setting. METHODS A mixed methods approach was designed to validate the framework. An initial iterative process informed an online survey which used a combination of a five-point Likert scale and open-ended questions. Pre-determined consensus thresholds, informed by a targeted literature review, provided the validation criteria. RESULTS A sample of 33 experts from 11 countries responded to the validation process. Quantitative measures largely supported the elements and relationships of the framework, and strongly supported its value and usefulness for supporting, promoting, and undertaking evaluations, as well as its usefulness for teaching evaluation in the disaster setting. Qualitative input suggested opportunities to strengthen and enhance the framework. There were limited responses to better understand the barriers and enablers of undertaking disaster evaluations. A potential for self-selection bias of respondents may be a limitation of this study. The attainment of high consensus thresholds, however, provides confidence in the validity of the results. CONCLUSION For the first time, a framework of this nature has undergone a rigorous validation process by experts in three related disciplines at an international level. The modified framework, CFDET 2018, provides a unifying framework within which existing evaluation typologies can be structured. It gives evaluators confidence to choose an appropriate strategy for their particular evaluation in the disaster setting and facilitates consistency in reporting across the different phases of a disaster to better understand the process, outcomes, and impacts of the efficacy and efficiency of interventions. Future research could create a series of toolkits to support improved disaster evaluation processes and to evaluate the utility of the framework in the real-world setting.

[1]  Anne Markiewicz,et al.  Developing Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks , 2015 .

[2]  F. Hasson,et al.  The Delphi Technique in Nursing and Health Research , 2011 .

[3]  Marvin L Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part IV: Framework for Societal Structures: the Societal Systems , 2015, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[4]  Martin Thoms,et al.  The Australian Natural Disaster Resilience Index , 2016 .

[5]  J. Creswell,et al.  Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry , 2000 .

[6]  Marvin L Birnbaum,et al.  Disaster Research/Evaluation Frameworks, Part 1: An Overview–RETRACTED , 2014, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[7]  J. Puri,et al.  Can rigorous impact evaluations improve humanitarian assistance? , 2017 .

[8]  Steffen Torp,et al.  Promoting health in everyday settings: Opportunities and challenges , 2014, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[9]  Jennifer L. Stevenson,et al.  International Initiative for Impact Evaluation ( 3 ie ) , 2016 .

[10]  Damon P. Coppola Introduction to International Disaster Management , 2006 .

[11]  A. Thieken,et al.  Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction – Success or Warning Sign for Paris? , 2015 .

[12]  Marvin L Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part VIII: Risk, Risk Reduction, Risk Management, and Capacity Building , 2016, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[13]  James Surowiecki The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations Doubleday Books. , 2004 .

[14]  Dewald van Niekerk,et al.  Tracking the evolution of the disaster management cycle: A general system theory approach , 2012 .

[15]  Federica Frattina UN WomenA focus on the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women , 2017 .

[16]  Steve Glassey,et al.  Preventing 'lessons lost': Is evidence-based dynamic doctrine the answer? , 2015 .

[17]  Marius Rehn,et al.  Systematic literature review of templates for reporting prehospital major incident medical management , 2013, BMJ Open.

[18]  M. Bamberger Institutionalizing impact evaluation within the framework of a monitoring and evaluation system , 2009 .

[19]  Linda Mabry,et al.  RealWorld Evaluation: Working Under Budget, Time, Data, and Political Constraints , 2006 .

[20]  Samuel J Stratton,et al.  Is There a Scientific Basis for Disaster Health and Medicine? , 2014, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[21]  Marvin L. Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part VII: The Relief/Recovery Framework , 2016, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[22]  H. White Some Reflections on Current Debates in Impact Evaluation , 2012 .

[23]  Lynn Chenoweth,et al.  Validation of a clinical leadership qualities framework for managers in aged care: a Delphi study. , 2015, Journal of clinical nursing.

[24]  Marvin L Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part V: Epidemiological Disaster Research , 2015, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[25]  D. Hilhorst Being good at doing good? Quality and accountability of humanitarian NGOs. , 2002, Disasters.

[26]  Samuel J Stratton Questioning the validity of science. , 2014, Prehospital and disaster medicine.

[27]  Yashodhan Ghorpade,et al.  What Methods May Be Used in Impact Evaluations of Humanitarian Assistance? , 2014, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[28]  Marvin L. Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part IX: Risk-Reduction Framework , 2016, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[29]  Marvin L. Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part VI: Interventional Research and the Disaster Logic Model , 2016, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[30]  Murray Turoff,et al.  Past and future emergency response information systems , 2002, CACM.

[31]  M. Sloggett Disaster Nursing and Emergency Preparedness for Chemical, Biological and Radiological Terrorism and Other Hazards , 2004 .

[32]  Kristi L. Koenig,et al.  Utstein-Style Template for Uniform Data Reporting of Acute Medical Response in Disasters , 2012, PLoS currents.

[33]  A. O’Cathain,et al.  Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance , 2015, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[34]  Marvin L. Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part II: The Disaster Health Conceptual Framework Revisited , 2015, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[35]  Marvin L. Birnbaum,et al.  Health Disaster Management Guidelines for Evaluation and Research in the Utstein Style , 1999, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[36]  Marvin L Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part I: An Overview , 2015, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[37]  Nancy P Wingo,et al.  Applying Mixed Methods in Action Research: Methodological Potentials and Advantages , 2018 .

[38]  H. DeVon,et al.  A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. , 2007, Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing.

[39]  Marvin L Birnbaum,et al.  Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part III: Framework for the Temporal Phases of Disasters , 2015, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[40]  David V. Budescu,et al.  When is a crowd wise? , 2014, ArXiv.

[41]  Johan von Schreeb,et al.  Humanitarian Assistance and Accountability: What Are We Really Talking About? , 2015, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[42]  C. Dolea,et al.  World Health Organization , 1949, International Organization.

[43]  Frederick M. Burkle,et al.  Disaster Metrics: A Comprehensive Framework for Disaster Evaluation Typologies , 2017, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[44]  Anthony F Jorm Using the Delphi expert consensus method in mental health research , 2015, The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry.

[45]  David M. Neal,et al.  Reconsidering the Phases of Disaster , 1997, International Journal of Mass Emergencies & Disasters.

[46]  Virginia Murray,et al.  Guidelines for Reports on Health Crises and Critical Health Events , 2010, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.