Evaluation of the National Trachoma Health Promotion Programme
Report for Indigenous Eye Health, University of Melbourne; Ninti One Research Report NR002
Ninti One Limited
E-Publications; E-Books; PublicationNT; Report NR002
Ninti One was invited by Indigenous Eye Health (IEH) to conduct an evaluation of the Trachoma Health Promotion Programme (THPP). The project evaluated the work of IEH at the University of Melbourne and its contribution to the goals of the National THPP in six remote Aboriginal communities in Central Australia (namely the tristate border region of South Australia, the Northern Territory and Western Australia). The intent of the project was to identify community knowledge and perceptions of the THPP and what impact this knowledge had on the respondents and their actions. The outputs will be used by IEH and others working in this field to continue the work of eliminating trachoma and to improve and develop future activities and initiatives. The research was conducted over six locations – Ali Curung, Finke, Lajamanu, Ntaria, Pukatja (Ernabella) and Warburton – ensuring that a sufficiently large and representative sample of people was reached in each community and overall across the population. - Executive summary; Made available via the Publications (Legal Deposit) Act 2004 (NT).
Executive summary -- Introduction -- Monitoring and evaluation strategy -- Research process -- Dara from survey questions -- Data analysis -- Conclusion -- Appendix A-B
Prevention and control; Trachoma; Health and hygiene; Ophthalmology; Eye diseases; Aboriginal Australians
Ninti One Limited
iv, 38 pages : colour illustrations ; 30 cm.
Check within Publication or with content Publisher.
Ninti One Research Report NR002 14 Evaluation of the National Trachoma Health Promotion Programme Ninti One Limited Report for Indigenous Eye Health University of Melbourne 4.7 Did you understand what Milpa was telling you? Did you understand what Milpa was telling you? Ali Curung Finke Ntaria Warburton Lajamanu Pukatja TOTAL Clean eyes, face, hands 6 13 7 12 7 6 51 Clean face, strong eyes 1 1 4 4 2 0 12 Eyes 2 1 0 0 0 1 4 He didnt talk 2 0 4 5 3 0 14 Health Generally 2 2 2 2 0 0 8 Keeping clean generally 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 Trachoma or eye sickness 3 2 3 0 0 1 9 Wash eyes, face, hands 7 0 0 2 0 5 14 Did not understand 1 4 0 0 2 3 10 Others 1 4 1 0 4 2 12 Dataset 7: Categorised responses for Did you understand what Milpa was telling you? If yes, what? The above question was worded ineffectively as it implies a yes/no answer; however, it did generate relevant responses in the form we were seeking. Important here, as was the case with earlier questions, is the difference between messages that show an understanding of change (such as clean eyes, face, hands) and those pointing to an action required (such as teaching kids or keeping clean generally). Responses categorised as others comprised unrelated responses (4), general health messages (4), medication to improve eye health (1) and an acknowledgement of understanding the message without explaining what was understood (3). As we will comment further in sections 5 and 6, another important distinction to be made is between responses that demonstrated an understanding directly related to the intended message (i.e by directly 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Clean eyes, face, hands Clean face, strong eyes Eyes He didn't talk Health Generally Keeping clean generally Trachoma or eye sickness Wash eyes, face, hands Did not understand Others Ali Curung Finke Ntaria Warburton Lajamanu Pukatja