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
2017
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
English
Prevention and control; Trachoma; Health and hygiene; Ophthalmology; Eye diseases; Aboriginal Australians
Ninti One Limited
Alice Springs
Report NR002
iv, 38 pages : colour illustrations ; 30 cm.
application/pdf.
9781741582796
Check within Publication or with content Publisher.
www.nintione.com.au
https://hdl.handle.net/10070/283987
https://hdl.handle.net/10070/410287
Ninti One Research Report NR002 Ninti One Limited Evaluation of the National Trachoma Health Promotion Programme iii Report for Indigenous Eye Health University of Melbourne Datasets Dataset 1: Total gender distribution of participants (%) ........................................................................ 6 Dataset 2: Proportion of participants in each age group (%) ................................................................. 7 Dataset 3: Proportion of participants who reported having seen Milpa (%) ......................................... 8 Dataset 4: Categorised responses from what does Milpa mean to you? ........................................... 10 Dataset 5: Categorised responses for When you see Milpa, what do you think? .............................. 11 Dataset 6: Categorised responses for Where have you seen Milpa? ................................................. 12 Dataset 6.1: Proportion of responses for Where have you seen Milpa? according to the categories broadcast media, leaflets and posters and personal appearances of Milpa (%) ........................... 13 Dataset 7: Categorised responses for Did you understand what Milpa was telling you? If yes, what? ....................................................................................................................................................... 14 Dataset 7.1: Proportion of responses in question Did you understand that Milpa was telling you? that are related or unrelated to the intended message (%). ......................................................... 15 Dataset 8: Categorised responses for How could people understand Milpa better? ........................ 16 Dataset 8.1: Grouped responses indicating ways to improve communication and understanding of the programme message to participants. ..................................................................................... 17 Dataset 9: Categorised responses to What are you doing about clean faces? .................................. 18 Dataset 10: Categorised responses to the question What can you do about clean faces? ............... 19 Dataset 10.1: Aggregated responses according to theme for the questions What are you doing about clean faces? and What can you do about clean faces? .................................................... 20 Dataset 11: Categorised responses for Does anything stop you from keeping faces clean? ............. 21 Dataset 12: Community attitudes to the programme categorised by theme and in response to the question How does the community feel (about the programme)? ............................................ 22 Dataset 13: Categorised responses for Why do you think you have not seen Milpa? ....................... 23 Dataset 14: Categorised responses for Have you seen a health programme that was really good? . 24 Dataset 15: Participant suggestions by category for the question How could a campaign work better for you? ......................................................................................................................................... 25 Figures Figure 1: Newsletter and drawing from Ntaria Childcare ....................................................................... 1 Figure 2: Participants in the Trachoma Evaluation co-design workshop ................................................ 2 Figure 3: Maureen Abbott, Aboriginal Community Researcher, conducting a focus group discussion in Lajamanu.......................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 4: Survey design flow and logic .................................................................................................... 5 Figure 5: Trachoma poster ...................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 6: SAFE strategy poster ................................................................................................................ 9