Eat Healthy Be Active–Evidence Based Summary

Updated on:

Practice-Tested

Summary of Evaluation Methods

The Eat Healthy–Be Active Community Workshops were pilot tested at ten diverse locations across the eastern and Midwestern US, including participants from a range of socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds. All lessons from the workshops were taught sequentially, and a pre-test/post-test evaluation design was used to evaluate effectiveness. Qualitative data were collected to evaluate usability and satisfaction.

Evaluation Audience

The ten pilot sites, including each site’s audience, are described in the table below.

Site Location Audience
Arkansas State University Beebe, AR University staff
Boston Organization of Nutritionists and Dietitians of Color Boston, MA Baptist church group
Clemson Cooperative Extension Clemson, SC University custodial staff, church group
Cole County Health Department Jefferson City, MO Church group
Health Resources Services Administration Rockville, MD Federal employees
Montgomery County Cooperative Extension Collegeville, PA Head Start parents, county employees
Naval Support Activity Millington, TN Spouses of military or retired military personnel
Panama City Cooperative Extension Panama City, FL Elementary school parents
Pulaski Cooperative Extension Pulaski, VA Adult education participants
Purdue Cooperative Extension Valparaiso, IN County employees

Curriculum Audience

These workshops are targeted for use by community leaders, health promoters, and educators for use among all adult participants.

Summary of Evaluation Results

Among workshop participants, 64% reported making changes in eating or physical activity behaviors after attending the workshops. Among those who made changes, 94% credited the workshop for the changes they made. In addition, 93% of workshop participants that attended all 6 reported intent to change eating behaviors, while 95% reported intent to be more physically active.

References

Hayes, R, Butner, K. Eat Healthy–Be Active Community Workshops: A pilot evaluation. JNEB 2012; 44(4): S67-S68. (Abstract)

 

 

Attachments

1 documents

documents