Positive deviance/hearth intervention in collaboration between academia and NGOs: a realist evaluation

Numerous NGOs and donors from high-income countries (HICs) offer diverse funding to assist LMICs. A collaborative effort in nutrition programs in urban communities was conducted by an international NGO with a local university, representing the NGO's first mode of partnership with academia. This study used realist evaluation to understand how and why Positive Deviance/Hearth intervention conducted by NGOs collaborated with university work or failed to work in urban population. We uncovered the underlying mechanisms that lead to certain outcomes in different situations of academia-NGO partnership. The initial program theory was formulated after discussions with main program officers from both NGO and academia. We conducted stakeholder interviews and FGD, along with validation and reviewing secondary data. The initial program theory underwent testing and refinement through a series of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) involving program officers and local government health offices. We adhered to the RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations when presenting the findings. Five Context Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configurations are identified from three program theories. Our findings illustrate the importance of considering the local context of the population when implementing standardized international NGO interventions. All the CMOs indicate that at the very least, collaborative programs between academia and NGOs should involve more stakeholder involvement and build clearer expectations between stakeholders.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Public Health
Published
2024-12-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-20632-4
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.85
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Positive deviance/hearth intervention in collaboration between academia and NGOs: a realist evaluation

Nuzulul Kusuma Putri, Leonika Pramudya Wardhani, Ernawaty Ernawaty
1 citations
BMC Public Health
Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations
0.85
article

Positive deviance/hearth intervention in collaboration between academia and NGOs: a realist evaluation

Nuzulul Kusuma Putri, Leonika Pramudya Wardhani, Ernawaty Ernawaty
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Numerous NGOs and donors from high-income countries (HICs) offer diverse funding to assist LMICs. A collaborative effort in nutrition programs in urban communities was conducted by an international NGO with a local university, representing the NGO's first mode of partnership with academia. This study used realist evaluation to understand how and why Positive Deviance/Hearth intervention conducted by NGOs collaborated with university work or failed to work in urban population. We uncovered the underlying mechanisms that lead to certain outcomes in different situations of academia-NGO partnership. The initial program theory was formulated after discussions with main program officers from both NGO and academia. We conducted stakeholder interviews and FGD, along with validation and reviewing secondary data. The initial program theory underwent testing and refinement through a series of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) involving program officers and local government health offices. We adhered to the RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations when presenting the findings. Five Context Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configurations are identified from three program theories. Our findings illustrate the importance of considering the local context of the population when implementing standardized international NGO interventions. All the CMOs indicate that at the very least, collaborative programs between academia and NGOs should involve more stakeholder involvement and build clearer expectations between stakeholders.

BMC Public HealthVol. 24(1)
Tulane University (US), Universitas Airlangga (ID)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations
0.85
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.