OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and achievements of a systematic community action model, Health in the Neighbourhoods, in two deprived areas of Barcelona. METHODS: The feasibility of the model implementation in two neighbourhoods was assessed. The model developed three stages aiming: (1) to make alliances with partners and stakeholders, (2) to develop a participatory needs and assets assessment, and (3) to plan, implement and evaluate interventions on the community prioritised needs. The feasibility of the model at each stage was assessed through the percentage of achievement of 18 indicators. It was evaluated between 2007 and 2011. RESULTS: The achievement of the indicators exceeded an average of 75% in both neighbourhoods. In stage 1 community working groups were set up. In stage 2 a comprehensive assets and health needs assessment was done through quantitative and qualitative methods, as well as participative prioritizations of community health problems. In stage 3, the community working groups defined an action plan and a number of interventions against the prioritised problems, based on evidence and local assets reviews. Interventions were developed, implemented and evaluated. CONCLUSION: This structured model, including a small set of indicators, enabled the implementation of a community action model with neighbourhoods' stakeholders. The model showed flexibility to adapt to neighbourhoods' characteristics and the objectives were successfully met. The alliances and partnerships with community and municipal sectors promoted the sustainability of most interventions.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and achievements of a systematic community action model, Health in the Neighbourhoods, in two deprived areas of Barcelona. METHODS: The feasibility of the model implementation in two neighbourhoods was assessed. The model developed three stages aiming: (1) to make alliances with partners and stakeholders, (2) to develop a participatory needs and assets assessment, and (3) to plan, implement and evaluate interventions on the community prioritised needs. The feasibility of the model at each stage was assessed through the percentage of achievement of 18 indicators. It was evaluated between 2007 and 2011. RESULTS: The achievement of the indicators exceeded an average of 75% in both neighbourhoods. In stage 1 community working groups were set up. In stage 2 a comprehensive assets and health needs assessment was done through quantitative and qualitative methods, as well as participative prioritizations of community health problems. In stage 3, the community working groups defined an action plan and a number of interventions against the prioritised problems, based on evidence and local assets reviews. Interventions were developed, implemented and evaluated. CONCLUSION: This structured model, including a small set of indicators, enabled the implementation of a community action model with neighbourhoods' stakeholders. The model showed flexibility to adapt to neighbourhoods' characteristics and the objectives were successfully met. The alliances and partnerships with community and municipal sectors promoted the sustainability of most interventions.
Authors: Viola Cassetti; Montserrat León García; Sonia López-Villar; María Victoria López Ruiz; Joan J Paredes-Carbonell Journal: Int J Public Health Date: 2020-03-09 Impact factor: 3.380
Authors: Ana M Novoa; Glòria Pérez; Albert Espelt; Cynthia Echave; Patricia G de Olalla; M Jesús Calvo; Maribel Pasarín; Èlia Diez; Carme Borrell; M Jesús Calvo; Berta Cormenzana; Imma Cortés; Èlia Diez; Cynthia Echave; Albert Espelt; Patrícia G de Olalla; Josep Gòmez; Ana M Novoa; Montserrat Pallarès; Glòria Pérez; Maica Rodríguez-Sanz Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Victoria Porthé; Irene García-Subirats; Carles Ariza; Joan Ramón Villalbí; Montse Bartroli; Olga Júarez; Elia Díez Journal: J Community Health Date: 2021-06