HP Metrics & Evaluation

Skip Navigation LinksDCPH-A Home / Organization / Health Promotion & Wellness / HP Metrics & Evaluation

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​The HP Metrics & Evaluation (HPME) Branch within the Department of Defense (DoD) offers program evaluation services to support the optimal functioning, effectiveness, impact, and relevance of the Defense Health Agency (DHA).​​​​

HPME is a recognized expert in public health program evaluation within the DoD.

We are comprised of more than 20 highly-skilled scientists and analysts trained in public health, behavior change, evaluation, measurement, statistics, questionnaire design and development, qualitative methods, psychology, and community-based participatory research.

We use a wide variety of available evaluation methods to execute evaluation projects to assure the effectiveness, efficiency, and relevance of public health programs, policies, and initiatives in support of the DoD.

Our Vision​​

HPME strives to be the DoD's leading expert in, and advocate for, comprehensive evaluation promoting evidence-driven public health practice.

Our Mission

HPME advocates for, builds capacity for, and provides comprehensive program evaluation services to inform evidence-driven public health decision-making within the DHA and improve programs, policies, and environments for the DoD.​

Our Core Values

At our core, HPME is focused on Action-oriented and Transparent evaluation practice. We also strive for all we do to be rooted in SCIENCE.

     

A. T.
Action-oriented
Transparent

S. C. I. E. N. C. E. 
Systematic
Collaborative
Innovative
Ethical
​Nimble
Courteous
Excellent
​​​​

Our Services

The HPME Branch offers a comprehensive suite of evaluation services in support of the DHA. In each of our projects, we generate actionable recommendations to improve a program, policy, or initiative's functioning, effectiveness, impact and relevance.

What we can do for you
How we do it
    Assess the health status and needs of the Total Military Family to ensure you are addressing the right problems
  • Community health assessment
  • Needs assessment
    Identify and promote evidence-ba​sed practice and program evaluation to inform you about what is known to work (and not work)
  • Review literature
  • Identify best practices within and outside the DoD
    Determine and document evidence in support of your health promotion or readiness program, policy, or initiative's:
  • Effectiveness
  • Implementation successes and challenges
  • Public health impact
  • Develop program evaluation plans
  • Design, develop, and execute questionnaires
  • Design, develop, and execute interviews and focus groups
  • Analyze qualitative and quantitative data
  • Develop tools to assess and monitor an installation's built environment
  • Collect, analyze, and report evaluation data 
    Build your evaluation capacity
  • Provide training on program evaluation
  • Identify relevant measures of performance and measures of effectiveness
  • Integrate evaluation from the inception of a program
    Document and disseminate your evaluation findings

  • Publish reports, infographics, briefing slide decks and other products to effectively communicate evaluation findings and implications
  • Brief evaluation findings or support you in briefing them
  • Publish evaluation findings within the  scientific literature
    Establish program evaluation standards, processes, and frameworks for use across the DoD
  • Develop toolkits
  • Advocate for evaluation at all phases of an initiative's lifecycle
  • Contribute to DoD policies, regulations, and operations orders

Our Approach

The HPME​ Branch uses the public health evaluation framework established by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to guide our work. Visit the CDC website for more details, to include the steps in the program evaluation process. CDC Program Evaluation FrameworkExternal Link


Program Evaluation Standards

  • ​Relevance and Utility: Evaluations should focus on useful information that is important to stakeholders. Their findings should be actionable and available in time for use. They should be presented in a way that is understandable, culturally responsive, and informative.
  • Rigor: Evaluations should produce findings that stakeholders can confidently rely upon while also providing clear explanations of limitations. The rigor of an evaluation is highly dependent on thoughtful planning and implementation of the underlying design and methods, as well as how findings are interpreted and reported.
  • Independence and Objectivity: Evaluations should strive to be as independent and objective as possible so that stakeholders, experts, and the public will accept their findings. Evaluation activities should be appropriately insulated from political and other undue influences that may affect their objectivity, impartiality, and professional judgement.
  • Ethics: Evaluations should be conducted to the highest ethical standards to maintain trust in the process and products. Evaluations should be equitable, fair, and just, and should consider cultural and contextual factors that could influence the findings or their use.​

Publications 

  • Gomez, S. A., Beymer, M. R., Jackson Santo, T., Riviere, L. A., Adler, A. B., Thomas, J. L., Millikan Bell, A., & Quartana, P. J. (2022). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Army families: Household finances, familial experiences, and soldiers' behavioral health. Military Psychology, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2022.214919​0    ​
  • Santo, T. J., Brown, J. A., Gomez, S. A., & Shirey, L. A. (2021). The Role of Program Evaluation in Keeping Army Health “Army Strong”: Translating Lessons Learned Into Best Practices. Military medicine. https://academic.oup.com/milmed/advance-article/doi/10.1093/milmed/usab516/6485114
  • Via, C., Gomez, S.A.Q., Jarka, M., Gibson, C., Rivera, L.O., Erickson, P., Dodd, M. (2021). Assessing the Impact of the U.S. Army Wellness Centers on Soldier and Other Clients’ Goal-Related Improvements in Health Behaviors and Chronic Disease Risk Factors [Poster presentation]. Military Health System Research Symposium. https://phc.amedd.army.mil/PHC%20Resource%20Library/pha-awc-impact-on-health-poster.pdf
  • Coleman, A. M., Hartzell, M. M., Oh, R. C., Funari, T. S., Rivera, L. O. (2020). Improving Resilience and Combating Burnout in US Army Health Care Teams. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 33(3), 440-445. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.03.190350 https://www.jabfm.org/content/33/3/440
  • Chukwura, C., Santo, T., Waters, C., & Andrews, A. (2019). ‘Nutrition is out of our control’: Soldiers’ perceptions of their local food environment. Public Health Nutrition, 22(15), 2766-2776. doi: 10.1017/S1368980019001381 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1368980019001381
  • Grattan, L. E., Mengistu, B. S., Bullock, S. H., Santo, T. J., & Jackson, D. D. (2019). Restricting Retail Hours of Alcohol Sales within an Army Community. Military Medicine, 184(9-10), e400–e405. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usz044  https://academic.oup.com/milmed/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/milmed/usz044/5429214
  • Gomez, S., Bullock, S. H., Santo, T. J., Korona-Bailey, J. A., McDannald, J. J., & Resta, J. J. (2019). Marching on the Road to Quality: Army Public Health Experience Adopting NACCHO's Roadmap to a Culture of Quality Framework. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 25(6), 598–601. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000001000  https://journals.lww.com/jphmp/Abstract/publishahead/Marching_on_the_Road_to_Quality__Army_Public.99385.aspx#pdf-link
  • Melton, J. J., Shirey, L. A., Barraza, E. M., & Bullock, S. H. (2019). Public Health Accreditation of Army Preventive Medicine Departments: Improving Military Medical Treatment Facility Practice to Impact Force Readiness. Military Medicine, 184(5-6), 117-121. doi: 10.1093/milmed/usy308.  https://academic.oup.com/milmed/article/184/5-6/117/5194151#
  • Rivera, L. O., Ford, J. D., Hartzell, M. M., & Hoover, T. A.  (2018). An Evaluation of Army Wellness Center Clients' Health-Related Outcomes. American Journal of Health Promotion, 32(7), 1526-1536. doi: 10.1177/0890117117753184 
    http://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/WVnm9Z8v872TtQGKwCs2/full
  • Santo, T. J., Ellis, S., Rivera, L. O., Vasquez, L. E., Francis, M. M., Jin, W. K., McRae, K. A., & Place, R. J. (2017). A Tobacco-Free Medical Campus Policy Is Associated With Decreased Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Increased Satisfaction Among Military Medical Employees: Results of a Mixed-Methods Evaluation​." Military Medicine, 182(5-6), e1724-e1732. doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00153 https://academic.oup.com/milmed/article/182/5-6/e1724/4158858
  • U.S. Army Public Health Center. (2016, November). FY15-16 Performance Triad FORSCOM Pilot Evaluation Executive Summary. https://p3.amedd.army.mil/Worksheets/P3_FORSCOM_ProgramEvaluationSummary20161104.pdf
  • Courie, A. F., Rivera, M. S., & Pompey, A. (2014). Managing public health in the Army through a standard community health promotion council model. U.S. Army Medical Department Journal, 82–90. https://hrcoe.amedd.army.mil/cac-docs/journal/2014/Jul-Sep2014.pdf#toolbar=0
  • Jackson, T. K., Cable, S. J., Jin, W. K., Robinson, A., Dennis, S. D., Vo, L. T., Prosser, T. J., & Rawlings, J. A. (2013). The importance of leadership in Soldiers' nutritional behaviors: results from the Soldier Fueling Initiative program evaluation. U.S. Army Medical Department Journal, 79–90. https://hrcoe.amedd.army.mil/cac-docs/journal/2013/Oct-Dec2013.pdf#toolbar=0​  ​
Disclaimer: The mention of any non-federal entity and/or its products is not to be construed or interpreted, in any manner, as federal endorsement of that non-federal entity or its products.