The Public Health Assessment Division (PHAD) is a recognized expert in public health program evaluation within the Department of Defense.

We are comprised of more than 20 highly-skilled scientists and analysts trained in public health, behavior change, evaluation, measurement, statistics, survey 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 Department of Defense.

Our Vision​​

The PHAD strives to be the Department of Defense's leading expert in, and advocate for, comprehensive evaluation promoting evidence-driven public health practice.

Our Services

The Public Health Assessment Division offers a comprehensive suite of evaluation services in support of the Defense Health Agency. In each of our projects, we generate actionable recommendations to improve a program, policy, or initiative's functioning, effectiveness, impact and relevance.

Our Approach

The Public Health Assessment Division utilizes the public health evaluation framework established by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to guide our work. The image on the right is a depiction of this framework provided by the CDC on its website:  https://www.cdc.gov/eval/framework/index.htm    

Steps in the Program Evaluation Process

• Engage Stakeholders. We first work to understand who needs to be involved and consulted in our                        evaluation project and who will be using the information we collect.
• Describe the Program. We then strive to understand as much as we can about the program, policy, or                  initiative we are evaluating. This understanding is crucial to ensure our final product is meaningful.
• Focus the Evaluation Design. As we focus our evaluation design, we work with our stakeholders to                        prioritize the most important questions to answer based on what is possible.
• Gather Credible Evidence. We then gather evidence to answer our assessment and evaluation                              questions. We do this through a variety of methods including literature searches, secondary (i.e.,                            already existing) data, surveys, interviews, observations, focus groups, and much more!
• Justify Conclusions. Once we have gathered our evidence, we analyze and interpret the evidence to make           meaning of the data we've collected. We also generate actionable recommendations to improve a program,         policy, or initiative based on what we have learned.
• Ensure Use and Lessons Learned. We then work to ensure our evaluation findings and lessons learned are       communicated and shared with those people and organizations who need to know – whether it be program         managers, Army leaders, or the scientific community. We do this through a variety of communication                     channels including infographics, scientific papers, briefings, information papers, and more. After all, what             good is a report if it just sits on a shelf?

Program Evaluation Standards

• Utility: We strive for our evaluation projects to serve the information needs of the intended users
• Feasibility: Our approaches and methods are realistic, prudent, diplomatic, and cost-effective
• Propriety: As evaluators, we behave ethically, legally, and with appropriate regard for all involved in and                affected by our evaluations
• Accuracy: We collect, reveal, and communicate technically accurate information
  

Example Work

Strategic Army Support

• Performance Triad and Readiness Outcomes Deliverables. The U.S. Army actively promotes healthy sleep, activity, and nutrition (SAN) behaviors as a means for improving Soldiers' health and readiness. The Performance Triad is the Army's initiative to enhance Soldiers' readiness by encouraging the Army Family to engage in healthy SAN behaviors and emphasizes the synergy, or interrelation of SAN behaviors. These deliverables (technical report, briefing slides, and information paper) summarize the synergy of Army Active Duty Soldiers' SAN behaviors and their association with injury and behavioral health outcomes in different formats for multiple audiences. Collectively, these deliverables provide an initial understanding about the synergy of Army Active Duty Soldiers' SAN behaviors and highlight the need for Army leaders to promote healthy SAN behaviors, especially the combination of sleep and activity, to strengthen Soldiers' readiness. ​​View our Briefing Slides and Technical Report. 
  

• ​ Initiative Evaluation Process (IEP) Guide.  The Guide outlines an initiative planning, evaluation, and review process to assist with developing and expanding initiatives that are effective in improving the health of the Total Army Family. Click here to learn more about the Guide.

• Health of the Army Family Report. The Army Public Health Center’s inaugural Health of the Army Family Report provides a holistic view of health including factors that impact Army Family members' quality of life across multiple health domains in the context of the Military Family Life Cycle. It provides actionable recommendations for multiple audiences including Soldiers and Families, Army leaders, researchers and evaluators, and policy makers and program proponents. This report serves as an important first step toward understanding, monitoring, and optimizing the health, quality of life, and readiness of Army Families.

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​  ​