Health Policy 119 (2015) 97
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Health Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol
Letter to the Editor Letter commenting on: Panjwani, C. and Caraher, M. (2014). The Public Health Responsibility Deal: Brokering a deal for public health, but on whose terms? Health Policy, 114(2), pp. 163–173 Dear Editor, We read Panjwani and Caraher’s paper [1] on the Public Health Responsibility Deal with interest. They make several comments about the evaluation of the Responsibility Deal which we would like to comment on, as we are the team of academic researchers which has been funded to undertake this evaluation. They state that “A DH-funded evaluation of the wider Responsibility Deal has begun, although the initial focus has been on how to evaluate the initiative – a logic model for its evaluation has been proposed – rather than an evaluation of outcomes”. We published an initial paper setting out some of the conceptual and methodological challenges around evaluating something as complex as the RD, and to clarify the logic model. This is increasingly accepted as good research practice in public health evaluation. In fact the main phase of the evaluation has been underway for the past year, and will include examination of the potential and actual impact of the RD on a range of health and non-health outcomes. They go on to say that “it is possible to evaluate the potential of ‘the Responsibility Deal approach’ as a public health policy tool, by looking in detail at the initiative’s working practices.” We are doing exactly this as part of the ongoing evaluation. Finally, we wish to clarify Panjwani and Carraher’s description of the evaluation as “DH-Funded”, for the benefit of those unacquainted with the complexities of UK research-funding environment. The evaluation is being conducted as part of the work of the Policy Innovation Research Unit (http://www.piru.ac.uk/). This is an independent, academic research unit based at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, one of 12 such units based at Universities in England (see: http://www.qoru.ac.uk/about/links/other-policy-researchunits-prus-2/). They are funded through the Department
DOI of the original article:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.11.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.08.007 0168-8510/© 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
of Health Policy Research Programme, which is a national research-funding programme within the Department of Health’s Research and Development Directorate (http://prp.dh.gov.uk/). These units are independent of the Department of Health and are encouraged to publish their research. The Department of Health requires that publications carry a disclaimer noting the independence of the research and that the views are not necessarily those of the Department. Yours sincerely, Reference [1] Panjwani C, Caraher M. The Public Health Responsibility Deal: brokering a deal for public health, but whose terms? Health Policy 2014;114(2):163–73, on http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.11.002.
Mark Petticrew ∗ Nicholas Mays Elizabeth Eastmure Mary Alison Durand Cecile Knai Policy Innovation Research Unit (PIRU), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15–17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9HS, United Kingdom Ellen Nolte a,b Policy Innovation Research Unit (PIRU), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15–17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9HS, United Kingdom b RAND Europe, UK
a
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 020 7927 2009. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Petticrew)
17 June 2014
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Health Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol
Letter to the Editor Letter commenting on: Panjwani, C. and Caraher, M. (2014). The Public Health Responsibility Deal: Brokering a deal for public health, but on whose terms? Health Policy, 114(2), pp. 163–173 Dear Editor, We read Panjwani and Caraher’s paper [1] on the Public Health Responsibility Deal with interest. They make several comments about the evaluation of the Responsibility Deal which we would like to comment on, as we are the team of academic researchers which has been funded to undertake this evaluation. They state that “A DH-funded evaluation of the wider Responsibility Deal has begun, although the initial focus has been on how to evaluate the initiative – a logic model for its evaluation has been proposed – rather than an evaluation of outcomes”. We published an initial paper setting out some of the conceptual and methodological challenges around evaluating something as complex as the RD, and to clarify the logic model. This is increasingly accepted as good research practice in public health evaluation. In fact the main phase of the evaluation has been underway for the past year, and will include examination of the potential and actual impact of the RD on a range of health and non-health outcomes. They go on to say that “it is possible to evaluate the potential of ‘the Responsibility Deal approach’ as a public health policy tool, by looking in detail at the initiative’s working practices.” We are doing exactly this as part of the ongoing evaluation. Finally, we wish to clarify Panjwani and Carraher’s description of the evaluation as “DH-Funded”, for the benefit of those unacquainted with the complexities of UK research-funding environment. The evaluation is being conducted as part of the work of the Policy Innovation Research Unit (http://www.piru.ac.uk/). This is an independent, academic research unit based at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, one of 12 such units based at Universities in England (see: http://www.qoru.ac.uk/about/links/other-policy-researchunits-prus-2/). They are funded through the Department
DOI of the original article:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.11.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.08.007 0168-8510/© 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
of Health Policy Research Programme, which is a national research-funding programme within the Department of Health’s Research and Development Directorate (http://prp.dh.gov.uk/). These units are independent of the Department of Health and are encouraged to publish their research. The Department of Health requires that publications carry a disclaimer noting the independence of the research and that the views are not necessarily those of the Department. Yours sincerely, Reference [1] Panjwani C, Caraher M. The Public Health Responsibility Deal: brokering a deal for public health, but whose terms? Health Policy 2014;114(2):163–73, on http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.11.002.
Mark Petticrew ∗ Nicholas Mays Elizabeth Eastmure Mary Alison Durand Cecile Knai Policy Innovation Research Unit (PIRU), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15–17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9HS, United Kingdom Ellen Nolte a,b Policy Innovation Research Unit (PIRU), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15–17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9HS, United Kingdom b RAND Europe, UK
a
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 020 7927 2009. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Petticrew)
17 June 2014
