Meta-avaliação de um processo participativo no fortalecimento da gestão municipal

• Autor(a) principal: Almeida, Cristiane Andrea Locatelli de
• Data de Publicação: 2017
• Outros Autores: Tanaka, Oswaldo Yoshimi
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por; eng
• Título da fonte: Revista de Saúde Pública
• Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/rsp/article/view/140989
• topic: Avaliação em Saúde; métodos. Avaliação de Processos (Cuidados de Saúde). Planejamento Participativo. Gestor de Saúde. Tomada de Decisões. Administração de Serviços de Saúde. Pesquisa Qualitativa.; Health Evaluation; methods. Process Assessment (Health Care). Participative Planning. Health Manager. Decision Making. Health Services Administration. Qualitative Research.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate, with a focus on participation, an evaluation process developed by municipal managers and administrators of a health region in the state of São Paulo, considering the need for theoretical reflection on participatory health practices in the Brazilian context. METHODS: Qualitative research that used the framework developed by Daigneault and Jacob (2009) to analyze the empirical material, encompassing three dimensions of participation: control of the evaluation process, diversity of participants, and extent of their involvement. We highlighted decisions or contextual aspects that deepened or limited the participatory option in the process under study. RESULTS: We identified the presence and important performance of stakeholders who are “not specialists in evaluation”, through participation both in the direction of the evaluation process and in its distinct stages. The formed group started from their own annoyances added to the need for information and reflection to define the subject and scope of the evaluation; the use of the process planned by them guided the definition of the data to be collected and the format of result dissemination; the empirical material analysis was undertaken jointly by the participants. Regarding the third dimension, a limitation was identified regarding the diversity of actors involved due to the prioritization of the possibility of in-depth work with a fixed group of managers. CONCLUSIONS: It is stated that there is no “ideal participation model” for evaluations. In certain contexts and structures, real opportunities for participation – even if they seem fragile at first sight – should be leveraged, and that requires flexibility and critical reflection on the part of those responsible for the evaluation processes to undertake the necessary adjustments.