Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marks, D. F.
Right arrow Articles by Sykes, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Marks, D. F.
Right arrow Articles by Sykes, C. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Promotion International, Vol. 17, No. 2, 105-118, June 2002
© Oxford University Press 2002

Evaluation of the European Union Programme of Community Action on Health Promotion, Information, Education and Training 1996–2000

David F. Marks and Catherine M. Sykes

City University, Department of Psychology, Northampton Square, London EC1V OHB, UK

Address for correspondence: David F. Marks City University Department of Psychology Northampton Square London EC1V OHB UK

The Programme of Community Action on Health Promotion, Information, Education and Training 1996–2000 was administered by the European Commission's Services in DGV Luxembourg. The programme was a consequence of a decision of the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union in March 1996. Middlesex University Health Research Centre won the tender to evaluate this programme. In this paper the evaluation team disseminate some of the findings that are pertinent to the international health promotion community. Key findings include significant differences in number of applications and in acceptance rates for different Member States. The expert assessors' opinions of the programme suggest a number of problems with its administration. Some projects were awarded commendably high ratings and others were very weak. The most serious weakness of many of the supported projects is lack of any internal evaluation. In order to broaden the scope of the second phase of the evaluation of this programme, more open communication and dialogue will be needed between all of the stakeholders. This implies a change in the culture of the European Commission's Services which, in the case of the units involved with this evaluation, are lacking in efficiency, openness and transparency.

Key words: European Union; evaluation; health promotion


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.