HUM 6354 – Advanced Professional Seminar

Sustainability, Funding, Research & Evaluation

For this week's creative practice we were to create with respect to Sustainability, Funding, Research and Evaluation. I created this Venn Diagram to show the intersection created when those elements are put in place into a program or business. The research and evaluation create value. When that value is equitable for all populations, it can catch the eye of funders who will invest in the program or business in such a way that the program or business can duplicate its processes and provide ongoing services to its target audiences. When all of these are achieved, a program or business can be sustained for the long term.

Many government agencies and community organizations have devoted significant resources to promoting research on evidence-based practices (EBPs), clinical guideline implementation, and quality-improvement programs because they understand the need to promote the use of best practices to achieve better outcomes in healthcare (Wiltsey Stirman, S., Kimberly, J., Cook, N., Calloway, A., Castro, F., and Charns, M., 2012). Wiltsey Stirman, et al., suggest that sustainability must be studied as a distinct and dynamic phenomenon, citing that while a program may be implemented, its relevance may yet diminish over time. They point out several reasons why a program may demise, but what stands out is their call to understand the processes and determine those methods sufficient to continue to provide the desired outcomes as just as important as knowing how to implement a program in the first place.

In their study surrounding what influences sustainability, Wiltsey Stirman, et al (2012) discovered that participation and support by the key stakeholders, along with funding were as important as all other factors. They noted that funding was rarely included in the analyses because most studies occur after the initial monitory resources had been removed. What is surprising is that they found that program effectiveness was reported in only nine studies. Their recommendations suggest program planners should include a sustainability plan when implementing a program.

According to Dose (2006), the largest single threat to the arts in medicine program is the lack of funding. Without the evidence of literature reviews, evaluations, testimonies and research studies to persuade funders, Dose implies that even the most solid of programs cannot survive. Financial backers want to know that their investments are going to projects with value. Staricoff (2006)states that the value of evaluating arts in health is that it provides evidence of the inherent ability of the arts to produce valuable clinical outcomes thereby adding another dimension to the work of health practitioners.



Dose, L. 2006. National Network for the Arts in Health: lessons learned form six years of work.
     Viewpoint. National Network for the Arts in Health. JRSH 2006;126(3):110-112.

Staricoff, R. L. (2006). Arts in health: the value of evaluation. The Journal of the Royal Society
     for the Promotion of Health, 126(3), 116–120.

Wiltsey Stirman, S., Kimberly, J., Cook, N., Calloway, A., Castro, F., & Charns, M. (2012). The
     sustainability of new programs and innovations: a review of the empirical literature and    
     recommendations for future research. Implementation Science: IS, 7, 17.