||Link to a PDF document
||Link to non-governmental site and does not
necessarily represent the views of the CDC
Acrobat (TM) Reader needs to be installed on
your computer in order to read documents in PDF format.
Download the Reader.
|Process Monitoring Data
- On the process monitoring forms in regard to staffing and
expenditures, do you want to know the number of volunteers or the number of
The number of volunteers providing interventions should be reported
regardless of the amount of time they volunteer.
- The process monitoring forms ask for the number of clients
receiving interventions in various settings. The instructions indicate that
a "Clinic/Health Care Facility" includes an STD clinic, but the form has
"STD Clinic" as a separate setting. How will this discrepancy be resolved?
The instructions will be revised to match the forms. "Clinic/Health Care
Facility" will not include an STD clinic. (The instructions also refer to
"Social Services Agency" but there is no corresponding designation on the
form under type of setting. For social services agency, the "other"
designation should be used.)
- If an intervention reaches clients other than those intended by
the intervention, how are these clients reported for process monitoring? For
example, if street outreach intends to target IDUs, but outreach workers
also encounter a lot of high risk heterosexuals, how is the heterosexual
population reported on the process monitoring forms?
The process monitoring forms should contain data on the primary risk
populations being served by the intervention. Data are not reported on
secondary risk populations. It is possible that new primary risk populations
will be added to an intervention type over time, and health departments
should provide data on them when process monitoring data are due. If you
find that you are serving different populations than the ones you originally
planned to serve in your intervention plans, you should report process
monitoring data about that new population if you redesigned your
intervention to accommodate the new population or the new clients you are
serving total at least 25% of your caseload. In regard to the question’s
example, if the heterosexual population comprises roughly 25% or more of the
population reached during outreach, then process monitoring data should be
provided on that population.
- Should clients who attend only one session of a GLI be reported
under GLI or ILI?
Group-level interventions (GLIs) should consist of multiple sessions.
There will undoubtedly be cases where clients do not attend all of the
sessions. Clients who attend only one session of a GLI should be reported
under GLI and not ILI since GLI was the intervention being delivered.
- Can you report risk populations for process monitoring based on
the intended audience for the intervention or do you need to assess
participants’ risk? For example, if 10 people participate in a GLI targeting
MSM, can you report that you reached 10 MSM if you do not collect data on
their risk behaviors?
For some intervention types, it is appropriate for the interventionist to
conduct a risk assessment. For example, a risk assessment should always be
completed for clients in PCM, and CDC strongly encourages risk assessments
for other interventions as well. When there is no risk assessment, the
intent of the intervention should guide reporting for process monitoring. If
the intent of GLI, for example, is to serve MSM and there is no risk
assessment to document the risk behavior, then clients should be reported as
MSM since the intervention is targeted and tailored for MSM. Since risk
assessments are not done during outreach, the venue for the outreach should
be considered. For example, if outreach is taking place in gay bars, then
the risk population should be reported as MSM. If no specific risk
population is targeted by an intervention (this could be the case for health
communications/public information), then "General Population" should be used
as the risk population category.
- How do you report the number of clients served if a Contractee
conducts teacher training with the intention that the teachers will then
provide prevention education to their students? How do you report the risk
population and demographics in this scenario?
In this scenario, health communications/public information seems to be
the intended intervention. Students are the targeted population and there is
probably no one risk behavior that is targeted. If this is the case,
"General Population" would be the risk population. However, the numbers of
clients served cannot be reported until those data are provided, in writing,
by the teachers who received training. The teachers should report back to
the Contractee after their prevention education session takes place. If the
intervention is designed to address heterosexual contact as the risk, then
that risk population category should be used for reporting when data are
provided by the teachers.
- How should health departments characterize the type of agency
delivering the intervention (item #6 on process monitoring forms) when the
intervention is conducted by an agency sub-contracted by the health
department’s grantee? Should the agency type be coded as the health
department’s grantee or the agency sub-contracted by the grantee?
The intent is to capture data on the types of agencies actually carrying
out interventions. Therefore, the agency that has been sub-contracted by the
health department’s grantee should be used for agency type.