Gilead COMPASS Initiative Evaluation
Gilead COMPASS Initiative™ Evaluation
Funder
Gilead Sciences
Funding Duration
January 2018 - June 2021
Partners
Emory University
Southern AIDS Coalition
University of Houston
Principal Investigator
Primary Contact
Description
The vision of the COMPASS Initiative™ is to address the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the Southern United States by partnering with local communities and supporting evidence-based solutions to meet the needs of people living with and impacted by HIV/AIDS. This mission calls for a shift away from an isolated impact approach by organizations in the deep South towards new systematic approach to collaborative capacity building of organizations, institutions, and other entities to reduce HIV/AIDS disparities in care. The design elements of the initiative - shared values, shared infrastructure, and the establishment of Coordinating Centers to address HIV in the deep South. To evaluate the Initiative ETR is applying the theoretical framework, Collective Impact Model, which is a structured approach to problem solving, including five core conditions: common agenda, shared measurement system, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and backbone organization. Evaluating the COMPASS Model will provide the most immediate and relevant information necessary for management, continuous improvement, and scale-up. The evaluation objectives are:
The evaluation objectives are as follows:
- To evaluate the overall Coordinating Center collaborative model:
- The startup process: barriers and facilitators
- The implementation actions and progress related to the 5 core imperatives of the Initiative
- Community experiences with the services provided through the Coordinating center model
- To understand the Collective Impact© of the Gilead COMPASS Initiative™ CC model in addressing HIV in the South, and its potential for scalability;
- To develop and routinely report on a common set of indicators that will measure the overall impact of the CC model;
- To support and/or extend Coordinating Center evaluation efforts where it might address questions regarding the impact of the Coordinating Center model.
