Publication: การประเมินนโยบายการสร้างเสริมสุขภาพของสำนักงานกองทุนสนับสนุนการสร้างเสริมสุขภาพ
1
0
Issued Date
2021
Resource Type
File Type
application/pdf
Access Rights
open access
Rights
ผลงานนี้เผยแพร่ภายใต้ สัญญาอนุญาตครีเอทีฟคอมมอนส์แบบ แสดงที่มา-ไม่ใช้เพื่อการค้า-ไม่ดัดแปลง 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
Rights Holder(s)
มหาวิทยาลัยศรีนครินทรวิโรฒ
Bibliographic Citation
วารสารพยาบาลตำรวจ. ปีที่ 13 ฉบับที่ 2 (2021): กรกฎาคม - ธันวาคม
Suggested Citation
ไพรัช บวรสมพงษ์, เชษฐ รัชดาพรรณาธิกุล, ธวิช สุดสาคร การประเมินนโยบายการสร้างเสริมสุขภาพของสำนักงานกองทุนสนับสนุนการสร้างเสริมสุขภาพ. วารสารพยาบาลตำรวจ. ปีที่ 13 ฉบับที่ 2 (2021): กรกฎาคม - ธันวาคม. Retrieved from: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14740/13351
Alternative Title(s)
EVALUATION OF HEALTH PROMOTION POLICY OF THAI HEALTH PROMOTION FOUNDATION
Author(s)
Organization
Abstract
The Thai Health Promotion Foundation needed to evaluate its 10-year (2012-2021) directions, goals, and strategies. Currently, it has been carried on more than halfway through and needs to be reviewed its action plan and activities during the past six years improving the efficiency of the project. The author was selected as an external assessor of this project. The evaluation results of the health promotion policy of the Thai Health Promotion Foundation are shown as follows: 1) The 10-Year directions, goals, and strategies (2012-2021) were appropriate for the current situation in Thailand and aligned with the fund’s established policies and operations under the Health Promotion Fund Act, B.E. 2544, and 2) various aspects of the mechanism employed to implement the policy under the Office of the Health Promotion Fund’s organizational structure were as follows: (1) Policy management of the fund committee controlled the operations, determined the overall budget, governed the administrative department, and managed the performances of the chief of the administrative department to ensure that the policy was executed in alignment with the objectives of the Health Promotion Fund Act, B.E. 2544, (2) Fund management and policy implementation were managed by the planning management committee, which was appointed by the fund committee, and (3) the policy outcome was evaluated depending on the operational budget size. The fund committee or the planning management committee held responsibilities of the monitoring and evaluating of the outcome and policy enforcing. The evaluation committee, which was independent of the fund committee, was also formed to assess the overall operational outcome that included social impact and administration ensuring public accountability of the Office of the Health Promotion Fund. The evaluation committee also reported the evaluation results and recommendations to the fund committee annually.