Analysis of evaluation indicators and development of a logic model-based performance evaluation framework for early...

This study analyzed the current evaluation indicators used for early childhood programs by the Center for Children's and Social Welfare Foodservice Management (CCFSM) in South Korea and developed a logic model-based performance evaluation framework to improve the system through outcome-oriented assessment.

The study comprised four stages. First, existing on-site evaluation indicators were mapped onto a logic model framework to assess their suitability for evaluating program effectiveness. Second, focus group interviews were conducted with stakeholders and experts to examine their understanding of, and perceived limitations in, the current evaluation system. Third, new outcome indicators were developed using checklist items for hygiene, safety, and nutrition management implemented across centers, and program effectiveness was evaluated using these indicators. Fourth, additional indicators were developed to assess the effectiveness of child-targeted nutrition and dietary education programs, and their practical applicability was examined.

The current evaluation indicators focused primarily on structural (input) and process measures, with limited emphasis on outcomes reflecting the ultimate program goals. Few indicators directly assessed improvements in children's health and dietary behaviors, and existing outcome measures relied largely on subjective satisfaction surveys completed by facility directors and parents. Based on the logic model, the proposed outcome indicators included, in the mid-term, improvements in hygiene, safety, and healthy eating practices scores, and, in the long-term, reductions in foodborne illness and food allergy incidents, increased fruit and vegetable intake, and decreased sodium and sugar intake.

The findings highlight the need to transition the CCFSM evaluation system toward a performance-oriented framework. A logic model-based evaluation system would improve accountability and better align evaluation practices with policy objectives, whereas phased implementation would help minimize operational burden on practitioners.