Form 0920-24AF TA Feedback Survey Instrument_0920-1050 GenIC

OMB Control # 0920-1050

Prevention Research Centers (PRC) Program Technical Assistance Feedback Survey

Participants

You are being asked to complete this survey based on your self-reported role within the PRC Program and the likelihood that you have received technical assistance (TA) from the CDC PRC Program during this funding cycle (2019-2024). These roles include the following PRC staff at each PRC: Principal Investigator, Deputy Director, Communications Lead, PERS Lead, and Evaluation Lead, where applicable.

• Your participation in this survey is voluntary. You may choose to end the survey at any time.

• The survey is anonymous and does not collect any identifying information.

• You may save and continue the survey at a later time by selecting 'Save and Return Later' at the bottom of the page. You may either bookmark the link or select the option to receive a link via email to continue the survey. The survey is designed to take about 15 minutes.

• For any questions that you cannot fully address or that are not applicable to you, please select N/A.

Purpose

The purpose of this survey is to collect PRC feedback on the TA provided by the CDC PRC Program that can be used for improvement purposes.

Per the current NOFO, technical assistance is defined as: an array of supports including advice, recommendations, information, demonstrations, and materials provided to assist the workforce or organizations in improving public health services.

As part of the PRC NOFO, the CDC PRC Program provides TA from three teams: Program Operations, Communications and Translation, and Evaluation. TA is provided through a variety of methods, such as monthly Project Officer (PO) calls, site visits, PERS office hours, and ad-hoc requests via phone or email.

Survey Layout

Section 1. Team-specific TA – You will be asked about TA you have received from each CDC PRC Program team

1a. Evaluation Team TA

1b. Program Operations Team TA

1c. Communications and Translation Team TA

Section 2. Overall TA – You will be asked about the overall TA provided by the CDC PRC Program

Public reporting burden of this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to CDC/ATSDR Reports Clearance Officer; 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS D-74, Atlanta, Georgia 30333; ATTN: PRA (0920-1050).

Section Break

1a. Evaluation Team TA

This section of the survey is related to TA provided by the CDC PRC Program Evaluation Team during the current funding cycle [CDC Staff: Garry Lowry, Nicole Kuiper, Monica Mendez Morello, Duane House, Yulia Chuvileva, Alyssa Jeffers; Contract Staff: Jennifer An, Kayla Calhoun, Ashley Hughes].

Technical assistance is defined as: an array of supports including advice, recommendations, information, demonstrations, and materials provided to assist the workforce or organizations in improving public health services.

As stated in the NOFO, monitoring and evaluation-related TA will be provided to PRCs to help collect and report PERS data for program evaluation, among other activities.

1. Please select the response that best corresponds with your use of each of the following TA this cycle:

	N/A, this support does not pertain to my role/duties	I was not aware this support was offered/available	I was aware this support was offered/available, but I did not need it/use it	I received/used this support
1a. PERS Guide (PDF)	1	2	3	4
1b. PERS Decision Trees (pg. 28), (pgs. 83-86)	1	2	3	4
1c. Glossary for acronyms and section-specific terminology definitions (pgs. 87-93 of PERS Guide)	1	2	3	4
1d. Excel data collection tools (e.g., journal articles template, presentations template, mentorship calculator)	1	2	3	4
1e. PDF Fillable Forms (e.g., TA & SME, Institutional support, CRP/Center characteristics)	1	2	3	4
1f. PERS Guidance and tools package (i.e., MindMap; click the download icon to open) that included all PERS resources & tools and a How-to Video Training	1	2	3	4
1g. CDC to Individual PRC Training on PERS System	1	2	3	4
1h. PERS Office Hours	1	2	3	4
1i. PERS Quality Review Report (QRR) support and follow-up	1	2	3	4
1j. PERS-related support from your evaluation liaison on monthly PO calls	1	2	3	4

[Branching logic:

• Any respondents who answered, “4 received/used” to any of the above items, continue onto “M&E Sub-Section PERS FEEDBACK” section below

• For all other respondents, skip to “1a. M&E Ad-Hoc TA”]

M&E SUB-SECTION – PERS FEEDBACK

[Branching logic: Populate each item that was answered as “4 received/used” above, in the below matrix]

2. You reported receiving/using the following TA. Please rate how useful each item was in helping to collect and/or report PERS data for program evaluation.

TA	Not Useful	Somewhat Useful	Useful	Extremely Useful
2a. PERS Guide (PDF)	1	2	3	4
2b. PERS Decision Trees (pg. 28), (pgs. 83-86)	1	2	3	4
2c. Glossary for acronyms and section-specific terminology definitions (pgs. 87-93 of PERS Guide)	1	2	3	4
2d. Excel data collection tools (e.g., journal articles template, presentations template, mentorship calculator)	1	2	3	4
2e. PDF Fillable Forms (e.g., TA & SME, Institutional support, CRP/Center characteristics)	1	2	3	4
2f. PERS Guidance and tools package (i.e., MindMap) that included all PERS resources & tools and a How-to Video Training	1	2	3	4
2g. CDC to Individual PRC Training on PERS System	1	2	3	4
2h. PERS Office Hours	1	2	3	4
2i. PERS Quality Review Report (QRR) support and follow-up	1	2	3	4
2j. PERS-related support from your evaluation liaison on monthly PO calls	1	2	3	4

[Branching logic: Only display the following question (#3) for each item they selected “1 not useful or 2 somewhat useful” for any of the options above]

3. Please describe how this support could be more useful. [open-ended comment box]

4. Please describe any other PERS-related TA you have received from anyone on the Evaluation Team that were not listed above, and how helpful it was. [Open-ended comment box]

5. What other PERS-related support/assistance would be helpful to receive? [open-ended comment box]

Break

PERS - Other

6. Were you involved with any aspect of data collection or data entry for the purposes of PERS in REDCap (e.g., reviewing PERS guidance, using associated PERS tools for data collection/entry, reviewing PERS decision trees, Quality Review Report Responses/edits)? Select all that apply.

   1. Yes, I entered data directly into PERS

   2. Yes, I was involved in reviewing PERS guidance/decision trees/tools for data collection/entry

   3. Yes, I was involved in Quality Review Report (QRR) responses and edits

   4. Yes, I provided data for someone else to enter into PERS

   5. No

7. It was easy for me to access/find the PERS Guidance and tools this cycle.

   1. Strongly disagree

   2. Disagree

   3. Neither agree nor disagree

   4. Agree

   5. Strongly agree

   6. N/A, I did not need access to these items

[Branching logic: If response in Q7 is “strongly disagree or disagree” ask question 8]

8. How could access to PERS guidance and tools be improved?

[open-ended response]

9. Were there any sections in the PERS guidance that were not clear about what should or should not be entered in PERS? Select all that apply.

   1. No, I had no issues determining what I should enter in each PERS section.

   2. CRP/Center Characteristics

   3. Institutional Support

   4. Community Advisory Boards (CABs)

   5. Partnerships

   6. Technical Assistance/Subject Matter Expertise

   7. Mentorship

   8. Training

   9. Research and Practice Tools

   10. Communication Channels and Additional Products

   11. Books and Book Chapters

   12. Journal Articles

   13. Presentations

[Branching logic: If b-m is selected, populate question 10 for each item]

10. Please provide recommendations for how we can improve the section-specific guidance that were not clear.

{Open-ended]

11. Please share any tools that would be useful/necessary for facilitating data collection from others, prior to data entry in PERS. [Open-ended]

12. How helpful was the PERS Issue Tracker in requesting PERS support?

    1. N/A, I don’t enter data directly into PERS

    2. N/A, I did not use the Issue Tracker

    3. N/A, I emailed PRCTechSupport when I needed PERS support

    4. Not at all helpful

    5. Somewhat helpful

    6. Very helpful

    7. Extremely helpful

13. How does the burden of PERS data entry this cycle compare to last cycle?

    1. N/A, I did not enter data into PERS last cycle

    2. Data entry burden is higher this cycle

    3. Data entry burden is lower this cycle

    4. Data entry burden is the same as last cycle

14. Please let us know anything else you may want to share with us related to PERS. [open-ended comment box]

End of sub-section – continue to 1b. Program Operations Team TA

1a. M&E AD-HOC TA

1. Please describe any other TA you received from anyone on the Evaluation Team that was not listed above, and how helpful it was (e.g., TA for network analysis, feedback on your Research and Translation Agenda). [Open-ended comment box]

2. What other support/assistance would be helpful to receive related to monitoring and evaluation? [open-ended comment box]

Break

1b. Program Operations Team TA

This section of the survey is related to TA provided by the CDC PRC Program’s Program Operations Team during the current funding cycle [Donna Henry, Reginald Gooden, Ann Smith, Yalanda Williams, Gabrielle O’Meara, Colleen Shaw, Regina Sullivan, Hilary Oliphant , Janelle Jordan]

Technical assistance is defined as: an array of supports including advice, recommendations, information, demonstrations, and materials provided to assist the workforce or organizations in improving public health services.

As listed in the NOFO, program operations-related TA will include support for monitoring and processing of approved budgets, prior approval actions, and annual action plans (AAPs), among other activities.

1. Please select the response that best corresponds with your use of the following TA:

	N/A, this support does not pertain to my role/duties	I was not aware this support was offered/available	I was aware this support was offered/available, but I did not need it	I received this support
1a. Developing/updating Annual Action Plans (AAP)	1	2	3	4
1b. Completing annual progress reports (RPPR)	1	2	3	4
1c. Meeting Core Research Project study aims	1	2	3	4
1d. Changing scope and/or other modifications to the Core Research Project study aims	1	2	3	4
1e. Meeting NOFO requirements (center components, other core research project components)	1	2	3	4
1f. Making budget revisions/approvals/changes	1	2	3	4
1g. Doing prior approval actions	1	2	3	4

[Branching logic: Only items that were selected as “4 received” populate in the next matrix]

2. You reported receiving/using the following TA. Please rate how useful each item was.

TA	Not Useful	Somewhat Useful	Useful	Extremely Useful
2a. Developing/updating Annual Action Plans (AAP)	1	2	3	4
2b. Completing annual progress reports (RPPR)	1	2	3	4
2c. Meeting Core Research Project study aims	1	2	3	4
2d. Changing scope and/or other modifications to the Core Research Project study aims	1	2	3	4
2e. Meeting NOFO requirements (center components, other core research project components)	1	2	3	4
2f. Making budget revisions/approvals/changes	1	2	3	4
2g. Doing prior approval actions	1	2	3	4

[Branching logic: Only display the following question (#3) for each item they selected “1 not useful or 2 somewhat useful” for any of the options above]

3. Please describe how this support could be more useful. [open-ended comment box]

4. Please describe any other TA you received from anyone on the Program Operations Team that was not listed above, and how helpful it was (e.g., information sharing between PRCs). [Open-ended comment box]

5. What other support/assistance would be helpful to receive related to program operations? [open-ended comment box]

Break

1c. Communications and Translation Unit TA

This section of the survey is related to TA provided by the CDC PRC Program’s Communications and Translation Unit during the current funding cycle [Jason Lang, Bindu Tharian Majid, Lauren Neumann, Aileen Maki, Communication Contractors]

Technical assistance is defined as: an array of supports including advice, recommendations, information, demonstrations, and materials provided to assist the workforce or organizations in improving public health services.

As listed in the NOFO, communications-related TA will be provided on the use of the CDC acknowledgement statement and PRC Program branding guidelines for communication and dissemination products, among other activities.

1. Please select the response that best corresponds with your use of the following TA:

	N/A, this support does not pertain to my role/duties	I was not aware this support was offered/available	I was aware this support was offered/available, but I did not need/use it	I received/used this support
1a. Clarifying requirements of acknowledging federal funding in program statements/documents	1	2	3	4
1b. Providing resources for Program branding guidelines (e.g., style guide, PRC logo)	1	2	3	4
1c. Providing resources for Program communication/dissemination (e.g., templates for briefs, image library)	1	2	3	4

[Branching logic: Only items that were selected as “4 received/used” populate in the next matrix]

2. You reported receiving/using the following TA. Please rate how useful each item was.

TA	Not Useful	Somewhat Useful	Useful	Extremely Useful
2a. Clarifying requirements of acknowledging federal funding in program statements/documents	1	2	3	4
2b. Providing resources for Program branding guidelines (e.g., style guide, PRC logo)	1	2	3	4
2c. Providing resources for Program communication/dissemination (e.g., templates for briefs, image library)	1	2	3	4

[Branching logic: Only display the following question (#3) for each item they selected “1 not useful or 2 somewhat useful” for any of the items above]

3. Please describe how this support could be more useful. [open-ended comment box]

4. Please describe any other TA/services you received from anyone from the Communications and Translation Unit that was not listed above, and how helpful it was (e.g., storytelling training, monthly social media content). [open-ended comment box]

5. What other support/assistance would be helpful to receive related to communications? [open-ended comment box]

Break

Section 2. Overall TA

CDC would like to understand how the current touchpoints for providing TA and support are going. Please select your level of agreement with the statements below.

	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
Monthly calls with my Project Officer (PO) and Evaluation Liaison met my expectations.	1	2	3	4	5	6
My PRC site visit this cycle met my expectations.	1	2	3	4	5	6

1. Overall, please share any recommendations for how monthly calls with your Project Officer and Evaluation Liaison can be improved to better meet your expectations, if applicable. [open-ended]

2. Overall, please share any recommendations for how site visits can be improved to better meet your expectations, if applicable. [open-ended]

3. Please select your level of agreement with the statements below about the TA that CDC’s PRC Program provided this cycle.

	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree
3a. The support provided by the CDC PRC Program to connect me with other PRCs to facilitate collaboration and information sharing meets my needs.	1	2	3	4	5
3b. I understand the types of TA support and services that are available from the CDC PRC Program.	1	2	3	4	5
3c. I know how to request TA support and services from CDC PRC Program.	1	2	3	4	5
3d. I request TA support and services from the CDC PRC Program when I need it.	1	2	3	4	5
3e. The CDC PRC Program teams are responsive to my TA needs/requests.	1	2	3	4	5
3f. The CDC PRC Program provides TA that adequately addresses my needs/requests.	1	2	3	4	5
3g. The CDC PRC Program is my preferred source for TA support and services, rather than other TA sources.	1	2	3	4	5

[Branching logic: Display the following question (#4) for each item in 3a-3f that’s “1 strongly disagree or 2 disagree” above]

4. Please describe how this support could be more useful. [open-ended]

[Branching logic: Only display the following questions (#5 and 6) if they selected “1 strongly disagree or 2 disagree” for 3g above]

5. Why do you prefer using other sources for TA other than the CDC PRC Program? Select all that apply.

   1. I have a stronger relationship with other sources

   2. Other sources are more efficient in responding to my TA needs

   3. Other sources have subject matter expertise that the CDC PRC Program does not

   4. Other – please add

6. Please describe who your other TA sources are and any other reasons you have for why you prefer to use other sources of TA. [open-ended response box]

7. Please share any overall suggestions you have for improving the TA provided by the CDC PRC Program.

[open-ended]

8. Please share any recommendations for how the CDC PRC Program can best communicate the TA that is available to PRCs.

9. Overall, please share any TA or needs you have that are not currently being met by the CDC PRC Program.