Cover: Evaluation of the PATH-SAFE Programme

Evaluation of the PATH-SAFE Programme


Published in: Food Standards Agency website (2023). doi: 10.46756/sci.fsa.cnq989

Posted on Aug 9, 2023

by Sana Zakaria, Pamina Smith, Devika Kapoor, Fifi Olumogba, Chryssa Politi

The report is intended for HM Treasury as the programme sponsor and delivery partners of the programme, primarily Food Standards Agency (FSA), Food Standards Scotland (FSS), Department for Environment and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC), and the Environment Agency (EA). The findings of the evaluation will help the delivery partners manage PATH-SAFE adaptively and assess the impact created through the programme on foodborne pathogen and antimicrobial resistance surveillance. The report is structured as follows: The remainder of this introduction describes the context for the PATH-SAFE programme, the goals and structure of the programme, the aims of the evaluation and its limitations, and our approach to developing this evaluation framework report. Chapter 2 presents the analytical framing for the evaluation comprising the PATH-SAFE theory of change (ToC). Chapter 3 describes our overarching evaluation approach through which we will collect evidence to assess the PATH-SAFE programme. The evaluation approach will comprise three types of evaluation: a process evaluation; an outcome evaluation; and an impact feasibility assessment. Chapter 4 presents the process and outcome evaluation frameworks through which the evaluation of the PATH-SAFE programme will be operationalised. Presented in tabular form, each framework comprises key evaluation questions (EQs), derived from the PATH-SAFE ToC, which our evaluation will seek to answer, alongside indicators and proposed data sources. The chapter builds on the frameworks and provides further detail on the methodology that will be undertaken to conduct the evaluation. Chapter 5 shows the evaluation timelines and key deliverables. Chapter 6 outlines the risks to the evaluation and our mitigations in place. The Annexes to the report contain additional information on the four workstreams (WSs) and sub streams of the PATH-SAFE programmes (Annex A), which is useful context for the evaluation frameworks, and more detailed information on the activities that led to the development of the evaluation framework report (Annex B) and the process and outcomes evaluation frameworks (Annex C).

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.