Home⇛Recoletos Multidisciplinary Research Journal⇛vol. 1 no. Special Issue (2025)

Evaluating a Community-Based Rehabilitation Program Using Provus Discrepancy Evaluation Model

Ulysses Cutamora | Giovanni Leonardo | Maria Menierva Lagria

Discipline: health studies

 

Abstract:

Background: This study assessed the implementation of the Community- Based Rehabilitation (CBR) program in Cebu using the Provus Discrepancy Evaluation Model. The evaluation compared the actual program implementation with the ideal parameters set by the World Health Organization (WHO) CBR standards, identifying discrepancies. Methods: A quantitative descriptive-evaluative research design was employed, with two respondent groups: program implementers and program clients, ensuring data triangulation. Data were gathered through one-onone interviews, using WHO’s 2004 standardized guidelines and indicators from the International Disability and Development Consortium (IDDC) as the evaluation framework. Key components assessed included health, education, livelihood, empowerment, and social aspects. Results: The study identified discrepancies across these five CBR components, primarily attributed to limited resources and expertise available for service delivery. In the Philippine context, most indicators under health and education were effectively implemented, successfully enhancing the lives of persons with disabilities and their families. However, the livelihood, empowerment, and social components showed significant gaps, with several indicators or services yet to be fully implemented. Conclusion: These findings underscore the need for resource allocation and capacity-building to improve these critical areas of the CBR program.



References:

  1. Amatya, B., & Khan, F. (2020). Rehabilitation response in pandemics. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 99(8), 663–668. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000001477
  2. Chappell, P., & Johannsmeier, C. (2009). The impact of community based rehabilitation as implemented by community rehabilitation facilitators on people with disabilities, their families and communities within South Africa. Disability and Rehabilitation, 31(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280802280429
  3. de Hoop, T., & Tripathi, S. (2020, March 8). Empowering women through self-help groups: Evidence of effectiveness, questions of scale. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie). https://www.3ieimpact.org/blogs/empowering-women-through-self-help-groups-evidence-effectiveness-questions-scale
  4. Hartman-Maeir, A., Eliad, Y., Kizoni, R., Nahaloni, I., Kelberman, H., & Katz, N. (2007). Evaluation of a long-term community based rehabilitation program for adult stroke survivors. NeuroRehabilitation, 22(4), 295–301. https://doi.org/10.3233/nre-2007-22407
  5. International Labour Organization, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, & World Health Organization. (2004). CBR: A strategy for rehabilitation, equalization of opportunities, poverty reduction and social inclusion of people with disabilities: Joint position paper 2004. World Health Organization.
  6. Kono, A. (2015). A glimpse of the employment status of persons with disabilities in the Philippines from a Cebuano perspective. Asia and Pacific Journal on Disability, 5(1). Disability Information Resources (DINF). https://www.dinf.ne.jp/doc/english/asia/resource/z00ap/vol5no1/glimpse.html
  7. Magallona, M. L. M., & Datangel, J. P.-B. (2012). The community-based rehabilitation programme of the University of the Philippines Manila, College of Allied Medical Professions. Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development, 22(3), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.5463/dcid.v22i3.110
  8. Mauro, V., Biggeri, M., Deepak, S., & Trani, J.-F. (2014). The effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation programmes: An impact evaluation of a quasi-randomised trial. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 68(11), 1102–1108. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2013-203728
  9. National Statistics Office. (2013). 2010 census of population and housing, report no. 2A: Demographic and housing characteristics (non-sample variables): Philippines. https://psa.gov.ph/system/files/main-publication/2010_PHIILIPPINES_FINAL%2520PDF.pdf
  10. Parmanto, B., & Saptono, A. (2009). Telerehabilitation: State-of-the-Art from an informatics perspective. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 1(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2009.6015
  11. Provus, M. M. (1969). The discrepancy evaluation model: An approach to local program improvement and development. U.S. Department of Health, Education & Welfare Office of Education.
  12. Rule, S., Seifert, H., & Mbugua, P. K. (2017). No need to reinvent the wheel: Disability mainstreaming for poverty reduction. In A. B. Nganwa, M. C. Sserunkuma, & P. K. Mbugua (Eds.), CBR Guidelines: a Bridge to Inclusive Society beyond the 2015 Development Framework. CBR Africa Network.
  13. Schutte, J. L., Gales, S., Filippone, A., Saptono, A., Bambang, P., & McCue, M. (2012). Evaluation of a telerehabilitation system for community-based rehabilitation. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 4(1), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2012.6092
  14. Sivakumar, T., James, J. W., Basavarajappa, C., Parthasarathy, R., Naveen Kumar, C., & Thirthalli, J. (2019). Impact of community-based rehabilitation for mental illness on “out of pocket” expenditure in rural South India. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 44, 138–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2019.07.029
  15. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2003). Overcoming exclusion through inclusive approaches in education: A challenge and a vision. UNESCO Digital Library. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000134785
  16. Velez College, Department of Occupational Therapy. (n.d.). Community based health and rehabilitation. https://sites.google.com/view/vcotcbhr/home
  17. World Health Organization and International Labour Organization. (2004). CBR: a strategy for rehabilitation, equalization of opportunities, poverty reduction and social inclusion of people with disabilities; joint position paper 2004. UNESCO. Retrieved 2021, from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000137716#:~:text=WHO%2C%20ILO%20and%20UNESCO%20view%20CBR%20as%20a,participation%20of%20people%20with%20disabilities%20and%20their%20organizations.
  18. World Health Organization. (2010). Community-based rehabilitation: CBR guidelines. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241548052
  19. World Health Organization. (2015a). Capturing the difference we make: community-based rehabilitation indicators manual. Retrieved 2021, from https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/199524/9789241509855_eng.pdf
  20. World Health Organization. (2015b). WHO global disability action plan 2014-2021: Better health for all people with disability. https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/199544
  21. Zhao, T., & Kwok, J. K. F. (1999). Evaluating community based rehabilitation: Guidelines for accountable practice. Rehabilitation International Regional Secretariat for Asia and the Pacific.

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic