Ecominds-effects-on-mental-wellbeing-evaluation-report

More documents

Recommendations

Info

36 <strong>Ecominds</strong> <strong>effects</strong> on mental wellbeingSphericity), linearity (visual) and heteroscedasticity.Descriptive statistics were obtained for each measureand mean differences between beginning andendpoint and before and after activity scores wererecorded along with the 95 per cent confidenceinterval for the estimated population mean difference.Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.A series of one-way analysis of variances (ANOVA)were conducted on major outcome measure startingscores to see if there were any differences betweenthe data from different projects. No significantdifferences were observed so data from projectswere analysed as one group.Analyses used parametric techniquesincluding: i) Paired samples t-test; ii)one-way betweensubjectANOVA(with posthoc Tukeycomparisons where appropriate); iii) one-waywithin-subjects (or repeated measures) ANOVA(with Greenhouse Geisser corrections and posthoc Bonferroni analysis where appropriate); iv)mixed between-within subjects ANOVA (with withGreenhouse Geisser corrections and post hoc Tukey/Bonferroni comparisons where appropriate); v)one -way between subjects multivariate analysis ofvariance MANOVA (with post hoc Bonferroni analysiswhere appropriate); vi) Pearson’s Product MomentCorrelation Coefficient. Where the data were notnormally distributed or did not fulfil the sample sizeand stringent assumptions of parametric techniques,analyses used non-parametric techniques including:i) Mann-Whitney U test; and ii) Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test (with Bonferroni correction applied whereappropriate). Percentage changes 142 of major variablesover time were calculated and where appropriate,effect size (eta-squared and partial eta-squared 143 ),strength of relationships 144 and shared variances 145were reported.3.8 Organisation of results in this reportThe results in this report have been organisedas follows:• Chapter 4 contains the findings of the ‘All projects’evaluation. Key findings are given first, followedby the participant demographics and details ofthe projects are outlined, before the resultsof both the ‘within group’ and the ‘betweengroups’ studies are organised under the five<strong>Ecominds</strong> themes.• Chapter 5 contains the findings of the ‘Indepth’evaluation. Again key findings precedethe participant demographics followed by detailsof the projects included in the study and theiractivities. Finally the changes that have occurredboth over the course of the programme and over theduration of a session are arranged under the five<strong>Ecominds</strong> themes.142 [(T2 – T1) / T1] x 100 = %]143 Effect size interpretations for eta squared .01 = small effect, .06moderate effect; and .14 large effect (Cohen 1988)144 Strength of relationship: r=.10 to .29 small; r=.30 to .49 medium; r=.50to 1 large145 “amount of the total variance in the dependent variable that ispredictable form the knowledge of the levels of the independentvariable” (Tabachnick and Fiddell, 2001 p52)
An evaluation for Mind 374. Results: ‘All projects’ evaluation4.1 ‘All projects’ evaluation: Key findings• The ‘All projects’ evaluation was open to all ofthe <strong>Ecominds</strong> funded projects and 52 projects(54%) returned data to the University of Essexfor analysis. The majority of projects in theevaluation were social and therapeutic horticulturetype projects (26), followed by environmentalconservation (12), nature arts and crafts (9),facilitated green exercise (3) and care farming (2).These numbers were representative of the totalnumbers of projects in each category.• Projects in the evaluation were located all overEngland with the most projects in London, Yorkshireand the Humber, and the South West. Projects inthe evaluation represented all grant size categoriesand size of projects in the evaluation rangedfrom 1-20 beneficiaries (two projects) to over 100beneficiaries (25 projects); those benefitting 21-40people (12 projects), 41-60 (five projects), 61-80 (fiveprojects) and 81-100 (one project).• A total of 515 participants completed questionnairesfor the ‘All projects’ evaluation, made up of 180in the ‘within group’ study and 335 participantsin the ‘between groups’ study. There were moremale participants (66%) than either female (34%)or transgender (
Page 1: Ecominds e
Page 4 and 5: 2 Ecominds <strong
Page 12 and 13: 10 Ecominds <stron
Page 88 and 89:
86 Ecominds <stron
Page 90 and 91:
88 Ecominds <stron
Page 92 and 93:
90 Ecominds <stron
Page 94 and 95:
92 Ecominds <stron
Page 96 and 97:
94 Ecominds <stron
Page 98 and 99:
96 Ecominds <stron
Page 100 and 101:
98 Ecominds <stron
Page 102 and 103:
100 Ecominds <stro
Page 104 and 105:
102 Ecominds <stro
Page 106 and 107:
104 Ecominds <stro
Page 108 and 109:
106 Ecominds <stro
Page 110 and 111:
108 Ecominds <stro
Page 112:
8789_Ecomind_Project_Directory_v7.i
show all

Ecominds-effects-on-mental-wellbeing-evaluation-report

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?