Journal List > J Nutr Health > v.48(6) > 1081425

J Nutr Health. 2015 Dec;48(6):542-557. Korean.
Published online December 31, 2015.
© 2015 The Korean Nutrition Society
Development of the evaluation tool for the food safety and nutrition management education projects targeting the middle class elderly: Application of the balanced score card and the structure-process-outcome concept
Hyeja Chang,1 Hyoi Yoo,2 Harim Chung,2 Hyesang Lee,3 Minjune Lee,4 Kyungeun Lee,5 Changhee Yoo,5 Junghwa Choi,6 Nayoung Lee,7 and Tongkyung Kwak2
1Department of Food Science & Nutrition, Dankook University, Gyeonggido 16890, Korea.
2Department of Food & Nutrition, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea.
3Department of Food & Nutrition, Andong University, Kyeongsangdo 36729, Korea.
4Graduate School of Education, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea.
5Department of Food & Nutrition, Seoul Women's University, Seoul 01797, Korea.
6Department of Food & Nutrition, Soongeui Women's College, Seoul 04628, Korea.
7Department of Food & Nutrition, Daejeon University, Daejeon 35235, Korea.

To whom correspondence should be addressed. tel: +82-2-2123-3120, Email:
Received October 08, 2014; Revised October 28, 2014; Accepted December 17, 2015.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.



The aim of this study is to develop an evaluation tool for operation of food safety and nutrition education projects for middle class elderly using the concept of the balanced score card.


After the draft of the evaluation tool for the elderly training projects was completed, it was revised into the questionnaire and the validity of the indicators was tested by the Delphi group. The validity of the indicators was rated using a 5-point scale. The Delphi group consisted of 26 experts in the education sector, 16 government officials, and 24 professionals of the related area in communities. The first round test was conducted from July 9 to July 17, 2012, and 45 persons responded. The second round test was conducted from July 18 to July 25 and 32 persons responded.


The indicators, which were answered by more than 75 percent of the experts as 'agree' (4 points), 'strongly agree' (5 point) were included as the final indicators for the evaluation tool: 28 items out of 36 in outcome perspectives, 9 items out of 12 in process perspectives, and 17 out of 20 items in structure perspectives. The score was allocated as 50 points for outcome indicators, 20 points for process indicators, and 30 points for structure indicators.


Completion of the evaluation tool is a prerequisite to determine whether the program is effectively implemented. The monitoring tool developed in the study could be applied for identification of the most optimal delivery path for the food safety and nutrition education program, for the spread of the food safety and nutrition education program for middle class elderly.

Keywords: evaluation tool for the food safety and nutrition management program; middle class elderly; balance score card; Delphi group technique


Table 1
Draft of the evaluation tool for the food safety and nutrition management program
Click for larger image

Table 2
Demographic characteristic of the final delphi group
Click for larger image

Table 3
Mean and Kendall's coefficient of concordance of the indicators in the outcome perspective
Click for larger image

Table 4
Allocation of score for outcome, process and structure indicators
Click for larger image

Table 5
Mean and Kendall's coefficient of concordance of the indicators in the process perspective
Click for larger image

Table 6
Mean and Kendall's coefficient of concordance of the indicators in the structure perspective
Click for larger image

Table 7
The final indicators' numbers and their scores in outcome, process and structure perspectives
Click for larger image


*This work was carried out with the support of the 2012 Research Fund of the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (project No.12162KFDA109), Republic of Korea.

1. Statistics Korea. Elderly statistics data [Internet]. Daejeon: Statistics Korea; [cited 2013 Sep 10].
2. Jeong HS, Song YM. Contributing factors to the increases in health insurance expenditures for the aged and their forecasts. Korean J Health Econ Policy 2013;19(2):21–38.
3. Kim JG. The impact of family type on health behavior of elderly people. J Welf Aged 2011;51:35–56.
4. Lee YN. Delivery system of dietary life safety programs of elderly; Proceedings of the 46th Korean Nutrition Society conference; 2011 Nov 11; Seoul, Korea.
5. Ministry of Health and Welfare. The third health plan 2020 in Korea [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare; [cited 2011 Aug 5].
Available from:
6. Choi JH, Lee ES, Lee YJ, Lee HS, Chang HJ, Lee KE, Yi NY, Ahn Y, Kwak TK. Development of food safety and nutrition education contents for the elderly - by focus group interview and delphi technique-. Korean J Community Nutr 2012;17(2):167–181.
7. Lee KE, Lee NY, Park JH. Food safety knowledge and home food safety practices of home-delivered meal service recipients. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 2009;38(5):618–625.
8. Kim KW. Issues and directions in developing nutrition education for older adults in Korea. J Community Nutr 2000;2(1):71–84.
9. Lee YS, Kim HK. Nutritional status and cognitive status of the elderly using public health center in Ulsan. Korean J Nutr 2002;35(10):1070–1080.
10. Sahyoun NR. Nutrition education for the healthy elderly population: isn't it time? J Nutr Educ Behav 2002;34 Suppl 1:S42–S47.
11. Kang NE, Lee JY. The analysis of effect on nutrition education program for the elderly in Sung-nam area. Korean J Food Nutr 2005;18(4):357–366.
12. Kim EH. A study on development of key performance indicator using BSC for public service: a case of elderly welfare service. Korean Public Adm Q 2013;22(2):349–374.
13. Ko Y. In: Cost benefit analysis of the home visiting care for vulnerable subjects with hypertension [doctoral dissertation]. Seoul: Seoul National University; 2010.
14. Lee SJ, Lee SB. Performance measurement of the public sector from a BSC perspective: the case of PBLIS. Korea Local Adm Rev 2005;19(2):155–186.
15. Seo YJ. In: The Development of performance evaluation tool for health promotion programs of public health centers. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare; 2003.
16. Kwak TK. In: Strategies to improve management practices on food safety and nutrition for elderly. Cheongwon: National Institute of Food and Drugs Safety Evaluation; 2011.
17. Stawar TL, Zipple AM. Book review the book "The strategy focused organization: how balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment", by Kaplan RS, Norton DP. Psychiatr Rehabil J 2002;26(2):212–213.
18. Choi SM. A review of adoptability of BSC(Balanced Scorecard) to social service organizations in Korea. Seoul City Res 2007;8:189–209.
19. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. Putting the balanced scorecard to work. Harv Bus Rev 1993;71(5):134–147.
20. Hasenfeld Y. Social services and welfare-to-work: prospects for the social work profession. Adm Soc Work 2000;23(3-4):185–199.
21. Kwak T, Chang H, Song J. Development of performance indicators based on balanced score card for school food service facilities. Korean J Community Nutr 2005;10(6):905–919.
22. Mcdonald G. In: Quality in health promotion. Cardiff: Health Promotion Wales; 1992.
23. Seo YJ, Jeong AS, Park TS, Lee KS. The development of a quality assessment tool for the process of health promotion programs at public health centers. Korean J Health Policy Adm 2003;13(3):35–51.
24. Lee HS, Lim JH. In: SPSS version 16.0 manual. Paju: Beobmoonsa; 2009.
25. Kim CL. In: The SAS statistics boxes: focused on statistic analysis and market research technique. 4th edition. Daejeon: Data Research, Inc.; 1994.
26. Bae JS, Kim MH, Kim SB. Effects of nutrition education and personalized lunch service program for elderly at senior welfare center in Jeonju. Korean J Community Nutr 2013;18(1):65–76.
27. Gregoire MB. In: Foodservice organizations: a managerial and systems approach. 7th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.; 2010.
28. Hsu CC, Sandford BA. The delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Eval 2007;12(10):1–7.
29. Ulschak FL. In: Human resource development: the theory and practice of need assessment. Reston, VA: Reston Publishing Company, Inc.; 1983.
30. Green PJ. The content of college-level outdoor leadership course; Conference of the Northwest District Association for American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance; Spokane, WA. 1982.
31. Sullivan GM. A primer on the validity of assessment instruments. J Grad Med Educ 2011;3(2):119–120.