The Healthcare Program - Free Essay Sample

This program improves health since it elevates a competent agency, enhance a sense of personal control that promotes and enables a healthy lifestyle by increasing targeted population's knowledge and influence their attitude. Moreover, the program encompasses providing education on biological, psychological, environmental, social, and, physical determinant of health which empowers the community to increase take control over their personal, environmental, and, community health and wellbeing. Therefore, this community-based program will be led to a more disease and injury prevention strategies, improved health, and enhanced quality of life of the population.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

How was the success of the program or policy measured?

The success of the objective of free health education was measured through conducting of reach and impact evaluation. Impact evaluation refers to the immediate effect which promotion programs have on the targeted population, investors, and, settings to influence the determinants of health (Gertler et al. 2016). Both immediate effects on persons and social and physical context were measured. On an individual level, the level of improved health knowledge, skills, and, inspiration, and, change of health behavior was measured. In association with the setting, the program measured several new organization programs and services to minimizing physical health risks, and improve the physical environment to shield the health of the community.

How many people were reached by the program or policy selected?

According to Glasgow, Lichtenstein, and, Marcus, (2003), reach refer to the extent to which a program appealed its intended audience

Reach formula=actual number of the individual / potential number of people

Actual number= 2,500

Potential number= 4000

Reach=2500/40000=0.625

Percentage reach=0.625x100

Percentage reach=62.5%

How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?

According to Shiramizu et al. (2017), the impact is the effect which interventions have on an individual, organization(s) or system(s) to influence health outcome. Reach and impact give a precise, objective, and, quantifiable measure of a program's progress.

2500 people took part in the sessions out of a possible 4000 (62.5%) anticipated population size. Out of 2500, 2000 people were detected to have improved health knowledge, skills, and, inspiration, and, change of health behavior.

Impacted realized by the program = 2000/2500 x 100= 80%

At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?

Evaluation is one of the essential management tools which helps in assessing how well a particular program is working by approximating the magnitude to which desired outcomes are being realized and by identification of whether improvements are desired to upsurge effectiveness about objectives. For high-quality implementation, timely evaluation is vital (Langbein, 2016). For the program evaluation was conducted when the desire to comprehend if and how the program works rose to determine whether it can be replicated later if considered to be successful. Hence, it conducted at exploration stage of the implementation process.

What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?

Quantitative data obtained through questionnaire responses and service utilization. Brownson. Baker, Deshpande, and, Gillespie(2017) asserts that quantitative data are essential for evaluation of the association between health promotion and an effect( outcome or impact)

What was specific information on unintended consequences identified?

There may be limited resources to enhance the health of the targeted population in the long term. The program depends largely on donations which may not last forever.

What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples

The primary principle of for promoting health entails empowerment, participation, and, intersectional collaboration. The program involved community members, policy makers, program managers and researchers as its stakeholders. Stakeholders is a group of persons, organizations with a vested interest in the evaluation of a program in which they may affect or affected by it. Those named stakeholders have various interest in the program, and their engagement ensures to some extent that process of evaluation was conducted ethically since it acknowledges interests of different stakeholders which reinforces the bond and bridging (Williams & Anderson, 2018).

Program managers are the group of stakeholders that would benefit more from reporting of evaluation findings. Wong et al. (2016), claim that these group often desire more detailed results since their task in managing the daily functions of organizations or in decision making concern the launching of new service. Primarily they are interested in findings which have implications for program outcome, and, other stakeholders' expectations. Besides, they need information regarding the cost of training, supplies, personnel, and logistics.

Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not? Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after 1 year of implementation.

At the heart of implementation is the notion of program integrity. Program integrity refers to the magnitude to which program is implemented as officially planned (Low, Smolkowski, & Cook, 2016). Program integrity comprises of five primary dimensions; quality of delivery, dosage, program differentiation, quality of delivery, participant responsiveness, and, program differentiation.

Reason for recommending implementation

Frequently, evaluations concentrate on program outcome without considering how the program and its elements generate the observed findings (Oermann, & Gaberson, 2016). This implies that comprehension is gained concerning what occurred as a result of the program without a clear picture. This technique can lead to false claims regarding how a program formed its observed effects. On the other side, implementing will assist program managers more precisely define program constituents and their linked degree of program integrity, hence nurturing more accurate replication of the intervention

According to Rice & Wicks (2007), health promotion program conventionally entails assessing of families, individuals, communities and arranging, executing, and evaluating intervention programs. Utilizing a health advocacy strategy to health promotions needs that nurse such me to identify not only an individual but health contextual risk aspects such as illiteracy among other health determinates inequalities that curb the ability to an underserved population to participate in health promotion activities.

References

Brownson, R. C., Baker, E. A., Deshpande, A. D., & Gillespie, K. N. (2017). Evidence-based public health. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from: https://books.google.co.ke/books

Hahn, R. A., & Truman, B. I. (2015). Education improves public health and promotes health equity. International Journal of Health Services, 45(4), 657-678. Retrieved from: 10.1177/0020731415585986

Glasgow, R. E., Lichtenstein, E., & Marcus, A. C. (2003). Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. American journal of public health, 93(8), 1261-1267. Retrieved from: https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/ref/10.2105/AJPH.93.8.1261

Gertler, P. J., Martinez, S., Premand, P., Rawlings, L. B., & Vermeersch, C. M. (2016). Impact evaluation in practice. The World Bank. Retrieved from: http://doi/abs/10.1596/978-1-4648-0779-4

Langbein, L. (2016). Public program evaluation: A statistical guide. Routledge. Retieved from: https://9781315497891_googlepreview.pdf

Low, S., Smolkowski, K., & Cook, C. (2016). What constitutes high-quality implementation of SEL programs? A latent class analysis of Second Step implementation. Prevention Science, 17(8), 981-991. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11121-016-0670-3

Oermann, M. H., & Gaberson, K. B. (2016). Evaluation and testing in nursing education. Springer Publishing Company.

Rice, M. C., & Wicks, M. N. (2007). The importance of nursing advocacy for the health promotion of female welfare recipients. Nursing Outlook, 55(5), 220-223.retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2006.10.003

Shiramizu, B., Shambaugh, V., Petrovich, H., Seto, T. B., Ho, T., Mokuau, N., & Hedges, J. R. (2017). Leading by success: Impact of a clinical and translational research infrastructure program to address health inequities. Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 4(5), 983-991.

Williams, J. K., & Anderson, C. M. (2018). Omics research ethics considerations. Nursing outlook, 66(4), 386-393. Retrieved from: doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2018.05.003

Wong, G., Westhorp, G., Manzano, A., Greenhalgh, J., Jagosh, J., & Greenhalgh, T. (2016). RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations. BMC medicine, 14(1), 96. Retrieved from: https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-016-0643-1