Assignment: NURS 6050 Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
Assignment NURS 6050 Assessing a Healthcare Program Policy Evaluation
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Assignment: NURS 6050 Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
Program/policy evaluation is a valuable tool that can help strengthen the quality of programs/policies and improve outcomes for the populations they serve. Program/policy evaluation answers basic questions about program/policy effectiveness. It involves collecting and analyzing information about program/policy activities, characteristics, and outcomes. This information can be used to ultimately improve program services or policy initiatives.
Cognizant of the role that training plays when it comes to improving a nurse’s competencies in EBP and thus empowering them to contribute to the development of EBP, here are certain strategies that can be undertaken from both an organizational level, to the larger professional level. At the organizational level, the organization can organize for opportunities where their nurses can get trained on evidence based practice. On the greater professional levels, professional bodies such as the ANA and the ANCC have developed certification program for nurses. By including components of evidence based practice in the certification exams, this ensures that nurses will prepare and apprise themselves on EBP and thus, in order to earn the certification, they will have to be competent in EBP. Alternatively, the institutions can include a whole different certification for EBP, where nurses will specifically be trained on EBP, tested on the same and thus, their competency will be proven by their certification. This will ultimately improve their ability to participate in the development and implementation of EBP.
Nurses can play a very important role assessing program/policy evaluation for the same reasons that they can be so
important to program/policy design. Nurses bring expertise and patient advocacy that can add significant insight and impact. In this Assignment, you will practice applying this expertise and insight by selecting an existing healthcare program or policy evaluation and reflecting on the criteria used to measure the effectiveness of the program/policy.
Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template
Use this document to complete the Module 5 Assessment Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
| Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation |
Blood Pressure Management Initiative |
| Description |
The blood pressure management initiative implemented was intended to reduce the cases of heart attacks and strokes in the US by urging clinicians, healthcare settings, and patients to emphasize blood pressure control and ultimately enhance the quality performance metric using the guidelines of the American Heart Association (AHA). AHA recommends BP goal of 139/89 mm Hg or less (Arnett et al., 2019). This initiative entails providing new and existing patients a face-to-face education and lifestyle counseling coupled with clinical referral and follow-up, screening and lifestyle awareness through the help of educational resources such as informational letters, health fairs, videos, brochures, reminders, and newsletters, ensuring innovative pharmacy packaging such as calendar blister packaging (CBP) to improve medication adherence and persistence, and enhanced care coordination with collaborative primary care teams using various aspects such as electronic prescribing, self-monitoring of blood pressure through the help of clinical interventions, standardized protocol tools to manage high blood pressure, and medication therapy management programs.
|
| How was the success of the program or policy measured?
|
The best way to measure the success of the program is to conduct a comparative analysis of the blood pressures samples taken before and after the program. Consequently, the success of this program was determined by comparing the first resting blood pressures of the respondents taken when they enrolled in the program with the resting blood pressures obtained in the final session. In particular, the number of patients with a BP of 139/89 mm Hg or less was compared to the number of patients who recorded a BP of 139/89 mm Hg and above. Ultimately, the program proved a success since the number of patients with a 139/89 mm Hg or less significantly outweighed the patients with a BP of 139/89 mm Hg and above.
|
| How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
|
After reaching out to the potential participant, this program attracted 320 patients. However, 32 patients were excluded for failing to meet inclusion criteria. Besides, 12 patients also left before completing the program. Consequently, 276 patients participated in the program. The impact of this program was mostly successful with majority of the participants (242) recording outstanding positive improvement and outcomes on the blood pressure management.
|
| What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
|
The evaluation of program was conducted by program-based data such as client record, administrative records, observation, interviews with clients, and surveys. This data is vital in understanding the program’s performance include the type of output it achieve. Moreover, quantitative data was also used to evaluate the number of patients with both positive and negative outcomes after the execution of program.
|
| What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?
|
The program was rolled out as planned and no unintended consequences were experienced. |
| 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 stakeholders identified in this program included the patients with high blood pressure, social workers, and hypertension quality improvement steering team that comprised of the nurses, clinical leaders, operational leaders, and clinical leaders. Of these stakeholders, patients with high blood pressure stand to benefit the most from the program because they are target population and so, if the program succeeds, they will undoubtedly reap the benefits of the program.
|
| Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
|
Essentially, the rationale of this program was to seek strategies to improve the blood pressures in hypertensive patients in the healthcare facility. Consequently, the outcome showed positive improvement in blood pressure management which ultimately reduces the risk of cardiovascular incidences. Therefore, the program met original intent and objective since it proved feasible to improve the management of high blood pressure among the hypertensive patients who enrolled for the program (Carey & Whelton, 2018). |
| Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
|
Since this program has been tested in the healthcare facility and demonstrated to be effective in managing the blood pressure, it is highly recommended to be fully implemented in the organization to help in mitigating the rising cases of high blood pressure. Besides, the program should be implemented alongside cardiac rehabs to help enhancing the quality metric which are anchored on the guidelines of the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation (AACVPR). |
| Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.
|
A nurse advocate can evaluate this policy by using the program-based data such as client record, administrative records, observation, interviews with clients, and surveys to understanding the program’s performance include the type of output it achieve. Secondly, a nurse advocate can use quantitative data to evaluate the program after year by comparing number of patients with both positive and negative outcomes after the execution of program to help in determining whether or not the program is successful.
|
| General Notes/Comments |
High blood pressure is a growing public health issue in the US. According to CDC (2020), almost 500, 000 deaths reported in the US in the year 2017 were attributed to hypertension as the primary or contributory cause. High blood pressure tends to make patients susceptible to risk heart diseases and stroke, which are also major causes of death in the US. Therefore, it is proper to utilize the blood pressure management initiative proposed in this program to avoid the risk of health issues in the future.
|
References
Arnett, D. K., Blumenthal, R. S., Albert, M. A., Buroker, A. B., Goldberger, Z. D., Hahn, E. J., … & Michos, E. D. (2019). 2019 ACC/AHA guideline on the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 74(10), e177-e232.
Carey, R. M., & Whelton, P. K. (2018). Prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure in adults: synopsis of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Hypertension Guideline. Annals of internal medicine, 168(5), 351-358.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2020). Facts about Hypertension | cdc.gov. Retrieved 5 April 2020, from https://www.cdc.gov/bloodpressure/facts.htm.
Also Read:
Assignment: NURS 6050 Global Healthcare Comparison Matrix and Narrative Statement
NURS 6050 Information science Essay
Healthcare programs or policies can be state-based, community-based, or at the organizational level. They are formulated to address specific health programs. Evaluation helps to determine healthcare programs’ effectiveness. In most cases, evaluation is progressive if the program or policy is continuous. It can also be done at different intervals depending on the objectives. The purpose of this program evaluation analysis is to examine the Racial and Ethnic Approaches to Community Health (REACH) program, whose main aim is to reduce racial and ethnic health disparities.
|
Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation |
The Racial and Ethnic Approaches to Community Health (REACH) program evaluation |
|
Description |
The REACH program started in 1999 to reduce racial and ethnic health disparities (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020). It is a national program administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Generally, the program’s recipients carry out extensive local and culturally appropriate programs to address a wide range of issues faced by racial and ethnic minorities such as African Americans, Hispanics, and American Indians. The primary objective is to promote health disparities related to chronic illnesses, mental health, preventive health, and overall health coverage (Carratala & Maxwell, 2020). The program also seeks to improve healthy behaviors. |
|
How was the success of the program or policy measured?
|
After a decade, the REACH had significant success as far as its targets are concerned. However, instead of evaluating the program generally, REACH uses data to evaluate the change in the health status of its target communities. For instance, it used data between 2014 and 2018 to assess the number of people it has helped access healthy foods, access to chronic health programs, and opportunities for physical activity. A progressive increase in the population it serves is the primary success indicator. |
|
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
|
The evaluation between 2014 and 2018 showed that millions of people have benefitted in various ways under the REACH program. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2020), over 2.9 million people had better access to healthy foods and beverages, while over 322,000 people benefitted directly from tobacco-free interventions. CDC further reported that about 1.4 million people got opportunities for physical activity, as over 830,000 people got access to chronic disease programs (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020). Using these reflection points, there is no denying that the impact of the REACH program cannot be underestimated. |
|
At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted? |
The REACH program is continuous, where evaluation is done at different implementation points. In most cases, evaluation happens after the completion of a project at the community level. As illustrated in the various CDC reports, evaluation can be after a decade or after some years, depending on the element being assessed. |
|
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
|
Change in health behaviors was the reference data for the evaluation between 2001 and 2009. For instance, Hispanic taking medication for hypertension increased from less than half to more than two-thirds of the affected population. In the same period, vaccination rates for pneumonia increased from 50.5% to 60.5% in black communities (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020). The other data is the impact across REACH communities through a 2009-2012 evaluation. The data examined reduction in smoking and obesity rates in REACH communities. |
|
What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?
|
The program’s impact is huge as far as disparities’ reduction is concerned. However, impact evaluation showed that ethnic gaps continue being affected by societies, culture, and the environment (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). As a result, REACH must use many strategies to address health gaps to ensure that health performance in ethnic and racial minorities reaches the desired state. |
|
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. |
REACH partners with local health departments, community-based organizations, universities, and tribes. Respective partners were consulted during program evaluation to determine success and areas of improvement. On who would benefit from results and reporting of the program evaluation, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would be the primary beneficiary. CDC would use the report to examine the health performance in the minority groups as the basis of improving outcomes or using other interventions to supplement outcomes.
|
|
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
|
To a huge extent, REACH achieved the original intent using the data from the different evaluations. CDC reports reveal significant community successes, including reducing chronic illnesses and unhealthy behaviors such as smoking as access to healthy food and beverages and physical health activities increases. |
|
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
|
I would recommend the program in my place of work. Firstly, health care organizations should partners with national and community-based organizations to reduce health disparities. Carratala and Maxwell (2020) reported that ethnic and racial minorities continue to be burdened by chronic illnesses and mental health problems. Since such illness burden at the communities has a domino effect in health care organizations, it is crucial to implement the REACH program to improve health outcomes in underserved populations.
|
|
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.
|
One way I could be involved in evaluating a program after one year of implementation is by being part of the evaluation committee. Here, I can share my knowledge on the reference points to consider when determining whether a program was a success or not. The other way is to avail information concerning the program by performing individual research. My information would guide on how to conduct a summative evaluation of the program. |
|
General Notes/Comments |
Evaluation reliably indicates whether a program achieved the desired outcomes. Healthcare programs can be at the state, community, or organizational levels, and their evaluation can be yearly, terminal, or progressive, as considered appropriate. Nurses should advocate for program evaluation to determine their success and provide the basis for continuous improvement. |
References
Carratala, S., & Maxwell, C. (2020, May 7). Health disparities by race and ethnicity. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/reports/2020/05/07/484742/health-disparities-race-ethnicity/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020, Mar 10).REACH program impact. https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/state-local-programs/reach/program_impact/index.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, Jul 15). Racial and ethnic approaches to community health. https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/state-local-programs/reach/index.htm
Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
Program/policy evaluation is a valuable tool that can help strengthen the quality of programs/policies and improve outcomes for the populations they serve. Program/policy evaluation answers basic questions about program/policy effectiveness. It involves collecting and analyzing information about program/policy activities, characteristics, and outcomes. This information can be used to ultimately improve program services or policy initiatives.
Nurses can play a very important role assessing program/policy evaluation for the same reasons that they can be so important to program/policy design. Nurses bring expertise and patient advocacy that can add significant insight and impact. In this Assignment, you will practice applying this expertise and insight by selecting an existing healthcare program or policy evaluation and reflecting on the criteria used to measure the effectiveness of the program/policy.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
To Prepare:
- Review the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template provided in the Resources.
- Select an existing healthcare program or policy evaluation or choose one of interest to you.
- Review community, state, or federal policy evaluation and reflect on the criteria used to measure the effectiveness of the program or policy described.
The Assignment: (2–3 pages)
Based on the program or policy evaluation you selected, complete the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template. Be sure to address the following:
- Describe the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
- How was the success of the program or policy measured?
- How many people were reached by the program or policy selected?
- How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
- At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?
- What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
- What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?
- 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.
- Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
- 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.
By Day 7 of Week 10
Submit your completed healthcare program/policy evaluation analysis.
submission information
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
- To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK10Assgn+LastName+Firstinitial
- Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
- Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Name: NURS_6050_Module05_Week10_Assignment_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Program/Policy Evaluation Based on the program or policy evaluation you seelcted, complete the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template. Be sure to address the following: · Describe the healthcare program or policy outcomes. · How was the success of the program or policy measured? · How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected? · At what point in time in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted? |
32 (32%) – 35 (35%) Using sufficient evidence, response clearly and accurately describes the healthcare program or policy outcomes. Response accurately and clearly explains how the success of the program or policy was measured. Response accurately and clearly describes how many people were reached by the program or policy and accurately describes the impact of the program or policy. Response accurately and clearly indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted. |
28 (28%) – 31 (31%) Using sufficient evidence, response accurately describes the healthcare program or policy outcomes. Response accurately explains how the success of the program or policy was measured. Response accurately describes how many people were reached by the program or policy and accurately describes the impact of the program or policy. Response accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted. |
25 (25%) – 27 (27%) Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate or incomplete. Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate or incomplete. Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the impact is vague or inaccurate. Response vaguely describes the point at which the program or policy evaluation was conducted. |
0 (0%) – 24 (24%) Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate and incomplete or is missing. Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate and incomplete or is missing. Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the associated impacts is vague and inaccurate or is missing. Response of the point at which time the program or policy was conducted is missing. |
|
| Reporting of Program/Policy Evaluations · What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation? · What specific information on unintended consequences was identified? · What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit the most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples. · Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not? · 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. |
45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Response clearly and thoroughly explains in detail: -specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation. -the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation. -who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation. -whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. -whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. -at least two ways that the nurse advocate could become involved in the evaluation of the program or policy after 1 year of implementation. | 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Using sufficient evidence, response accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation. Response explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation. Response explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation. Response explains who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation. Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Response includes an accurate explanation of two ways that the nurse advocate could become involved in the evaluation of the program or policy after 1 year of implementation. | 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation. Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague or incomplete. Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate. Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate. Explanation of whether the program/policy met the original intent and outcomes, and the reasons why or why not is incomplete or inaccurate. Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete or inaccurate. Explanation of ways that the nurse advocate could become involved in the evaluation or policy after 1 year of implementation is incomplete or inaccurate. | 0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Identification of the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate or is missing. Response includes vague and incomplete or is missing explanation of: -specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation. -the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation. -who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation. -whether the program or policy met the original intent and outcomes, and the reasons why or why not. -whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not. -ways that the nurse advocate could become involved in the evaluation or policy after 1 year of implementation. | |
| Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, low logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused– neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is incomplete or missing. |
|
| Written Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. | 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. | 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. | 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Contains many (≥5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. | |
| Written Expression and Formatting: The paper follows correct APA format for title page, font, spacing, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list). |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. | 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. | 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. | 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Contains many (≥5) APA format errors. | |
| Total Points: 100 | |||||
Name: NURS_6050_Module05_Week10_Assignment_Rubric