Evaluate the hypothetical program that you created
(see attached paper)
using the following types of evaluation: formative, process, outcome, and impact. Identify each type of evaluation that you are using and the part of the program to which it applies, program goals, and program accomplishments. Describe successful areas of the program and areas that need improvement. For the areas requiring improvement, present the changes that will be made, the anticipated outcomes, and how those changes would be evaluated.
Write a 15–20-page, double-spaced paper in Word format. Apply APA standards to citation of sources.
Utilize at least 7–10 scholarly sources in your research and be sure to include a references page. Write in a clear, concise, and organized manner; demonstrate ethical scholarship in accurate representation and attribution of sources; and display accurate spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
Support your statements with scholarly references and appropriate examples. Cite all sources using the APA format.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Types of evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/std/Program/ pupestd/Types%20of%20Evaluation.pdf
Assignment 2: Program Evaluation
Running head: Public HEALTH PROGRAM Effective Public Health Program Implementation Name Institution Effective Public Health Program Implementation Drug Abuse is a major problem in the United States. One of the hypothetical programs that I can implement to address the issue of prescription drug abuse is imposition of the measures on the chemists and pharmaceutical shops that sell prescription drugs to people over the counter. In this program, all these people will be prohibited from selling these drugs to people over the counter without the prescription of a recognized doctor. In this program, an action will be taken against all the people who sell such drugs such as the pain relievers to their clients without producing a prescription. The target population in this program will be the people who are between the ages of 12 to 17 years. The reason for targeting this age group is because, research reveals that in the US, about 2000 youths who are of this age group have at one time abused a prescription pain reliever. Some of them usually get addicted to these drugs without their knowledge because addiction usually kicks in when they make their initial decision of voluntarily taking the prescriptions drugs. It is the repeated intake of these drugs which changes the normal functioning of their brains which makes them to no longer have the control of whether to take these drugs or not (Erwin, Brownson, Keck, & Scutchfield, 2016). The impact of this prevention program is that it will limit the access of these drugs by the target population. Limiting the sale of the prescription drugs to only the people who have the doctors note to show that they are supposed to buy certain drugs to treat their illnesses will greatly aid in ensuring that the pharmaceuticals do not sell drugs to the people within this age bracket who purchases the drug for other uses rather than the medical ones. The intervention in this case will entail the coming together of the people who sell the drugs to fight the sale of the drugs to the people who do not have the doctors’ prescription and are as a result abusing the drugs. As a result of this, this program will thus curtail the people who are under the age of 18 years to purchase the drugs from the stores and leave that to their parents. In addition to this, all the people who are above the age of 18 years are supposed to only receive the drugs if they have a doctor’s prescription. The public health sector is only termed successful if the following six sectors are addressed: Innovation based models, a technical package for high priority cases, performance management through monitoring and evaluation, partnerships on the private and public sector, effective communication strategies and the political commitment when establishing the action plan. The backbone of the implementation is the innovation in the health sector, and support from the technical package, communication, partnerships, and management steers implementation effectiveness whereas the political sector provides the indirect support in a project (Frieden et al., 2014). The innovation sector needs to not only focus on science and medicine but also on the data systems, communication strategy providing a new insight. For example, the success of smallpox eradication, the change of tact in target vaccine population and also ways of administering the vaccine went a long way to the success of the program (Frieden et al., 2014). The innovations should also not be developed anew, and the private sector should also make its contributions. On the other hand, the technical package which is a well-defined sustainable means to combat the crisis. The tailor-made program suits a given epidemic. For instance, in designing an effective package one needs to focus on the target population and how it will be accessed by them, the expertise available and ultimately time and cash constraint. In practicality, the standardization of the vaccination and treatments increases a wider base in the program implementation and combatting health crisis. The management of the public sector has no clear guidelines on its monitoring and evaluations henceforth no much accountability from the health workers. Advancement of performance management would a long way in leading suitable and sustainable health programs, the use of programs to access feedback and loops like in the case of Tuberculosis management would improve the sector as well as the enhancing welfare of health workers (Frieden et al., 2014). In the partnerships sector, the presence of private sector provides support to the government programs especially on the critical cases although getting the assistance can be quite slow and demoralizing it ultimately pays the price. The partnerships in the immunization platform have yielded great results involving so many sector dynamics, and proper monitoring should be carried to ensure no over-indulging. Communication and political commitment sector go hand in hand. The proper communication channels allow for better information flow from one sector leading to an on binding program cutting across its target population, and the political commitment comes in to invoke awareness to the citizens by rallying behind the immunization programs and ensuring the public take up the resources available (Frieden et al., 2014). The government also provides financial programs such as PEPFAR ensuring existence and sustainability of the projects. The effective implementation of a health program needs the careful planning and strategizing to ensure coming up with a suitable and sustainable program that covers the scope of all the six sectors which are important for success. In the implementation of a health program enhances the levels of development as the citizens can shift focus from their health challenges which are progressively addressed to productive development. References Erwin, P., Brownson, R., Keck, C. & Scutchfield, F. (2016). Principles of public health practice. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Frieden, Thomas R, M.D., M.P.H. (2014). Six components necessary for effective public health program implementation. American Journal of Public Health, 104(1), 17-22. Retrieved from https://login.libproxy.edmc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.edmc.edu/docview/1477881548?accountid=34899