NUR 6050 Module 5 Week 9 Assignment: Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

NUR 6050 Module 5 Week 9 Assignment: Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

NUR 6050 Module 5 Week 9 Assignment: Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Assignment: 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.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NUR 6050 Module 5 Week 9 Assignment: Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

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.

Rubric Detail
•
Excellent
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.

A Sample Of This Assignment Written By One Of Our Top-rated Writers

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	RCMI Multidisciplinary And Translational Research Infrastructure Expansion (RMATRIX) Program
Description	The RMATRIX program was initiated to help in research that would reduce health inequities and improve health, specifically for the Native Hawaiians, Filipinos, and Pacific Islanders. Initially, the health program’s goal was to foster translational and clinical disparities research and build community and institutional synergy (Shiramizu et al., 2018). The program also aimed at advancing health disparities investigators mentoring and career development while prioritizing metabolic-related issues and nutrition and chronic and aging diseases management and prevention. The main reason the RMATRIX received support from the College of Health Sciences and Social Welfare (CHSSW) is the increasing growth of coordinated multidisciplinary teams in delivering effective health care services, particularly those that engage in community-based partnerships.
How was the success of the program or policy measured?	The program assessment was based on its scientific impact on its results, knowledge gained, and how it would contribute to community health. Hence, the uniqueness of Hawaii’s diverse population and geographical location presented different opportunities to examine how race, environment, ethnicity, and culture impact delivery, access, and care outcomes. And also how these factors contribute to various health inequities for the Pacific Islanders and Native Hawaiians. Other assessments included advocacy, collaboration, and synergy assessments. For any clinical program to prove its effectiveness, especially in its translational research, the most important factor to consider is the impact of the program on the target population in terms of policy and advocacy (Nooraie et al., 2020). Hence, during the program’s pilot project, the investigators notified that the program disparity findings were used for advocacy by the health professionals and community leaders at local, national, and international levels. Also, the Hawaii State Senate as part of the group that would convene the country’s health task force to address the health inequities. Also, the increased collaboration and synergies among the leaders and the pilot program investigators were essential since they proved potential in increasing the project’s impact on its target population. Such collaboration was enabled by the significant grants offered to the investigators, thus enabling them to further their research.
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?	When assessing the numbers of Pacific Islanders and Native Hawaiians, the RMATRIX program would be beneficial to over 1.4 million people. That means the success of RMATRIX program was essential to 0.4 percent of the United States population (Office of Minority Health, 2020).
At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?	The program evaluation was conducted during the RMATRIX expansion stage (Hedges & Izutsu, 2018). That is because the investigator had to collaborate with other researchers to ensure that the research would be more effective for the target community and beneficial locally, nationally, and internationally.
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?	The main data in the RMATRIX program include presentations, publications, patents, research findings that impacted change to social or clinical service practice, advocacy, community involvement, disciplines, collaborators and federal contacts findings, and data from new research or pilot continuation. Also, there was data from 17 investigators that was based on public and self-report documentation.
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?	While most healthcare programs aim to achieve their main goals within the targeted short-term period, the RMATRIX program’s effectiveness would be felt in a cross range of three years. As a result, such delays would prolong its long-term goal of improving and promoting health equity for the disparate population.
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 main stakeholders included the Hawaii community, the University of Hawaii, John A. Burns School of Medicine, and the United States Federal government. However, the stakeholder who would benefit more was the Hawaii community. That is because, through the United States government funding the University of Hawaii and John A. Burns School of Medicine investigators to carry on the RMATRIX program, the investigators will manage to enhance their approach to disease diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. Such an approach will aim to improve the Hawaii community’s health while reducing health-related disparities.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?	Yes, the program met its original intent. Since its inception, the RMATRIX program has proved its importance in career mentorship and development by creating a critical investigation mass who commit in eliminating health inequities. The main approach is translational and clinical health disparities collaboration and research with other communities and institutions, including different professional disciplines at local, national, and international levels. Hence, RMATRIX success lies in how the organizations, individual investigators and professional disciplines interact. However, its uniqueness in terms of modest landscape, location, and size in translational and clinical research at the University of Hawaii has made it become more pronounced (Shiramizu et al., 2018). For instance, during its pilot program, it was discovered that RMATRIX was involved in the change of intellectual atmosphere, thus raising ethnic disparities awareness within the health realm. In return, it received support from funding agencies, bringing along indigenous investigators collaborate with other international and national groups, thus providing a new research avenue.
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?	Despite the RMATRIX program being a University of Hawaii initiative, it is an essential program that a healthcare organization can translate in terms of engaging in research through healthcare providers’ collaboration that will benefit the target community. Hence, the most effective way our healthcare organization can adopt the program is by building an organization-based research infrastructure that addresses the existing translational and clinical gaps.
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.	The main way I can advocate for RMATRIX program is by encouraging students under my mentorship during practicum on the need to engage in evidence-based research that will help them in future nursing practice. Hence, I would enlighten the students more about the effectiveness of RMATRIX and especially on the need for collaboration when researching matters concerning the community (William et al., 2018). As a nurse advocate, I would also find meaningful ways to collaborate with other policymakers, especially in finding evidence on how to run the program to ensure that it achieves its long and short-term goals.
General Notes/Comments	RMATRIX is an effective program as it advocates for the need for career mentorship and development through engaging in a collaboration that helps eliminates health inequities. Therefore, governmental institutions should fund similar programs to improve other communities’ livelihoods.

References

Hedges, J. R., & Izutsu, S. (2018). Medical School Hotline: Annual Report for the John A. Burns School of Medicine-Fiscal Year 2018. Hawai’i Journal of Medicine & Public Health, 77(8), 199. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6077951/

Nooraie, R. Y., Kwan, B. M., Cohn, E., AuYoung, M., Roberts, M. C., Adsul, P., & Shelton, R. C. (2020). Advancing health equity through CTSA programs: Opportunities for interaction between health equity, dissemination and implementation, and translational science. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 4(3), 168-175. doi:10.1017/cts.2020.10

Office of Minority Health (n.d). Profile: Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders. HHS.gov. https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=3&lvlid=65

Shiramizu, B., Shambaugh, V., Petrovich, H., Seto, T. B., Ho, T., Mokuau, N., & Hedges, J. R. (2018). 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-016-0302-4

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