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
| Criteria | Ratings |
| Program/Policy EvaluationBased 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? | 35 to >31 pts
Excellent 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. 31 to >27 pts Good 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. 27 to >24 pts Fair 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. 24 to >0 pts Poor 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. | 50 to >44 pts
Excellent 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. 44 to >39 pts Good 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. 39 to >34 pts Fair 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. 34 to >0 pts Poor 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 to >4 pts
Excellent 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 to >3 pts Good 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 to >2 pts Fair 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. 2 to >0 pts Poor 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
view longer description |
5 to >4 pts
Excellent Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 4 to >3 pts Good Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 to >2 pts Fair Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 2 to >0 pts Poor 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).
view longer description |
5 to >4 pts
Excellent Uses correct APA format with no errors. 4 to >3 pts Good Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. 3 to >2 pts Fair Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. 2 to >0 pts Poor Contains many (≥5) APA format errors. |
There are no reviews yet.