PHN-652 Population-Based Interventions Course Assignments & Discussions Study Guide

PHN-652 Population-Based Interventions Course Assignments & Discussions Study Guide

PHN-652 Population-Based Interventions Course Description

In this course, learners closely examine concepts of population health in order to design health promotion and disease prevention interventions for diverse populations. Beginning with the selection of appropriate models for evidence-based interventions, learners assess a population and propose the most appropriate intervention based on available evidence. Learners also consider the financial, regulatory, legal, and ethical aspects of population-based interventions and methods for evaluating outcomes. Prerequisite: NUR-590.

PHN-652 Population-Based Interventions Course Assignments & Examples Study Guide

PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions

PHN-652 Topic 1: Evidence-Based Practice in Public Health

Objectives:

1. Examine the evolution of evidence-based public health.
2. Explain the role of evidence-based practice in disease prevention and health promotion.
3. Determine appropriate sources to inform evidence-based practice.
4. Discuss the role of teaching in public health nursing practice.

PHN-652 Benchmark – Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Assignment

Description

The purpose of this assignment is to discuss the importance of evidence-based interventions to the design of health promotion and disease prevention. In a 1,250-1,500 word paper, provide detailed descriptions of disease prevention and health promotion, as well as the role of evidence-based interventions in the success of this practice.

Refer to the assigned reading, “Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Through Population-Based Interventions, Including Action to Address Social Determinants and Health Inequity,” to assist in completing the assignment.

Include the following:

1. A description of disease prevention.
2. An example of an existing disease prevention model at the three levels of practice (community, systems, and individual).
3. An analysis of the benefits and concerns with utilizing this model.
4. A description of health promotion.
5. An example of an existing health promotion model at the three levels of practice (community, systems, and individual).
6. An analysis of the benefits and concerns with utilizing this model.
7. A discussion of the role evidence-based practice plays in the success of disease prevention and health promotion.
8. A discussion of the role of health teaching in disease prevention and health promotion.

Cite two or three additional resources in your paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assesses the following programmatic competency:

MSN Public Health Nursing

6.1 Evaluate theoretical frameworks in public health nursing useful for assessing the health status of populations and promoting health and preventing disease for individuals, communities, and populations.

IMPORTANT LINKS

https://prevention.nih.gov/research-priorities/dissemination-implementation-research/evidence-based-practices-programs

https://www.healthypeople.gov/sites/default/files/EvidenceBasedClinicalPH2010.pdf

http://www.emro.who.int/fr/about-who/public-health-functions/health-promotion-disease-prevention.html

For top-quality coursework writing help and assignment writing services, trust Reliable Papers. Our expert team delivers 100% original human-written work tailored to your needs. Contact us via phone, WhatsApp, or live chat for assistance today!

PHN-652 Benchmark – Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Assignment Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
PHN-652	PHN-652-O500	Benchmark – Health Promotion and Disease Prevention	110.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory 0-75% (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory 76-80% (80.00%)	3: Satisfactory 81-88% (88.00%)	4: Good 89-92% (92.00%)	: Excellent 93-100% (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	70.0%
Disease Prevention	5.0%	A description of disease prevention is not present.	A description of disease prevention is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of disease prevention is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of disease prevention is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of disease prevention is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Existing Prevention Model at Three Levels of Practice	10.0%	An example of an existing prevention model at the three levels of practice is not present.	An example of an existing prevention model at the three levels of practice is incomplete or incorrect.	An example of an existing prevention model at the three levels of practice is included but lacks supporting details.	An example of an existing prevention model at the three levels of practice is complete and includes supporting details.	An example of an existing prevention model at the three levels of practice is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Disease Prevention – Analysis of Benefits and Concerns (C6.1)	15.0%	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the disease prevention model is not present.	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the disease prevention model is incomplete or incorrect.	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the disease prevention model is included but lacks supporting details.	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the disease prevention model is complete and includes supporting details.	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the disease prevention model is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Health Promotion	5.0%	A description of health promotion is not present.	A description of health promotion is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of health promotion is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of health promotion is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of health promotion is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Existing Health Promotion Model at Three Levels of Practice	10.0%	An example of an existing health promotion model at the three levels of practice is not present.	An example of an existing health promotion model at the three levels of practice is incomplete or incorrect.	An example of an existing health promotion model at the three levels of practice is included but lacks supporting details.	An example of an existing health promotion model at the three levels of practice is complete and includes supporting details.	An example of an existing health promotion model at the three levels of practice is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Health Promotion – Analysis of Benefits and Concerns (C6.1)	15.0%	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the health promotion model is not present.	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the health promotion model is incomplete or incorrect.	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the health promotion model is included but lacks supporting details.	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the health promotion model is complete and includes supporting details.	An analysis of the benefits of and concerns with utilizing the health promotion model is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Role of Evidence-Based Practice (C6.1)	5.0%	A discussion of the role of evidence-based practice in the success of disease prevention and health promotion is not present.	A discussion of the role of evidence-based practice in the success of disease prevention and health promotion is incomplete or incorrect.	A discussion of the role of evidence-based practice in the success of disease prevention and health promotion is included but lacks supporting details.	A discussion of the role of evidence-based practice in the success of disease prevention and health promotion is complete and includes supporting details.	A discussion of the role of evidence-based practice in the success of disease prevention and health promotion is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Role of Health Teaching in Disease Prevention and Health Promotion	5.0%	A discussion of the role of health teaching in disease prevention and health promotion is not present.	A discussion of the role of health teaching in disease prevention and health promotion is incomplete or incorrect.	A discussion of the role of health teaching in disease prevention and health promotion is included but lacks supporting details.	A discussion of the role of health teaching in disease prevention and health promotion is complete and includes supporting details.	A discussion of the role of health teaching in disease prevention and health promotion is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Organization and Effectiveness	20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format	10.0%
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

 

Topic 1 DQ 1

Discuss the sources of evidence for public health nurses. How can this evidence be applied to support evidence-based practice? Cite at least two sources of evidence in your response.

Re: Topic 1 DQ 1 Example Answer

There are many different sources for public health nurses to utilize from, and the first would be the Center for Disease Control and Prevention website. I personally like this website to pull information regarding current health, social, and any other topic an individual would like knowledge of. For a public health nurse, the information that is placed in this source is vital because it provides a comprehensive look at different healthcare, biological, and social specialties and presents information in a method that is comprehensive and easy to understand. Many studies that are being completed by government or public health programs are found on the CDC. Many healthcare issues that are being tracked by private offices are submitted to the CDC for overall, comprehensive review. This is why I think the CDC websites is a great resource for both public health nurses and any other individual who is seeking to further their knowledge base.

The second source of information that public health nurses may utilize are scholarly databases such as the one that is provided by Grand Canyon University. Scholarly databases allow for public health nurses to specify studies down to whether or not they are peer reviewed, scholarly based, time frame, etc. Any other database source such as EBSCOhost would also provide information that has been deemed to be peer reviewed or scholarly.

It is so important that public health nurses use reviewed, credible sources for their studies because it oftentimes serves as a foundation for any other research that follows. It can unintentionally skew results in one way or another when foundational information is later to found to not be as credible or true as it was previously deemed.

Topic 1 DQ 2

How has evidence-based practice evolved? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this evolution for public health nurses as well as communities?

Topic 1 DQ 2 Example Answer

The provision of quality care aims at ensuring that safety is a priority in nursing care. However, this is a matter that has often been overlooked in nursing school, a notion that has seen nurses lack adequate preparation on how to offer safe care to patients. The resulting improvement to shape the nursing curriculum was the introduction of evidence-based practice (EBP) to make sure that nurses are proficient in both the clinical experience and patient-oriented care by meeting the laid provision for the best care in line with emerging clinical researches PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions. Since the beginning of EBP, it has since shaped the nursing profession, it has promoted skills, competence, and equipped nurses with the relevant knowledge required to provide quality and safe care by nurses (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2017)

As stated above, EBP had several advantages including equipping the health care nurses with skills and knowledge which has played an important role in their profession and interaction with the community. It has given nurses a platform in which they can make reverence and address a range of challenges as a result of promoting competence. The evolution of EBP has, however, come along with a lot of challenges. At times, it is very difficult to find valid and credible evidence. This consumes a lot of time and sometimes the public health officers are misguided by some sources, hence ending up doing what is contrary to the expectations of the community (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2017). EBP has also lead to oversight of common sense. EBP has made some public health workers lazy, that they rely so much on evidence from other sources rather than using their minds to reason and execute the mandate.

References

LoBiondo-Wood, G., &Haber, J. (2017). Nursing research-E-book: method and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice. Elsevier Health Sciences.

You can also read another study guide on nursing assignments for students from another post on PHN-690 Public Health Nursing Practicum Course Assignments & Discussions.

 PHN-652 Topic 2: Models and Tools Used in Public Health

Objectives:

1. Describe the importance of public health models in providing quality health care.
2. Differentiate between public health models for a public health program.
3. Analyze existing models of public health.

PHN-652 Intervention Wheel Analysis Assignment

Intervention Wheel Analysis

The intervention wheel is a commonly used model used in public health. The purpose of this assignment is to analyze the intervention wheel and contrast it with another model used in public health. Write a 1,250-1,500 word paper, including the following:

1. A description of the strengths and weaknesses of the intervention wheel.
2. An example of when the intervention wheel has been used in public health.
3. A brief description of another model used in public health.
4. A description of how the two models are similar.
5. A description of how the two models are different.

Cite two or three resources in your paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

PHN-652 Intervention Wheel Analysis Assignment Rubric

Course Code		Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
PHN-652		PHN-652-O500	Intervention Wheel Analysis	85.0
Criteria		Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory 0-75% (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory 76-80% (80.00%)		3: Satisfactory 81-88% (88.00%)	4: Good 89-92% (92.00%)	5: Excellent 93-100% (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content		70.0%
Strengths and Weaknesses of Intervention Wheel		15.0%	A description of the strengths and weaknesses of the intervention wheel is not present.	A description of the strengths and weaknesses of the intervention wheel is incomplete or incorrect.		A description of the strengths and weaknesses of the intervention wheel is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the strengths and weaknesses of the intervention wheel is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the strengths and weaknesses of the intervention wheel is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Intervention Wheel Example		15.0%	An example of when the intervention wheel has been used in public health is not present.	An example of when the intervention wheel has been used in public health is incomplete or incorrect.		An example of when the intervention wheel has been used in public health is included but lacks supporting details.	An example of when the intervention wheel has been used in public health is complete and includes supporting details.	An example of when the intervention wheel has been used in public health is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Description of Public Health Model		10.0%	A brief description of another model used in public health is not present.	A brief description of another model used in public health is incomplete or incorrect.		A brief description of another model used in public health is included but lacks supporting details.	A brief description of another model used in public health is complete and includes supporting details.	A brief description of another model used in public health is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Similarity of Models		15.0%	A description of how the two models are similar is not present.	A description of how the two models are similar is incomplete or incorrect.		A description of how the two models are similar is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of how the two models are similar is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of how the two models are similar is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Differences in Models		15.0%	A description of how the two models are different is not present.	A description of how the two models are different is incomplete or incorrect.		A description of how the two models are different is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of how the two models are different is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of how the two models are different is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Group 2Organization and Effectiveness		20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose		7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.		Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction		8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.		Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)		5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.		Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format		10.0%
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)		5.0%	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.		Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)		5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.		Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage		100%
Topic 2 DQ 1

Why are public health models important in providing quality health care? Briefly describe two public health models and their impact on quality health care.

Re: Topic 2 DQ 1 Example Answer

In different facilities, several healthcare models and theories are used to enhance the practices of the health workers to ensure that quality care of the patients is realized. One common model is the Social Cognitive Theory     (SCT). This model focuses on engaging how one’s influences affects other people’s action and it revolves around the behavior of the individual (Stanhope et. al., 2019). However, it is mainly meant to guide healthcare workers. This model tends to promote self-efficacy in that one will be able to control their behavior and it includes having self-control when it comes to monitoring their behavior. A good example is the Healthy Relationship program that is instilled by Chattanooga CARES, which is operated by a small group of individuals who are living with AIDS, and it mainly focuses on skill-building. Another model is the Health Belief Model that offers guidelines on how to promote different preventive programs. To measure the development of the healthcare system, the facility will be able to engage more in prevention than treatment programs. According to the saying, prevention is better than cure, and this must be a concept that applies to healthcare facilities (Jackson, & Gracia, 2014). According to this model, the main area to define includes the threats of the disease, consequences, actions to be taken, barriers to the action taken, and the chances to succeed. For instance, the Michigan Model for Health is a program that is designed to be implemented in the learning institution. It focuses on social health problems.

References

Stanhope, M., Faan, R, D., Lancaster, J., & Faan, R.P (2019). Public Health Nursing E-Book: Population -Centered Health Care in the Community. Mosby

Jackson, C., & Gracia, J .N (2014) Addressing Health and Health -care disparities: the role of a diverse workforce and the social determinants of health. Public Health. Reports, 129( 1-supp12). 57-61.

Topic 2 DQ 2

There are numerous tools available for public health nurses to use. Choose the tool used in public health that is, in your opinion, the most effective. Provide a rationale for this tool’s effectiveness and provide an example of when it has been used.

PHN-652 Data Collection Method Assignment

Data Collection Method

For this assignment, you will plan to collect data for a community health need.

Begin by choosing a population of interest to you. Research your chosen population for available health data. This is your secondary data. From the data available about your population, identify a health need that you would like to address.

Choose a data collection method to collect primary data about the identified health need for your population. Popular data collection methods to choose from are surveys, focus groups, and interviews. Write a 750-1,000-word plan describing how you will collect primary data about the identified health need for your chosen population.

Include the following in your data collection plan:

1. Description of the chosen population and identified health need.
2. Identify the most appropriate data collection method for your chosen population with rationale.
3. Describe which type of data that will be collected (qualitative or quantitative).
4. Identify health indicators specific to the population with at least one source.
5. Provide at least five example questions to be used in your data collection.
6. Include a rationale for each question asked, including the expected data.

Cite two or three resources in your paper.

Prepare this PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

 

Topic 3 DQ 1

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative or quantitative data. Give an example of when you would use each.

Topic 3 DQ 2

There are numerous ways in which public health nurses can collect data in order to identify population needs and develop interventions, including surveys, focus groups, and interviews. Choose the two data collection methods you feel are the most effective. Describe each method and explain why you chose them PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions. How would you know which data collection technique is most effective for your chosen population?

Topic 4: Public Health Nursing Assessments

Objectives:

1. Apply the public health nursing practice model in the creation of a population needs assessment report.
2. Differentiate among micro, meso, and macro levels of assessment.
3. Discuss techniques for conducting a community health needs assessment.
4. Utilize data sources to write a community health needs assessment report.

PHN-652 Community Health Needs Assessment Report Assignment

Community Health Needs Assessment Report

The purpose of this assignment is to apply the public health nursing practice model in order to write a community needs assessment report. Utilizing the data collected from your Topic 3 chosen population, write a 1,000-1,200 word community needs assessment report with the following information:

1. A description of the community or population researched.
2. Explanation of current data available.
3. Summary of health needs identified through analysis of data.
4. Description of the data collection method planned for collecting secondary data.
5. Description of at least one key health issue/need from a nursing diagnosis, including the micro, meso, and macro level.
6. Summary of at least one social determinant of the health issue identified.
7. Brief outline of a plan for addressing the chosen health need.

Include three to five resources in your paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

PHN-652 Community Health Needs Assessment Report Assignment Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
PHN-652	PHN-652-O500	Community Health Needs Assessment Report	85.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory 0-75% (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory 76-80% (80.00%)	3: Satisfactory 81-88% (88.00%)	4: Good 89-92% (92.00%)	5: Excellent 93-100% (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	70.0%
Community or Population Researched	10.0%	A description of the community or population researched is not present.	A description of the community or population researched is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the community or population researched is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the community or population researched is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the community or population researched is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Current Data Available	10.0%	An explanation of current data available is not present.	An explanation of current data available is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of current data available is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of current data available is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of current data available is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Health Needs Identified	10.0%	A summary of health needs identified through analysis of data is not present.	A summary of health needs identified through analysis of data is incomplete or incorrect.	A summary of health needs identified through analysis of data is included but lacks supporting details.	A summary of health needs identified through analysis of data is complete and includes supporting details.	A summary of health needs identified through analysis of data is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Data Collection Method	10.0%	A description of the data collection method planned for collecting secondary data is not present.	A description of the data collection method planned for collecting secondary data is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the data collection method planned for collecting secondary data is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the data collection method planned for collecting secondary data is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the data collection method planned for collecting secondary data is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Micro, Meso, and Macro Level of Health Issue or Need	10.0%	A description of at least one key health issue or need from a nursing diagnosis, including the micro, meso, and macro level, is not present.	A description of at least one key health issue or need from a nursing diagnosis, including the micro, meso, and macro level, is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of at least one key health issue or need from a nursing diagnosis, including the micro, meso, and macro level, is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of at least one key health issue or need from a nursing diagnosis, including the micro, meso, and macro level, is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of at least one key health issue or need from a nursing diagnosis, including the micro, meso, and macro level, is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Social Determinant	10.0%	A summary of at least one social determinant of the health issue identified is not present.	A summary of at least one social determinant of the health issue identified is incomplete or incorrect.	A summary of at least one social determinant of the health issue identified is included but lacks supporting details.	A summary of at least one social determinant of the health issue identified is complete and includes supporting details.	A discussion of the A summary of at least one social determinant of the health issue identified is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Outline of Plan to Address Health Need	10.0%	A brief outline of a plan for addressing the chosen health need is not present.	A brief outline of a plan for addressing the chosen health need is incomplete or incorrect.	A brief outline of a plan for addressing the chosen health need is included but lacks supporting details.	A brief outline of a plan for addressing the chosen health need is complete and includes supporting details.	A brief outline of a plan for addressing the chosen health need is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Organization and Effectiveness	20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format	10.0%
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

 

Topic 4 DQ 1

What techniques can be used in conducting a community health needs assessment? Which technique do you feel is the most effective?

Topic 4 DQ 2

When writing a community health needs assessment report, the public health nurse will need to include micro, meso, and macro levels of assessment. What is the difference between these levels of assessment? Why is it necessary to use all levels of assessment when writing a community health needs assessment report? What would be the impact of not including all three levels of assessment in a community health needs assessment report?

Topic 5: Developing Evidence-Based Interventions

Objectives:

1. Explain the importance of evaluating population-based interventions.
2. Identify an evidence-based intervention for a community need or health issue based on a community health needs assessment.
3. Develop an evidence-based intervention to target a community health need.

PHN-652 Benchmark – Population Needs Intervention Development Assignment

Benchmark – Population Needs Intervention Development

The purpose of this assignment is to develop an intervention to target a community health need.

There are 17 types of interventions that can be used by public health nurses. To address the health issue or disparity of health identified during your Community Health Needs Assessment Report in Topic 4, develop an intervention plan to target that need.

To report your intervention plan, create a 10-12 slide PowerPoint presentation, not including the title and reference slides, that addresses the following information:

1. Description of the population chosen.
2. Data used in determining health need.
3. Summary of which interventions are already in place for this community health need.
4. Detailed description of the intervention targeted to the population.
5. Rationale for developing this intervention.
6. Evidence-based resources to support intervention.
7. Identification of all stakeholders, including the community.
8. Description of the steps that will be taken to ensure the intervention is culturally sensitive to the community and population.

Include three to five resources in your presentation.

Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” located in the Student Success Center, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

PHN-652 Benchmark – Population Needs Intervention Development Assignment Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
PHN-652	PHN-652-O500	Benchmark – Population Needs Intervention Development	110.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory 0-75% (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory 76-80% (80.00%)	3: Satisfactory 81-88% (88.00%)	4: Good 89-92% (92.00%)	5: Excellent 93-100% (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Criteria	100.0%
Population Chosen	5.0%	A description of the community or population chosen is not present.	A description of the community or population chosen is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the community or population chosen is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the community or population chosen is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the community or population chosen is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Data Used	5.0%	An explanation of data used in determining a health need is not present.	An explanation of data used in determining a health need is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of data used in determining a health need is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of data used in determining a health need is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of data used in determining a health need is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Interventions Already in Place	5.0%	A summary of interventions already in place for this community health need is not present.	A summary of interventions already in place for this community health need is incomplete or incorrect.	A summary of interventions already in place for this community health need is included but lacks supporting details.	A summary of interventions already in place for this community health need is complete and includes supporting details.	A summary of interventions already in place for this community health need is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Intervention Chosen	10.0%	A detailed description of the intervention targeted to the population is not present.	A detailed description of the intervention targeted to the population is incomplete or incorrect.	A detailed description of the intervention targeted to the population is included but lacks supporting details.	A detailed description of the intervention targeted to the population is complete and includes supporting details.	A detailed description of the intervention targeted to the population is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Rationale for Intervention	10.0%	A rationale for choosing the population-based intervention is not present.	A rationale for choosing the population-based intervention is incomplete or incorrect.	A rationale for choosing the population-based intervention is included but lacks supporting details.	A rationale for choosing the population-based intervention is complete and includes supporting details.	A rationale for choosing the population-based intervention is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Evidence-Based Resources	10.0%	Evidence-based resources in support of the intervention are not present.	Evidence-based resources in support of the intervention are incomplete or incorrect.	Evidence-based resources in support of the intervention are included but lack supporting details.	Evidence-based resources in support of the intervention are complete and include supporting details.	Evidence-based resources in support of the intervention are extremely thorough and include substantial supporting details.
Stakeholders	5.0%	A description of all stakeholders, including the community, is not present.	A description of all stakeholders, including the community, is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of all stakeholders, including the community, is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of all stakeholders, including the community, is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of all stakeholders, including the community, is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Steps for Culturally Sensitive Intervention  (C6.4)	10.0%	A description of the steps to ensure the intervention is culturally sensitive to the community and population is not present.	A description of the steps to ensure the intervention is culturally sensitive to the community and population is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the steps to ensure the intervention is culturally sensitive to the community and population is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the steps to ensure the intervention is culturally sensitive to the community and population is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the steps to ensure the intervention is culturally sensitive to the community and population is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Presentation of Content	10.0%	The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.	The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.	The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other.	The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness.  Includes persuasive information from reliable sources.	The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.
Layout	10.0%	The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability.  The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.	The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.	The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.	The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.	The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)	10.0%	Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.	Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.	Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.	The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.	The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.
Mechanics of Writing  (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.	Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.	Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

TOPIC 6: Population-Based Intervention Implementation Plan

This assignment is a continuation from the PowerPoint presentation from the TOPIC: Benchmark – Population Needs Intervention Development.

 

Population-Based Intervention Implementation Plan

PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions

The purpose of this assignment is to plan for the successful implementation of your population-based intervention. Using your identified health need from Topic 5, write a 1,000-1,200 word paper that includes the following information.

1. Identify and explain potential barriers to implementation of the evidence-based intervention.
2. Discuss strategies to overcome the barriers to implementation of the evidence-based intervention.
3. Describe how you will account for the ethical, legal, and regulatory aspects of community health in your intervention.

Include three to five resources in your PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

STUDY MATERIALS

Read Chapters 20 and 23 in Public Health Nursing: Population-Centered Health Care in the Community.

Read “Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Evidence-Based Interventions Among Third Sector Organisations: A Systematic Review,” by Bach-Mortensen, Anders, Lange, and Montgomery, from Implementation Science (2018). URL: https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=131025466&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Read “Supporting Research and Evidence-Based Public Health Practice in State and Local Health Agencies” (2017), located on the American Public Health Association (APHA) website. URL: https://www.apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-database/2018/01/18/supporting-research-and-evidence-based-public-health-practice

Review “The Public Health Approach to Violence Prevention,” located on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention  (CDC) website. URL: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/PH_App_Violence-a.pdf

Read “Workplace Health Model,” by Division of Population Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (2016), located on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website. URL: https://www.cdc.gov/workplacehealthpromotion/model/index.html

Explore “Chapter 19. Choosing and Adapting Community Interventions,” located on the Community Toolbox website (2018). URL: https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/analyze/choose-and-adapt-community-interventions

PHN-652 Benchmark – Funding Plan Assignment

Benchmark – Funding Plan

The purpose of this assignment is to create a plan for funding an intervention while applying financial planning and management best practices.

Write a 1,200-1,500 word plan for funding, including the following information:

1. Description of the data used to determine the targeted health disparity.
2. Description of the health disparity targeted through the intervention.
3. Description of intervention sustainability.
4. Description of possible cost savings resulting from intervention implementation.
5. Rationale for chosen sources of funding. PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions.
6. A proposed budget that includes total cost of implementation, expenses, and amount of funding received.
7. Description of adherence to financial planning and management best practices.

Include one or two resources in your paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

Grading Rubric

Data – A description of the A description of the data used to determine the targeted health disparity is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details- 5.5 points

Health Disparity: A description of the health disparity is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details. – 5.5 points

Intervention Sustainability: A description of intervention sustainability is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details –11 points

Cost-Savings: A description of possible cost savings resulting from intervention implementation is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details. – 11 points

Source of Funding: A rationale for chosen source of funding is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details – 16.5 points

Proposed Budget: A proposed budget including total cost of implementation, expenses, and amount of funding received is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details – 11 points

Best Practices of Financial Management (B): A description of application of best practices for financial management is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details. – 16.5 points

Thesis Development and Purpose: Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. – 7.7 points

Argument Logic and Construction: Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. – 8.8 points

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use – 5.5 points

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) – 5.5 points

Documentation of Sources: Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error – 5.5 points

Total 110 points

Class Resources

Grants | Funding | CDC

Home | GRANTS.GOV

Prevention and Public Health Fund | HHS.gov

Chapter 43. Managing Finances | Community Tool Box (ku.edu)

Public Health Financing (cdc.gov)

Chapter 42. Getting Grants and Financial Resources | Community Tool Box (ku.edu)

PHN-652 Benchmark – Funding Plan Assignment Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
PHN-652	PHN-652-O500	Benchmark – Funding Plan	110.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory 0-75% (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory 76-80% (80.00%)	3: Satisfactory 81-88% (88.00%)	4: Good 89-92% (92.00%)	5: Excellent 93-100% (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	70.0%
Data	5.0%	A description of the data used to determine the targeted health disparity is not present.	A description of the data used to determine the targeted health disparity is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the data used to determine the targeted health disparity is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the data used to determine the targeted health disparity is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the A description of the data used to determine the targeted health disparity is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Health Disparity	5.0%	A description of the health disparity determined is not present.	A description of the health disparity determined is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the health disparity is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the health disparity is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the health disparity is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Intervention Sustainability	10.0%	A description of intervention sustainability is not present.	A description of intervention sustainability is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of intervention sustainability is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of intervention sustainability is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of intervention sustainability is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Cost-Savings	10.0%	A description of possible cost savings resulting from intervention implementation is not present.	A description of possible cost savings resulting from intervention implementation is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of possible cost savings resulting from intervention implementation is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of possible cost savings resulting from intervention implementation is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of possible cost savings resulting from intervention implementation is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Source of Funding	15.0%	A rationale for chosen source of funding is not present.	A rationale for chosen source of funding is incomplete or incorrect.	A rationale for chosen source of funding is included but lacks supporting details.	A rationale for chosen source of funding is complete and includes supporting details.	A rationale for chosen source of funding is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Proposed Budget	10.0%	A proposed budget including total cost of implementation, expenses, and amount of funding received is not present.	A proposed budget including total cost of implementation, expenses, and amount of funding received is incomplete or incorrect.	A proposed budget including total cost of implementation, expenses, and amount of funding received is included but lacks supporting details.	A proposed budget including total cost of implementation, expenses, and amount of funding received is complete and includes supporting details.	A proposed budget including total cost of implementation, expenses, and amount of funding received is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Best Practices of Financial Management (C6.6)	15.0%	A description of application of best practices for financial management is not present.	A description of application of best practices for financial management is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of application of best practices for financial management is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of application of best practices for financial management is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of application of best practices for financial management is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Group 2Organization and Effectiveness	20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format	10.0%
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

Topic 8: Evaluating Population-Based Interventions

Objectives:

1. Identify critical features and strategies for the evaluation of the evidence-based intervention process.
2. Develop a plan for evaluating an evidence-based intervention.
3. Identify the performance measures of an evidence-based intervention.

PHN-652 Planning for Evaluation Assignment

Planning for Evaluation

The purpose of this assignment is to develop an evaluation plan for your evidence-based intervention in order to reflect on its effectiveness.

You may choose to include key slides from your Population-Based Intervention Implementation Plan from Topic 5 in order to ensure that stakeholders have an understanding of the data collection and intervention planning processes.

Create a 5-8 slide PowerPoint presentation, not including title or reference slides, with the following information:

1. Describe the population and health disparity targeted in the intervention.
2. Identify features and strategies for evaluation.
3. Identify performance measures.
4. Write short-term and long-term outcomes with plans for measurement and benchmarking.
5. Plan for the next steps in the intervention. What will you do with this evaluation data?

Include speaker notes for each slide, detailing how you would present this information to stakeholders.

Include one or two resources in your presentation.

Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” located in the Student Success Center, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this PHN-652 — Population-Based Interventions assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

Some Resources:

Framework for Program Evaluation – CDC

Evaluation | Model | Workplace Health Promotion | CDC

The Public Health Approach to Violence Prevention (cdc.gov)

PHN-652 Planning for Evaluation Assignment Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
PHN-652	PHN-652-O500	Planning for Evaluation	85.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory 0-75% (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory 76-80% (80.00%)	3: Satisfactory 81-88% (88.00%)	4: Good 89-92% (92.00%)	5: Excellent 93-100% (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Group 1	100.0%
CriterioPopulation and Health Disparityn 1	10.0%	A description of population and healthy disparity is not present.	A description of population and healthy disparity is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of population and healthy disparity is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of population and healthy disparity is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of population and healthy disparity is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Features and Strategies for Evaluation	10.0%	Features and strategies for evaluation are not present.	Features and strategies for evaluation are incomplete or incorrect.	Features and strategies for evaluation are included but lack supporting details.	Features and strategies for evaluation are complete and include supporting details.	Features and strategies for evaluation are extremely thorough and include substantial supporting details.
Performance Measures	10.0%	A description of performance measures is not present.	A description of performance measures is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of performance measures is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of performance measures is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the A description of performance measures is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes	10.0%	A description of short-term and long-term outcomes with a plan for measurement and benchmarking is not present.	A description of short-term and long-term outcomes with a plan for measurement and benchmarking is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of short-term and long-term outcomes with a plan for measurement and benchmarking is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of short-term and long-term outcomes with a plan for measurement and benchmarking is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of short-term and long-term outcomes with a plan for measurement and benchmarking is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Next Steps	10.0%	A plan for next steps in the intervention is not present.	A plan for next steps in the intervention is incomplete or incorrect.	A plan for next steps in the intervention is included but lacks supporting details.	A plan for next steps in the intervention is complete and includes supporting details.	A plan for next steps in the intervention is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Presentation of Content	20.0%	The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.	The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.	The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other.	The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness.  Includes persuasive information from reliable sources.	The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.
Layout	10.0%	The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability.  The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.	The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.	The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.	The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.	The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)	10.0%	Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.	Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.	Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.	The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.	The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.
Mechanics of Writing  (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.	Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.	Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

Make Your Nursing Academic Journey Truly Fulfilling with Our Expert Nursing Assignment Writing Help!

Feeling overwhelmed by the demands of your nursing essays and assignments? Don’t let stress derail your academic success. ReliablePapers.com is your partner in navigating the challenges of nursing studies. Our reliable nursing paper writing services are tailored to lighten your assignment load and ensure your journey in nursing education is not just manageable, but truly fulfilling.

Expertise That Sets Us Apart

At ReliablePapers.com, we understand the unique struggles faced by nursing students. That’s why we’ve assembled a team of seasoned nursing writers who are not only experts in their field but also passionate about helping students succeed. Our writers bring years of academic writing experience and a deep understanding of nursing topics, ensuring that your papers are meticulously crafted to meet the highest standards.

Why Choose ReliablePapers.com for Your Nursing Essays?

• Experienced Nursing Writers: Our team comprises experienced nursing professionals who are dedicated to delivering top-quality nursing papers tailored to your requirements.
• Direct Communication: You’ll have direct communication with your assigned writer, allowing for seamless collaboration and transparency throughout the writing process.
• Affordable Prices: We understand the financial constraints of students, which is why we offer competitive prices starting at just $10 per page.
• Guaranteed Originality: Plagiarism is a strict no-no at ReliablePapers.com. We guarantee 100% original, custom-made papers that reflect your unique voice and understanding.
• Timely Support: With our fast turnaround times and dedicated support team, you can rest assured that your papers will be delivered on time, every time.
• Hassle-Free Ordering: Ordering a custom nursing paper from ReliablePapers.com is quick and easy. Simply provide your details, and our experts will take care of the rest.

Why Struggle When Help Is Just a Click Away?

Don’t let nursing assignments overwhelm you. With ReliablePapers.com’s nursing writing help services, you can reclaim your time, achieve top grades, and stay ahead of the curve. Order your custom nursing paper today and unlock your full potential with ReliablePapers.com!

Don’t Let Stress Define Your Nursing Academic Journey

Place your order with ReliablePapers.com today and experience the difference firsthand. Whether you need to buy nursing research papers, get cheap nursing papers, or professional nursing coursework help, we’ve got you covered. Trust us with your nursing assignments, and let us help you succeed in your nursing studies.

Hire an Expert Paper Writer on Any Subject, Any Topic, Any Deadline! Submit your paper instructions by placing your order here to get started!