public health

HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HEALTH PROFESSIONS AND HUMAN SERVICES

DEPARTMENT OF POPULATION HEALTH

MASTER OF PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAM

Faculty: Course Time & Location

SYLLABUS – Spring 2024

MPH205: PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAM PLANNING AND EVALUATION (3 credits)

Alison O Jordan MSW, LCSW, CCHP Mondays 6:30-8:20pm Face to Face, Dome 201*

Adjunct Professor *Up to 5 Select Classes Synchronous Online at Professor’s discretion

Office Hours:

By appointment, please email

[email protected]

COURSE DESCRIPTION

Public Health professionals engage in very applied, multidisciplinary planning and evaluation of programs that aim to improve access to care, quality of care and cost of care, and ultimately health and well-being. This course prepares students to plan, implement, and evaluate public health programs as well as examine challenges to program development and outcomes brought about by differential access to care, care quality and cost of services. Strategies for overcoming complexities associated with cross-sector collaborations, fragmented health systems and designing effective programs that bridge different organizations with very disparate capabilities to conduct health research, will also be explored.

COURSE RATIONALE

Professionals in public health are increasingly expected to be competent in the research skills and techniques that are used to create programs and assess their effectiveness. This course will provide students with an overview and familiarity with the research tools and methods needed to plan, critique, and conduct appropriate assessments for public health programs. Students will also learn about how to plan a community or public health program.

COURSE OBJECTIVES AND CORE Competencies

MPH Public Health Knowledge Learning Objectives

Explain the critical importance of evidence in advancing public health knowledge; Explain the role of quantitative and qualitative methods and sciences in describing and assessing a population’s health

MPH Foundational Competencies

· Assess population needs, assets and capacities that affect communities’ health

· Apply awareness of cultural values and practices to the design or implementation of public health policies or programs

· Design a population-based policy, program, project or intervention

· Explain basic principles and tools of budget and resource management

· Select methods to evaluate public health programs

· Communicate audience-appropriate public health content, both in writing and through oral presentation

MPH Generalist Competencies

· Assess public health program plans in relation to quality, utility, and impact on public health.

· Assess public health evaluation plans in relation to quality, utility, and impact on public health.

Academic Integrity:

UniversitY & DEPARTMENT POLICiES

Hofstra University places high value upon educating students about academic integrity. At the same time, the University will not tolerate dishonesty, and it will not offer the privileges of the community to the repeat offender. The academic community assumes that work of any kind--whether a research paper, a critical essay, a homework assignment, a test or quiz, a computer program, or a creative assignment in any medium--is done, entirely and without unauthorized assistance, by the individual(s) whose name(s) it bears. Students bear the ultimate responsibility for implementing the principles of academic integrity. For more information, please visit hofstra.edu/fps/11.html.

Use of AI tools prohibited. You may not use AI or ML tools, such as ChatGPT or Dall-E, or other similar tools on assignments, discussions, exams, and presentations in this course. You are expected to complete each assignment without assistance from others, including AI/ML automated tools. The use of ChatGPT or similar AI tools for work submitted in this course constitutes the receiving of “unauthorized assistance for academic work” and is a violation of the Hofstra University Honor Code. For more information click here or go to https://www.hofstra.edu/provost/course-syllabi-information.html

Hofstra University Honor Code: “As a member of the Hofstra community I pledge to demonstrate integrity and ethical behavior in all aspects of my life, both inside and out of the classroom. I understand that I am accountable for everything I say and write. I will not misrepresent my academic work, nor will I give or receive unauthorized assistance for academic work. I agree to respect the rights of all members of the Hofstra community. I will be guided by the values expressed in the P.R.I.D.E Values. I accept the responsibility to follow this Honor Code at all times.”

Turnitin for Textual Similarity Review: “Students agree that by taking this course all required papers may be subject to submission for textual similarity review to  Turnitin.com for the detection of plagiarism. All submitted papers will be included as source documents in the  Turnitin.com reference database solely for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of such papers. Use of the  Turnitin.com service is subject to the Usage Policy stated in the  Turnitin.com site.”

Academic Dishonesty: Plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty are serious ethical and professional infractions. Hofstra University places high value upon educating students about academic honesty. At the same time, the University will not tolerate dishonesty, and it will not offer the privileges of the community to the repeat offender.

The academic community assumes that work of any kind--whether a research paper, a critical essay, a homework assignment, a test or quiz, a computer program, or a creative assignment in any medium--is done, entirely and without unauthorized assistance, by the individual(s) whose name(s) it bears. If joint projects are assigned, then the work is expected to be wholly the work of those whose names it bears. If the work contains facts, ideas, opinions, discoveries, words, statistics, illustrations, or other elements in any media form (including electronic) that are beyond the assumption of being common knowledge, these must be fully and appropriately acknowledged, following a prescribed format for doing so. They may be acknowledged through footnotes, endnotes, citations, or whatever other means of accreditation is acceptable according to the format prescribed in that particular field of study.

Students bear the ultimate responsibility for implementing the principles of academic honesty. Students must understand that it is not enough to identify the source of quoted material; it is also necessary to indicate when one is paraphrasing (restating in other words) material found in a source. Thus, the use of other's ideas as well as their words needs to be acknowledged. Any violation of these principles constitutes academic dishonesty. Indeed, it is important for students to avoid even the appearance of dishonesty. A list of violations is available through the office of the provost and student conduct handbook.

Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Assault, Dating & Domestic Violence, and Stalking: Hofstra prohibits sexual and other discriminatory harassment, stalking, domestic and dating violence, and sexual assault (collectively, “Gender-Based Offenses”). Students who believe they have been subjected to any of these Gender-Based Offenses should refer to Hofstra’s  Nondiscrimination Policy for information about applicable policies and how to submit reports. Students may contact the Title IX Coordinator for Student Issues at 516-463-5841 or  [email protected] or contact Public Safety at 516-463-6606, or, for concerns involving employees or other nonstudents, the Title IX Coordinator for Employee Issues, at 516-463-6859 or  [email protected]. Confidential resources and support are also available from medical professionals at Student Health Services, at 516-463-6745 or  [email protected] and counseling professionals in Student Counseling Services at 516-463-CARE (2273), as well as, clergy at the Interfaith Center.

University Deadlines: See Academic Calendar webpage at https://www.hofstra.edu/academic-records/#calendar; https://www.hofstra.edu/academic-records/spring-2024-calendar.html

Absences for Religious Observance

Hofstra University recognizes that students and/or faculty may from time to time miss class due to religious observances. Students who anticipate missing class for this reason should notify faculty members in advance. “The University, faculty, and student shall work together to achieve a reasonable accommodation concerning any conflicts between educational and religious obligations.” Each student who is absent from school because of his or her religious beliefs will be given an equivalent opportunity to register for classes or make up any examination, study, or work requirements missed due to absence.

Additional information about Class Attendance, Academic Integrity including Prohibition on Use of AI Tools, the Honor Code and Violation Procedures; Disability Accommodations; Resources for Students who are Pregnant; Temporary Adjustments/Academic Leave of Absence; Absences for Religious Observance; University Deadlines and Grade Policy; and more is available: https://www.hofstra.edu/provost/course-syllabi-information.html

ATTENDANCE POLICY

This course will include lecture and small group work, some of which will be graded. Students will be expected to attend each class session and actively participate. If you are unable to attend class, please contact the instructor prior to class, by email. Missing more than one class may affect your class grade; in a course that meets once a week for one semester you may only miss two classes. That IS NOT suggesting that two absences are allowed, but rather reflects that in reality there are times, for whatever reason (illness, flat tire, etc.), that one cannot attend class. However, after two absences, each one may result in lowering a grade by half a grade level (e.g., B to B-). More than four absences may result in a failing grade.

BASIC NEEDS

Your safety and wellbeing are more important than anything going on in class. Any student who faces challenges securing food, housing, and/or personal safety is urged to contact the Dean of Students office for support. Please let me know if you need to talk or would like my help.

WEB CAMERAS

Web cameras are expected to be on during a virtual class except for a bio break or if approved in advance.

· Upload all assignment to Canvas by 11:59PM on due date, unless otherwise specified

Assignments

MPH GRADING SCALE
94-100	90-93	85-89	79-84	76-78	73-75	70-72	<70
A	A-	B+	B	B-	C+	C	F

· All written work submitted will be: double spaced, 1” margins, 12-point Times New Roman, Arial or Calibri font, bibliographic references and citations in APA format. See http://www.uwp.edu/departments/library/guides/apa.htm ; http://www.apastyle.org/

Assignment	Description	Due	% of Grade
1	Needs Assessment Summary Report & Topic	Individual work: Develop a 2-page double-spaced needs assessment summary and provide a topic area for their program plan based on current Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA) reports, Key Stakeholder interviews.	Session 3: 2/12/24	10
2	Key Stakeholder Interview Report	Individual work: Develop an action plan including which stakeholders to interview. After interviews are conducted, prepare a 4-page double-space report summarizing the results of each semi-structured interview with one or more stakeholder and discusses how this informs your proposed plan.	Session 4: 2/19/24	10
3	Logic Model	Individual work: Develop a 1-page logic model using a sample template. Consider inputs and outputs needed for both planning and implementation.	Session 5: 2/26/24	10
4	Implementation Plan with Timeline	Individual work: Using provided template, identify and set out a time line for the project plan. Identify a lead, as well as key stakeholders. Align with Logic Model (modify logic model as needed).	Session 6: 3/4/24	10
5	Program Budget, and Budget Justification	Individual work: Using provided template, identify key leadership, staffing and supplies / materials needed for your project. Assess assets and resources available for in-kind contributions.	Session 7: 3/11/24	10
6	Program Plan Presentation / Peer Review*	Individual Work: Develop a 10-minute presentation describing all sections of the final program plan. Prepare the presentation slide set for key STAKEHOLDERS. Provide feedback to Peers using rating tool provided during class time.	Session 8: 3/25/24	10
7	Program Plan	Individual Work: See guidelines below	Session 9: 4/1/24	20
8	Evaluation Plan	Group Work: Teams of 2-4 students review assigned project plan and develop an evaluation plan for a collaborative project between Hofstra and the local community from selected project plans.	Finals week: 5/13/24 6:00p	20

Assignment 6: Program Plan Presentation/Peer Review:

Note: Upload presentation slide set to Canvas before class starts; presentations will take place during class time. Develop a 10-minute presentation describing all sections outlined above of the final program and evaluation plan. Please prepare the slide set presentation as if you are presenting the plan to your STAKEHOLDERS (see Presentation Rubric below).

Program Plan Presentation:

Please make sure to include a meeting agenda in your presentation. That can be the first slide of your presentation or you can print a hard copy. In the meeting, you also want to obtain a clear understanding of stakeholder interests, perceptions, and concerns related to your program and evaluation. The following questions can help you do that.

Select a couple of these questions to ask the stakeholders at the end of your presentation :

· What do stakeholders perceive as the purpose of your program? What do they think about your program?

· What concerns, if any, do they have about the program?

· What have they heard about the proposed program evaluation?

· What areas do stakeholders think are important to address first in the evaluation?

· What do they hope to learn from the evaluation?

· What concerns, if any, do they have with the program evaluation?

· How available are they to participate in the evaluation process?

· What are the political implications of specific stakeholders’ involvement?

· What are the program expectations of stakeholders’ involvement in the evaluation?

· How can you meet stakeholders’ evaluation and communication needs?

· What are the ethical guidelines: institutional or organizational rules or norms that guide evaluation practice, especially regarding vulnerable populations.

WHY IS STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IMPORTANT? When you involve stakeholders from the beginning of the evaluation process, you are more likely to:

• Reduce stakeholders’ distrust and fear of evaluation.

• Increase stakeholders’ awareness of and commitment to the evaluation process.

• Increase the chances that stakeholders will support your evaluation efforts, advocate for your program, and adhere to subsequent recommendations.

• Increase the chances that the evaluation findings will be used.

• Increase the credibility of your evaluation findings. If you do not engage stakeholders, your evaluation runs the risk of missing important elements of the program. In that case, evaluation findings might be ignored, criticized, or resisted because your evaluation did not consider stakeholder concerns or priorities.

Peer Review: You will be asked to provide ANONYMOUS feedback through an online polling tool for each presenter in consideration of the criteria in the Grading Rubric for Presentations / Feedback. This will provide you with the skills needed to conduct peer review as well as help you hone your own presentation skills.

Grading Rubric for Assignment #6: Program Plan Presentation / Peer Review
	Exceptional (9-10)	Acceptable (7-8)	Marginal (6-5)	Unacceptable (0-4)
Presentation
Content	Speaker provides an accurate and complete overview of the practicum experience and relates the public health competencies to the work completed at the practice site.	Provides an overview of the practicum experience relating some of the public health competencies to the work completed at the practice site.	Provides an overview of the practicum experience but does not relate the public health competencies to the work completed at the practice site.	Inadequate description of the practice site experience with no effort to relate the public health competencies to the work completed at the practice site.
Organization	Presentation is clear, logical, and organized. Listener can follow line of reasoning.	Presentation is generally clear and well organized. A few minor points may be confusing.	Listener can follow presentation only with effort. Some arguments are not clear. Not well organized.	Listener unable to follow presentation. Arguments are not clear. No evidence of organization in presentation.
Level of Presentation	Level of presentation is appropriate for the audience. Presentation is paced for audience understanding. It is not a reading of a paper. Speaker is comfortable in front of the group and can be heard by all.	Level of presentation is generally appropriate. Pacing is sometimes too fast or too slow. The presenter seems slightly uncomfortable at times, occasionally hard to hear.	Aspects of presentation are too elementary or too sophisticated for audience. Much of the information is read. Presenter seems uncomfortable and is hard to hear.	Presentation is entirely too elementary or too sophisticated for audience. Presentation read with limited or no eye contact with the audience. Presenter is clearly uncomfortable / cannot be heard.
Peer Review
Feedback	Reviewer provides substantive, actionable, measurable feedback Reviewer offers substantive comments on all three criteria: 1-content, 2-organization, and 3-level of presentation	Reviewer provides generally clear feedback. Reviewer does not offer substantive comments on all three criteria	Reviewer provides some useful feedback. Reviewer offers some useful comments for at least one area (content, organization and level)	Reviewer provides limited useful feedback. Review does not consider any of the criteria above (content, organization and level)

ASSIGNMENTS #7 & #8 Grading: Each plan component will be graded from 0-5 (0= missing, 1= Incomplete, 2= Developing, 3= Acceptable, 4= Well Done, 5= Exceptional). In addition, grammar, spelling, overall readability and general appearance/formatting will each be assessed on the same scale. Thus, there are 12 line-items graded 0-5 (Total available points= 60; 20% of grade).

Some links to reference materials follow and other background materials may be posted to Canvas; however, students are responsible for doing a thorough topic-specific review of the literature in consideration of emerging best practices.

ASSIGNMENT #8: EVALUATION PLAN [Max score = 60; 20% of Grade]

Your GROUP EVALUATION PLAN should be about 16 double-spaced pages (acceptable range is 12-20); excluding cover page, bibliography, and appendices. The FINAL PROGRAM PLAN should follow the below outline and clearly label the following sections:

Each team member will contribute to all components including:

Section 1: Planned Approach (max score = 15 points)

a. Logic model

b. Implementation plan with timeline

c. Budget with Narrative Justification

Section 2: Selected evaluation methods (max score = 15 points)

a. process measures, benefits and limitations

b. outcome measures, benefits and limitations

c. Planned approach including strategy to mitigate limitations of planned measure (5 pages

Section 3: Program Participants Protections (max score = 15 points)

a. Safety, medical concerns and determination of status as a protected class; (1 page)

b. Informed consent and Confidentiality

c. Involvement of participant stakeholders

Section 4: Rationale for Evaluation (max score = 15 points)

a. Potential impact to the field

b. Contribution to emerging best practices.

c. Appendices (minimum: data collection instruments; Draft letter to Institutional Review Board)

ASSIGNMENT #7: Final Program Plan [Max score = 60; 20% of Grade]

Your FINAL PROGRAM PLAN should be about 16 double-spaced pages (acceptable range is 12-20); excluding cover page, bibliography, and appendices). The FINAL PROGRAM PLAN should follow the below outline and clearly label the following sections:

Section 1: Introduction (max. score = 20 points)

a. Background of public health issue

b. Epidemiology

c. Best practices

d. Summary of literature

Section 2: Program Plan (max score = 15 points)

a. Program description (including application of evidence-informed model, one health behavior theory as part of program and 3-5 SMART objectives)

b. Table of Organization (with brief descriptions)

c. Stakeholder Involvement (including identification of specific primary and secondary stakeholders; their involvement, and brief summaries of the individual interviews, including interviewer, and how stakeholder engagement contributed to the plan)

Section 3: Implementation Plan (max score = 15 points)

a. Logic model

b. 1-year budget with justification

c. 1-year Gantt chart timeline

Section 4: Other (max score = 10 points)

d. Bibliography (at least 15 citations)

e. Appendices (minimum: key stakeholder questionnaire and member contributions)

McKenzie JF, Neiger BL, Thackeray M. (2023). Planning, Implementing, and Evaluating: Health Promotion Programs, Eighth Edition. ISBN: 978-1-284-22864-9

Suggested readings

Required Text

See additional resources below as well as articles and reports available on Canvas.

Course Outline (subject to change)

Date	Topic	Readings/Assignments
Session 1: 1/29/24	Introduction to Public Health Education, Health Promotion and Program Planning	During Session 1: Review Syllabus and select Community Health Needs Assessments Before Session 2: Read Chapters 1 and 2 Review: Tool for Stakeholder Analysis https://tools4dev.org/resources/stakeholder-analysis-matrix-template/
Session 2: 2/5/24	Initiating the Public Health Program Planning Process	Due: Topic for Program Plan based on needs assessed Review: National Standards for Cultural and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS): https://thinkculturalhealth.hhs.gov/assets/pdfs/EnhancedNationalCLASStandards.pdf Review: View Cultural Responsiveness video Read: Chapters 3 and 4
Session 3: 2/12/24	Program Planning Models & Cultural Considerations in Program Design	Due: Assignment 1: Needs Assessment Summary Report & Topic Read: Chapters 5 and 6 Optional: View Target HIV webinar: The Road to Dissemination (Session 1) Reminders: No class 2/19; Office hours 2/13/24
Session 4: 2/26/24	Measuring & Sampling Mission Statement, Goals & Objectives	Due: Assignment 2: Stakeholder Interview Report by 6p Read: Chapters 7 & 8 Read: Kellogg Logic Model Development: https://ag.purdue.edu/extension/pdehs/Documents/Pub3669.pdf Optional: View Target HIV webinar: The Road to Dissemination (Session 2)
Session 5: 3/4/24	Health Promotion Model Interventions Marketing & Communication Program Implementation and Tracking	Due: Assignment 3: Logic Model Review: Implementation Plan template Read: Chapters 9 & 10 Optional: View Target HIV webinar: The Road to Dissemination (Session 3)
Session 6: 3/11/24	Budgets, Budget Justification, and Timelines	Due: Assignment 4: Implementation Plan with Timeline Read: Chapter 11 Review: Budget Worksheet Reminder: Office hours 3/5 & 3/12
Session 7: 3/25/24	Health Promotion Community Organizing & Building Collaboratives	Due: Assignment 5: Program Budget and Budget Justification Reminders: No class 3/18; Office hours 3/12; Virtual Program Presentations 3/25/24 Optional: View Target HIV webinar: The Road to Dissemination (Session 4) Read: Chapter 12
Session 8: 4/1/24	Presentation and Peer Review Skill Development	Due: Assignment 6: Program Plan Presentation/ Peer Review Select: Program Plans to use for Evaluation Plan Read: Chapter 13
*Session 9: 4/8/24	Implementation & Program Management	Due: Assignment 7: Program Plan Discuss: Team building and skill assessments Due: Small group team roster Read: Chapter 14
Session 10: 4/15/24	Evaluation Approaches & Designs Process & Outcome Evaluations; Mixed Methods	Small group: Break-out sessions to review selected Program Plan, discuss Evaluation Plan, and assign individual tasks. Read: Chapter 15
Session 11: 4/22/24	Data Analysis & Reporting	Small group: Status of Workplan for completing presentation slides and Program Plan / Evaluation
Session 12: 4/29/24	Indicators and Other Measurement Considerations	Required team meeting Share: Validated Tools; Draft presentation outline and slide presentation template options
*Session 13: 5/6/24	Team Evaluation Presentations	Due: Presentation of Evaluation Plan
Session 14: 5/13/24	Course Wrap-up	Due: Assignment 8: Evaluation Plan May 13, 2024 6:00pm

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Health Behavior Theory

Gebhardt WA, Maes S. Integrating social-psychological frameworks for health behavior research  

Am J Health Behav . 2001 Nov-Dec;25(6):528-36.  doi: 10.5993/ajhb.25.6.2.

Rejeski WJ, Fanning J. Models and theories of health behavior and clinical interventions in aging: a contemporary, integrative approach. Clin Interv Aging. 2019 May 30;14:1007-1019. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S206974. PMID: 31213787; PMCID: PMC6549388

Program Planning

Betancourt, JR, Green, AR, Carillo, JE. & Ananeh-Firempong, O. (2003) defining cultural competence: A practical framework for addressing racial/ethnic disparities in health and health care. Public Health Reports, 118, 293-302.

Crosby R, Noar SM. What is a planning model? An introduction to PRECEDE-PROCEED. 2011. Journal of Public Health Dentistry. 71(S):7-15.

Linnan LA, Sterba KR, Lee AM, Bontempi JB, Yang J, and Crump C. Planning and the professional preparation of health educators: implications for teaching, research, and practice. Health Promo Prac. 05;6(3):308-19.

Edwards, R. W., Jumper-Thurman. P., Plested, B. A., Oetting, E. R., & Swanson, L. (2000). Community readiness: Research to practice. Journal of Community Psychology, 28(3), 291-307.

Oswald, A.J., Wu, S. Objective Confirmation of Subjective Measures of Human Well-Being: Evidence from the United States. (2010) Science, 327:376-379.

Trifiletti, L.C., Gielen, A.C., Sleet, D.A., & Hopkins, K.A. (2005). Behavioral and social sciences theories and models: Are they used in unintentional injury research? Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 20(3), 293-307.

Community Guide to Preventive Resources: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html

Principles of Community Engagement: http://www.cdc.gov/phppo/pce/

Promoting Health: Intervention strategies from social and behavioral research: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=9939#toc

Theory at a Glance: http://www.cancer.gov/PDF/481f5d53-63df-41bc-bfaf-5aa48ee1da4d/TAAG3.pdfogg

Community Tool Box https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents

Lists 46 Chapters through which you can obtain practical, step-by-step guidance in community-building skills. See also Toolkits, which offer short outlines for key tasks.

Implementation Science:

Theories, Models & Frameworks, Implementation Science at UW https://impsciuw.org/implementation-science/research/frameworks/#:~:text=Per%20Nilsen's%20schema%20sorts%20implementation,%2C%20and%205)%20evaluation%20frameworks.

Alexis Marbach, MPH, presents Applying Implementation Science to a Multi-Intervention, Multi-Site Study Linking and Retaining People Living with HIV in Care https://www.abtassociates.com/arm2020

Cultural Considerations:

Blackstock, U. (2024). Legacy: A Black Physician Reckons with Racism in Medicine. India: Penguin Publishing Group.

Duke School of Nursing: A Conversation on DEI: Dean Vincent Guilamo-Ramos and Dr. Ernest Grant, 2023 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDRYYAhJ0yU

Camara Jones, Allegories on Racism https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/practice/resources/equitylibrary/jones-allegories.html

Levison JH, Levinson JK, Alegría M. A Critical Review and Commentary on the Challenges in Engaging HIV-Infected Latinos in the Continuum of HIV Care. AIDS Behav. 2018 Aug;22(8):2500-2512. doi: 10.1007/s10461-018-2187-1. PMID: 29948334; PMCID: PMC6085100.

Funding Opportunities to Support planning and assessment activities: https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/opportunities/o-ojjdp-2023-171851?utm_campaign=fundingnewsandresources&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/opportunities/o-ojjdp-2023-171851

Program Planning, Implementation, Evaluation & Dissemination (4-part webinar series) including sample implementation plan and logic model from Hofstra student.

https://targethiv.org/news/road-dissemination-has-been-paved

Program Evaluation:

Advocacy Evaluation Project (provides many resources for conducting evaluations) http://www.innonet.org/index.php?section_id=101&content_id=397

Baldwin,K., Marvin,C., M. Rodine, M.K. (1998). The Development of a Comprehensive Interdisciplinary HIV/AIDS Center: A Community Needs Assessment. Journal of Public Health Management & Practice, 4(4), 87-96.

Baranowski, T. et al. (2000). Gimme 5 Fruit and Vegetables for Fun and Health: Outcome Evaluation. Health Education & Behavior, 27(1), 96-111.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Framework for program evaluation in

public health. MMWR 1999;48(No. RR-11)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/eval/guide/step1/

Community Tool Box https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents

This page lists 46 Chapters through which you can obtain practical, step-by-step guidance in community-building skills. See also Toolkits, which offer short outlines for key tasks.

Davis, M. et al. (2000). Gimme 5 Fruit and Vegetables for Fun and Health:

Process Evaluation. Health Education & Behavior, 27(2), 167-176.

Earp, A. and Ennett, S.T. (1991). Conceptual models for health education research and practice. Health Educ Res; 6:163-171

Thurston, W., Graham,J., Hatfield, J. (2003). Evaluability Assessment: A Catalyst for Program Change and Improvement. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 26(2), 206-221.

Evaluation Plan Workbook http://www.innonet.org/client_docs/File/evaluation_plan_workbook.pdf

Introduction to program evaluation for public health programs: A self-study guide. CDC framework and template: http://www.cdc.gov/eval/framework.htm#formats;

https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:US:a51f4e1c-cc32-4b7b-b141-12cd3ceac12a

University of Kentucky Tool Kit

https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/evaluate/evaluation/evaluation-plan/main

Evaluation Plan Sample https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/The%20Final%20Report%20from%20the%20Evaluation%20ES.pdf

Evaluation Plan Templates

National Rural Health Center resources

https://www.ruralcenter.org/sites/default/files/Project%20Evaluation%20Plan%20Template.pdf

Community Health Needs Assessments (CHNA):

https://www.lihealthcollab.org/filesimages/Healthy%20Resources/Nassau%20County%20DOH%20CHA_CHIP%202019-2021.pdf

https://nyulangone.org/files/hempstead-community-needs.pdf

https://www.northwell.edu/sites/northwell.edu/files/2023-03/nassau-county-CHNA-report-2022-2024.pdf

https://www.nassaucountyny.gov/1652/Health-Department

https://www.lihealthcollab.org/member-resources/data-resources

https://data.cdc.gov/browse?tags=zip+code [compare 11550 and 11530]

https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/publications/health_equity/index.html

https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/strategies2016/index.html

The Road to Dissemination – Documenting the Journey from Planned Approach to Intervention Implementation

- a Target HIV IHIP webinar series from the HRSA HAB Ryan White Special Projects of National Significance (SPNS) program. Join HRSA, the SPNS Integrating HIV Innovative Practices (IHIP) team and ACOJA Consulting for this four-part webinar series.

Start your journey and learn how to better document and disseminate your HIV interventions.

Session 1 - Why this Destination? Getting Travelers and Stakeholders Onboard

Initial steps to the documentation and dissemination of an agency's HIV interventions:

· Where we’re going with an overview of the journey.

· Identifying your team (travelers) and collaborators (key stakeholders).

· Working together to learn the different modes of travel (learning and communication styles).

https://targethiv.org/library/road-dissemination-session-1-why-destination-getting-travelers-and- stakeholders-onboard

Session 2 - Starting the Journey: Mapping a Route to your Planned Destination

Steps to the documentation and dissemination of an agency's HIV interventions:

· Planning tools and tips.

· Mapping your route: Planning before you go, with key considerations for documenting each stop.

https://targethiv.org/library/road-dissemination-session-2-starting-journey-mapping-route-your- planned-destination

Session 3 - Detours: The Only Certainty is Change

Change happens!

· Documenting change and adapting your approach.

· Planned vs. actual scenarios of change (real or imagined).

https://targethiv.org/library/road-dissemination-session-3-detours-only-certainty-change

Session 4 - You’ve arrived! Creating your Travel Log

Are you ready to take the first step towards successful intervention documentation and dissemination? Look no further.

· Reflect together on highlights, lessons learned, and final observations.

· Feedback, feedback, feedback! Engaging the group for tips and tools.

https://targethiv.org/ calendar /road-dissemination-session-4-youve-arrived-creating-your-travel-log

1