Project Milestone Three: Program Analysis and Project Milestone Four: Recommendations

PHE 525 Milestone Four Guidelines and Rubric As a public health practitioner, you may be asked to recommend new or different approaches to address a public health issue. The first step is to determine what is currently being done to address the issue. The second step is to evaluate the existing programs to identify gaps. The last step is to make recommendations. These recommendations can be improvements to existing programs, or you may recommend implementing a new program. Prompt: Submit a short paper with your recommendations for the public health program you have selected for the final project. Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

 Be sure to specifically recommend improvements that should be made to the current program.

 Clearly outline and explain other social and behavioral theoretical approaches that may be used to engage the community.

 Substantiate your claims with evidence from the program and peer-reviewed literature. Would you suggest a new program or simply a new program approach? If so, briefly explain what that program would look like and how it would be an improvement to the current program.

Guidelines for Submission: The paper must be 2–3 pages in length. It should be double-spaced and formatted with 12-point Times New Roman font and one- inch margins. All sources must be cited in APA format. Instructor Feedback: This activity uses an integrated rubric in Blackboard. Students can view instructor feedback in the Grade Center. For more information, review these instructions.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value Recommendations Meets “Proficient” criteria and

uses real-world examples to further support recommendations

Recommends improvements that should be made to the program and substantiates answer with relevant and appropriate evidence from the program and peer-reviewed literature

Identifies improvements that should be made to the program but evidence from the program and peer-reviewed literature to substantiate recommendations used lacks relevance

Does not recommend improvements that should be made to the program

35

Theoretical Approaches

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses specific examples from the literature to further demonstrate the merit of these theoretical approaches for community engagement

Clearly and succinctly outlines and explains other social and behavioral theoretical approaches that may be used to engage the community and substantiates claims with evidence from the program and peer-reviewed literature

Outlines and explains other social and behavioral theoretical approaches but fails to use evidence from the program and peer-reviewed literature to substantiate claims and response lacks clarity and succinctness

Does not outline or explain other social and behavioral theoretical approaches that may be used to engage the community

35

New Program/Approach

Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides data that substantiates the credibility of the recommended program

Suggests a new program or program approach and clearly explains the merits of the new program or approach over the old program

Suggests a new program but explanation of the program is vague and does not explain how the new program would be an improvement

Does not suggest a new program

20

Articulation of Response

(APA/Mechanics)

Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to- read format

Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization

Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas

Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas

10

Total 100%