| Course Title: | Public Health Program Planning and Evaluation |
|---|---|
| Course Number: | MPH507 |
| Credit Hours: | 3 credits |
| Course Pre-requisites: | MPH500, MPH501, MPH502, MPH505, MPH509, MPH506, MPH503, MPH504 |
| Course Description: |
In this course, students consider methods for identifying population-based needs as a foundation for program planning and evaluation. Topics include public health intervention, needs-based program development, and program marketing and evaluation. Students consider emerging priorities in health promotion programs, including disabilities, workplace issues, equity, and counter marketing. They also explore leadership competencies needed for developing successful health promotion programs and apply methods for evaluating public health program effectiveness. |
Syllabus
Course Information
Fieldwork Compliance Requirements
Chamberlain does not have specific practicum field compliance requirements for MPH students. Meeting student compliance requirements will only be necessary when the student’s fieldwork facility requires it. Students who do not complete the facility-specific requirements prior to the start of the course will not be registered or will be withdrawn from the course. Students should direct any questions to MPHFieldSupport@chamberlain.edu.
Textbooks and Resources
Required Textbooks
The following books are required for this course:
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Access E-Book
Guttmacher, S., Kelly, P. J., & Ruiz-Janecko, Y. (2010). Community-Based Health Interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Access E-Book
Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical, systematic approach for community health (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Optional Resources
The following resources are available for this course:
Physical Books and Supplies
To obtain all your books and supplies, visit the online Chamberlain bookstore at https://bookstore.chamberlain.edu/.
eBook Details
First Time Using VitalSource?
Step 1: View the VitalSource Video
Step 2: Register with VitalSource Bookshelf Online
- Click the cover or title of your eBook. A new window will open.
- Enter email address and password. Bookshelf Online will open.
Step 3: Access the Desktop and Mobile Versions
You must complete Step 2 prior to using the desktop or mobile versions.
Already Registered? 3 Ways to Access Your eBooks
Online
Access your eBook by clicking on the book cover or title in the syllabus page. Bookshelf Online will open.
Desktop
Download your eBooks and use them whether you're connected to the Internet or not.
Mobile
Download the app and get your eBooks on your iPhone, iPad, or Android device.
Program Outcomes
The MPH program outcomes are aligned with the Council for Education of Public Health (CEPH) accreditation criteria (2011) and the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health (ASPPH) publication, a Master of Public Health Degree for the 21st Century (2014).
At the completion of the Chamberlain MPH program, the graduate will be able to
1
Articulate the history and philosophy of the professional discipline of public health relative to its core values, concepts, functions, and leadership roles.
2
Utilize quantitative methods and epidemiologic tools to assess, monitor, and review the health status of populations and their related determinants of health and illness.
3
Apply evidence-based reasoning and health informatics approaches to the process of program planning, development, budgeting, management, and evaluation in public health organizations and public health interventions to improve community health outcomes.
4
Specify approaches for assessing, preventing, and controlling environmental hazards that pose risks to human health and safety.
5
Apply theoretical constructs of social change, health behavior, and social justice in planning public health interventions.
6
Develop public health programs and strategies responsive to the diverse cultural values and traditions of the communities being served.
7
Practice systems thinking techniques and problem solving to understand and respond to the dynamic interactions among sectors, organizations and public health professionals in improving public health.
8
Demonstrate leadership abilities as effective collaborators and coordinators within and across organizations and as members of interdisciplinary and interprofessional teams.
9
Communicate public health messages to a variety of audiences using targeted written, mass media and electronic communication, and social marketing.
10
Apply the ethical, legal, economic, political, and regulatory dimensions of healthcare and public health policy to developing, evaluating, and advocating for public health policies.
Course Outcomes
Chamberlain courses are built to align course content with specific competency-focused Course Outcomes (COs). The COs define the learning objectives that the student will be required to comprehend and demonstrate competency by course completion. The COs that will be covered in detail for each module can be found in the overview page in that particular module. Whenever possible, a reference will be made from a particular activity or assessment back to the CO that it emphasizes.
Upon completion of this course, the student will be able to demonstrate the following.
1
Apply methodologies to create strategic and cost-effective public health programs. (POs 2 and 3)
2
Identify the challenges of implementing a successful public health program. (PO 7)
3
Use methodology to overcome barriers in the implementation of a public health program. (POs 1 and 6)
4
Evaluate the effectiveness of public health programs. (PO 7)
5
Examine prevention and the use of partnerships. (POs 1 and 2)
Learning Guide
Module Topic & Outcomes | Readings | Learning Activities |
|---|---|---|
Module 1 Introduction to Program Planning and Evaluation CO 3 | Module 1 Lesson: Introduction to Program Planning and Evaluation Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical, systematic approach for community health (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Guttmacher, S., Kelly, P. J., & Ruiz-Janecko, Y. (2010). Community-based health interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
| Learning Resources:
Graded Discussion |
Module 2 Planning Models for Health Programs COs 1 and 5 | Module 2 Lesson: Planning Models for Health Programs Guttmacher, S., Kelly, P. J., & Ruiz-Janecko, Y. (2010). Community-based health interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical, systematic approach for community health (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Lenihan, P. (2005). MAPP and the evolution of planning in public health practice. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 11(5), 381–388. | Learning Resources:
Graded Discussions |
Module 3 The PRECEDE-PROCEED Model CO 1 | Module 3 Lesson: The PRECEDE-PROCEED Model No textbook readings. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. (2005). Theory at a glance: A guide for health promotion practice. (2nd ed.). (NIH Publication No. 05-3896). Retrieved from http://www.sbccimplementationkits.org/ demandrmnch /wp-content/uploads/2014/02/ Theory-at-a-Glance-A-Guide-For-Health-Promotion-Practice .pdf Wright, A., McGorry, P. D., Harris, M. G., Jorm, A. F., & Pennell, K. (2006, August). Development and evaluation of a youth mental health community awareness campaign—The Compass Strategy. BMC Public Health, 6, 215. | Learning Resources:
Graded Assessment: |
Module 4 Assessments for Program Planning COs 1, 2, and 5 | Module 4 Lesson: Assessments for Program Planning Guttmacher, S., Kelly, P. J., & Ruiz-Janecko, Y. (2010). Community-based health interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical, systematic approach for community health (3rd ed.) . Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
| Graded Discussion |
Module 5 Defining Program Goals and Objectives CO 1 | Module 5 Lesson: Defining Program Goals and Objectives Guttmacher, S., Kelly, P. J., & Ruiz-Janecko, Y. (2010). Community-based health interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical, systematic approach for community health (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
| Learning Resources:
Graded Discussion |
Module 6 Logic Models COs 1 and 3 | Module 6 Lesson: Logic Models Florin, P., Celebucki, C., Stevenson, X., Mena, X., Salago, D., White, A.,...Dougal, M . (2006). Cultivating systemic capacity: The Rhode Island tobacco control enhancement project. American Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 213–220. Fluhr, J. D., Oman, R. F., Allen, J. R., Lanphier, M. G., & McLeroy, K. R. (2004). A collaborative approach to program evaluation of community based teen pregnancy prevention projects. Health Promotion Practice, 5, 127–137. Guttmacher, S., Kelly, P. J., & Ruiz-Janecko, Y. (2010). Community-based health interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical, systematic approach for community health (3rd ed.) . Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Nesman, T. M., Batsche, C., & Hernandez, M. (2007). Theory-based evaluation of a comprehensive Latino education initiative: An interactive evaluation approach. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30, 267–281. Renger, R., & Hurley, C. (2006). From theory to practice: Lessons learned in the application of ATM approach to developing logic models. Evaluation and Program Planning 29, 109–116. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). Physical activity evaluation handbook. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ nccdphp /dnpa/physical/handbook/ pdf /handbook/pdf UK. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Logic model development guide. Retrieved from http://www.wkkf.org/ resource-directory /resource/2006/02/wk-kellogg-foundation-logic-model-development-guide | Graded Assessment: Creating a Logic Model Paper |
Module 7 Program Evaluation and Budget COs 1 and 4 | Module 7 Lesson: Program Evaluation and Budget Cunningham, L. E., Michielutte, R., Dignan, M., Sharp, P., & Boxley, J. (2000). The value of process evaluation in a community-based cancer control program. Evaluation and Program Planning, 23, 13–25. Doniger, A. S., Adams, E., Utter, C. A., & Riley, J. S. (2001). Impact evaluation of the "not me, not now" abstinence-oriented, adolescent pregnancy prevention communications program, Monroe County, New York. Journal of Health Communication, 6, 45–60. Guttmacher, S., Kelly, P. J., & Ruiz-Janecko, Y. (2010). Community-based health interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical, systematic approach for community health (3 rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Spoth, G., Randall, K., Trudeau, L., Shin, C., & Redmond, C. (2008). Substance use outcomes 5½ years past baseline for partnership-based, family-school preventive interventions. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 96, 57–68. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). Physical activity evaluation handbook. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ nccdphp /dnpa/physical/handbook/ pdf /handbook.pdf | Graded Assessment: |
Module 8 Dissemination and Sustainability CO 1 | Module 8 Lesson: Dissemination and Sustainability Guttmacher, S., Kelly, P. J., & Ruiz-Janecko, Y. (2010). Community-based health interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical, systematic approach for community health (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Nelson, D. E., Reynolds, J. H., Luke, D. A., Mueller, N. B., Eischen, M. H., Jordan, J.,...Vallone, D . (2007). Successfully maintaining program funding during trying times: Lessons from tobacco control programs in five states. J Public Health Management Practice, 13, 612–620. Robinson, K. L., Dreidger, M. S., Elliott, S. J., & Eyles, J. (2006). Understanding facilitators of and barriers to health promotion practice. Health Promotion Practice, 7(4), 467–476. Sadof, M. D., Boschert, K. A., Brandt, S. J., & Motyl, A. P. (2006). An analysis of predictors of sustainability efforts at the inner-city asthma intervention sites: After the funding is gone. Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, 97, 31–35. Scheirer, M. (2005). Is sustainability possible? A review and commentary on empirical studies of program sustainability. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(3), 320–347. Scheirer, M. A., Hartling, G., & Hagerman, D. (2008). Defining sustainability outcomes of health programs: Illustrations from an on-line survey. Evaluation and Program Planning, 31, 335–346. Shediac-Rizkallah, M. C., & Lee, R. B. (1998). Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: Conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice, and policy. Health Education Research, 13, 87–108. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). Physical activity evaluation handbook. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ nccdphp /dnpa/physical/handbook/ pdf /handbook.pdf | Graded Discussion |
Evaluation Methods
The maximum score in this class is 1,000 points. The categories, which contribute to your final grade, are weighted as follows.
| Learning Activities & Assessments | Points | Weighting |
|---|---|---|
| Graded Discussions (Modules 1, 4, 5, and 8 have one graded discussion; Module 2 has two graded discussions) | 90 | 9% |
| Applying the PRECEDE Portion of the PRECEDE-PROCEED Model Paper (Module 3) | 200 | 20% |
| Logic Model Paper (Module 6) | 210 | 21% |
| Grant Proposal (Module 7) | 500 | 50% |
| Total Points | 1,000 | 100% |
No extra credit assignments are permitted for any reason.
The course grade is determined by transferring the total number of points possible in the course to a percentage grade. There is no rounding of grades. Percentages of 0.5% or higher are not raised to the next whole number.
All of your course requirements are graded using points. At the end of the course, the points are converted to a letter grade using the scale in the table below.
| Letter Grade | Points | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| A | 930–1,000 | 93% to 100% |
| A- | 900–929 | 90% to 92.9% |
| B+ | 870–899 | 87% to 89.9% |
| B | 830–869 | 83% to 86.9% |
| B- | 800–829 | 80% to 82.9% |
| C+ | 770–799 | 77% to 79.9% |
| C | 730–769 | 73% to 76.9% |
| C- | 700–729 | 70% to 72.9% |
| D+ | 670–699 | 67% to 69.9% |
| D | 630–669 | 63% to 66.9% |
| D- | 600–629 | 60% to 62.9% |
| F | 599 and below | Below 60% |
Discussion Participation
In discussions, you, as a student, will interact with your instructor and classmates to explore topics related to the content of this course. You will be graded for the following.
1. Attendance
Weekly discussion: Discussions are a critical learning experience in the online classroom. Participation in each discussion is required. Each discussion earns a maximum of 15 points per module.
2. Guidelines and Rubric for Discussions
Purpose: Threaded discussions are designed to promote dialogue between faculty and students, and students and their peers. In the discussions, students should
- demonstrate an understanding of the concepts for the module;
- integrate professional resources;
- engage in meaningful and respectful dialogue with classmates; and
- express thoughts clearly and logically.
Participation requirement: You are required to post a minimum of three times in each discussion. These three posts must be on a minimum of two separate days. You must respond to the initial discussion question by 11:59 p.m. MT on Wednesday. To receive credit for a week's discussion, students may begin posting no earlier than the Sunday immediately before each module opens.
3. Threaded Discussion Guiding Principles
The ideas and beliefs underpinning the Threaded Discussions (TDs) guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes and competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply, and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The use of TDs provides students with opportunities to contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a safe, caring, and fluid environment that models professional and social interaction. The TD's ebb and flow is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship. Participation in the TDs generates opportunities for students to actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty. Threaded Discussions foster the development of members into a community of learners as they share ideas and inquiries, consider perspectives that may be different from their own, and integrate knowledge from other disciplines.
4. Grading Rubric
Discussion Criteria | Outstanding or highest level of performance | Very good or high level of performance | Competent or satisfactory level of performance | Poor or failing or unsatisfactory level of performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Answers the initial graded discussion question(s)/topic(s), demonstrating knowledge and understanding of the concepts for the module. | Addresses all aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding regarding all modular concepts. AND, Posts initial response to the discussion no later than Wednesday of the week. | Addresses most aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding of most of the modular concepts. AND, Posts initial response to the discussion no later than Wednesday of the week. (Maximum of 2 points if initial response is posted to the discussion AFTER Wednesday of the week.) | Addresses minimal aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding of some of the modular concepts. | Does not address the initial discussion question(s). |
Integrates evidence to support discussion. Sources are credited.* (APA format not required.) | Integrates evidence to support your discussion from
AND
Sources are credited.* | Integrates evidence to support discussion from
BUT,
Sources are credited.* | Integrates evidence to support discussion only from an outside source, with no mention of assigned readings or lesson. Sources are credited.* | Does not integrate any evidence. |
Engages in meaningful dialogue with classmates or instructor before the end of the week. | Responds to a classmate or instructor's post furthering the dialogue by providing more information and seeking clarification, thereby adding significant depth to the discussion. | Responds to a classmate or instructor's post furthering the dialogue by providing more information or seeking clarification, thereby adding limited depth to the discussion. | Responds to a classmate or instructor but does not further the discussion. | No response post to another student or instructor before the close of the week. |
| Outstanding or highest level of performance | Very good or high level of performance | Competent or satisfactory level of performance | Poor or failing or unsatisfactory level of performance |
Communicates in a professional manner. | Presents information using clear and concise language in an organized manner (NO errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). | Presents information in an organized manner (minimal, meaning fewer than 3, errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). | Presents information using understandable language but is somewhat disorganized (more than 3 errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). | Presents information that is not clear, logical, professional, nor organized to the point that the reader has difficulty understanding the message (significant errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). |
* Credited means stating where the information came from (specific article, text, or lesson). Examples: Our text discusses.... The information from our lesson states..., Smith (2010) claimed that..., Mary Manners (personal communication, November 17, 2011)... APA formatting is not required.
** Assigned readings are those listed on the Syllabus or Learning Activities page as required reading. This may include text readings, required articles, or required websites and media.
*** Scholarly source—per the APA Guidelines, only scholarly sources should be used in written assignments. These include peer-reviewed publications, government reports, or sources written by a professional or scholar in the field. Wikipedia, Wikis, .com websites, or blogs should not be used because anyone can add to these. Outside sources do not include assigned required readings.
Web Links Disclaimer
The purpose of Web Links is to provide students with annotated bibliographies of world-wide websites relevant to their courses. These websites are not meant to be all inclusive of what is available for each course's subjects and have not been sanctioned as academically rigorous or scholarly by Chamberlain. Please exercise caution when using these websites for course assignments and references. The Web Links page is located on the Course Resources page.
Disability Accommodations in Academic Programs
Chamberlain is committed to maintaining an academic environment free of discrimination and complies with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Chamberlain will make reasonable accommodations to afford students with disabilities full and equal enjoyment of Chamberlain’s programs and services. Chamberlain makes no assumptions concerning any individual’s abilities or disabilities and makes an individual assessment to determine whether each student’s needs can be met at Chamberlain.
Our intent is to ensure that every student who makes a request for accommodations under ADA is advised of the accommodation process as promptly as possible. If you are a student with a verifiable documented disability, and you can provide medical documentation regarding this disability, then contact our ADA Officer at adaofficer@chamberlain.edu for more information on how to receive ADA accommodations in your online classes or fax your request to 630-596-1651.
Late Work Policy
Students are expected to submit assignments by the time they are due. Assignments submitted after the due date and time will receive a deduction of 10% of the total points possible for that assignment for each day the assignment is late. Assessments will be accepted, with penalty as described, up to a maximum of 3 days late, after which point a zero will be recorded for the assessment.
In the event of an emergency that prevents timely submission of an assignment, students may petition their instructor for a waiver of the late submission grade reduction. The instructor will review the student's rationale for the request and make a determination based on the merits of the student's appeal. Consideration of the student's total course performance to date will be a contributing factor in the determination. Students should continue to attend class, actively participate, and complete other assignments while the appeal is pending.
This policy applies to activities and assessments that contribute to the numerical calculation of the course letter grade.
TurnItIn
Students agree that, by taking this course, all work submitted for a grade is 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 Terms and Conditions of Use posted on the Turnitin.com site.
Purpose:
The purpose of this Turnitin® policy is to facilitate the formative development of scholarly writing skills.
Overview:
Turnitin® is a web-based resource that Chamberlain makes available to students and faculty to comprehensively check work to identify a similarity index for matching text with a database of existing written work, web pages, and electronic journals. Turnitin® assists students in identifying potential plagiarism and supports the student toward academic integrity and originality in order to further develop their scholarly writing skills. Student-created work that is submitted to Turnitin® generates a Turnitin® Originality Report that students use to further edit work prior to submitting to faculty for feedback and evaluation.
Information about Turnitin® can be located in the Chamberlain Student Handbook. The link to Turnitin.com is placed in every online course under the Course Home area, which is located at the bottom of the list.
Policy:
All faculty members teaching in the Master of Public Health (MPH) program will use TurnItIn® for each written assessment in all courses unless the Syllabus states that a particular assessment is excluded. Additionally, all faculty can screen any submitted activity for plagiarism, using TurnItIn.
Professional ePortfolio
Across the Master of Public Health (MPH) program, you will collect assignments and compile them as artifacts within a Professional ePortfolio to demonstrate your professional growth, competency, and expertise. Your final ePortfolio, developed throughout your program and submitted at the end of the degree program, will be assessed against the learning outcomes of the program. Chamberlain will provide detailed information regarding how and when to submit your Professional ePortfolio in your final courses of the program. It is each student's responsibility to save, maintain all artifacts, and upload required artifacts to the ePortfolio.
e-Portfolio Guidelines and Rubric are available on the Course Resource page (under Course Home).
Please retain the following artifacts from this course to include in the e-Portfolio:
- MPH507 Syllabus (copy)
- Grant Proposal (Module 7)