NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Sample Answer for NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Included After Question

The Assignment: (2–3 pages)

Based on the program or policy evaluation you selected, complete the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template. Be sure to address the following:

  • Describe the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
  • How was the success of the program or policy measured?
  • How many people were reached by the program or policy selected?
  • How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
  • At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?
  • What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
  • What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?
  • What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
  • Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
  • Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
  • Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after 1 year of implementation.

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Title: NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

The evaluation of a healthcare program or policy is essential for providers to assess and ascertain its efficacy to the targeted health population (Duong et al., 2021). The purpose of this paper to offer an evaluation of a program implemented in our facility concerning the provision of mental health to young people (18-24) on psychological stressors and dealing with early adulthood issues like substance use disorder that emanates from such events.

Healthcare Program/Policy EvaluationMental health provision services for young adults in the facility
DescriptionThis program was launched in collaboration with the Massachusetts’ health department because of increased levels of mental health challenges that young adults face in their bid to navigate their situations. The program’s outcomes included increasing mental health to this age group, optimizing resources to address mental health challenges, and development of long-term engagements and creation of mental health units as part of emergency care in the emergency rooms and departments (Horigian et al., 2021).
How was the success of the program or policy measured?The success of this program was measured by the number of young adults who participated in it and benefited immensely from the suggested strategies to deal with mental health issues. During its implementation, program benefited 300 young adults from the low-income families and households who lack access to healthcare, including mental health services. The number of suicides also reduced with the areas where the intervention was implemented to the latter.
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?The program targeted 500 young adults within the county. However, as indicated, 300 benefited from the program’s roll out within the facility. The program had a significant impact on the targeted population since it reduced suicide contemplation by over 60% in the county based on figures from the public health department. The program benefited the targeted young people by offering sufficient information and education on how to deal with emotional stressors and other factors that lead to such situations (Kecojevic et al., 2021).
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?Data from the facility and the county health office was used in conducting the evaluation. Before its implementation, the facility never considered data and cases of mental health presenting in the ER. The available data indicated that only ten patients had presented symptoms of mental health illness. However, with the program’s roll out, the number increased to 300. Data of the health department also indicated a reduction in suicides and reported suicide ideation. 
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?While the program was aimed at conferring benefits to the young adults to help them address psychological challenges, its unintended effects entailed straining of relationships between parents and teenagers in the initial stages of the intervention. However, those who benefited would later appreciate the critical roles of their parents.
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.The program identified different stakeholders including the affected young adults, their parents and even spouses, the community, healthcare facilities, and the government. Those who benefited the most from the program included young adults with mental health issues and the general public as it got information about the different ways to cope with emotional stressors.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?I believe that the program attained the original intended objectives and intent. For instance, it focused on provision on mental health to a population group that is mainly neglected because none think of them as critical consumers of mental health services (Lewinski & Simmons, 2018). Secondly, the program focused on a group that can experience the highest burden of mental health if not handled well.
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?I would recommend this program to my place of work because of the benefits that it provides to the selected health population. Again, I would recommend it since it allows mental health practitioners to leverage their expertise in solving existing community problems.
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.The two ways that I would be involved in evaluation of a program after its implement include collecting data on its efficacy, and promoting its increased adoption by the targeted population. 
General Notes/CommentsNurses play a critical role in program evaluation and implementation as patient and health population advocates (Milstead & Short, 2019). The need to address mental health issues implores nurses to develop innovative approaches to health care challenges within their communities and collaborate with others to implement these interventions in the most effective manner.

References

Duong, M. T., Bruns, E. J., Lee, K., Cox, S., Coifman, J., Mayworm, A., & Lyon, A. R. (2021).

Rates of mental health service utilization by children and adolescents in schools and other common service settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 48(3), 420-439. DOI: 10.1007/s10488-020-01080-9.

Horigian, V. E., Schmidt, R. D., & Feaster, D. J. (2021). Loneliness, mental health, and

substance use among US young adults during COVID-19. Journal of psychoactive drugs, 53(1), 1-9. DOI: 10.1080/02791072.2020.1836435.

Kecojevic, A., Basch, C. H., Sullivan, M., & Davi, N. K. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19

epidemic on mental health of undergraduate students in New Jersey, cross-sectional study. PloS one, 15(9), e0239696.

Lewinski, A. A., & Simmons, L. A. (2018). Nurse knowledge and engagement in health policy

making: Findings from a pilot study. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 49(9), 407-415.

Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.).

            Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation:

Also Read:

NURS 6050 Global Healthcare Comparison Matrix and Narrative Statement

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Title: NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

The evaluation of a healthcare program or policy is essential for providers to assess and ascertain its efficacy to the targeted health population (Duong et al., 2021). The purpose of this paper to offer an evaluation of a program implemented in our facility concerning the provision of mental health to young people (18-24) on psychological stressors and dealing with early adulthood issues like substance use disorder that emanates from such events.

NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program Policy Evaluation
NURS 6050 Assessing Healthcare Program Policy Evaluation
Healthcare Program/Policy EvaluationMental health provision services for young adults in the facility
DescriptionThis program was launched in collaboration with the Massachusetts’ health department because of increased levels of mental health challenges that young adults face in their bid to navigate their situations. The program’s outcomes included increasing mental health to this age group, optimizing resources to address mental health challenges, and development of long-term engagements and creation of mental health units as part of emergency care in the emergency rooms and departments (Horigian et al., 2021).
How was the success of the program or policy measured?The success of this program was measured by the number of young adults who participated in it and benefited immensely from the suggested strategies to deal with mental health issues. During its implementation, program benefited 300 young adults from the low-income families and households who lack access to healthcare, including mental health services. The number of suicides also reduced with the areas where the intervention was implemented to the latter.
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?The program targeted 500 young adults within the county. However, as indicated, 300 benefited from the program’s roll out within the facility. The program had a significant impact on the targeted population since it reduced suicide contemplation by over 60% in the county based on figures from the public health department. The program benefited the targeted young people by offering sufficient information and education on how to deal with emotional stressors and other factors that lead to such situations (Kecojevic et al., 2021).
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?Data from the facility and the county health office was used in conducting the evaluation. Before its implementation, the facility never considered data and cases of mental health presenting in the ER. The available data indicated that only ten patients had presented symptoms of mental health illness. However, with the program’s roll out, the number increased to 300. Data of the health department also indicated a reduction in suicides and reported suicide ideation. 
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?While the program was aimed at conferring benefits to the young adults to help them address psychological challenges, its unintended effects entailed straining of relationships between parents and teenagers in the initial stages of the intervention. However, those who benefited would later appreciate the critical roles of their parents.
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.The program identified different stakeholders including the affected young adults, their parents and even spouses, the community, healthcare facilities, and the government. Those who benefited the most from the program included young adults with mental health issues and the general public as it got information about the different ways to cope with emotional stressors.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?I believe that the program attained the original intended objectives and intent. For instance, it focused on provision on mental health to a population group that is mainly neglected because none think of them as critical consumers of mental health services (Lewinski & Simmons, 2018). Secondly, the program focused on a group that can experience the highest burden of mental health if not handled well.
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?I would recommend this program to my place of work because of the benefits that it provides to the selected health population. Again, I would recommend it since it allows mental health practitioners to leverage their expertise in solving existing community problems.
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.The two ways that I would be involved in evaluation of a program after its implement include collecting data on its efficacy, and promoting its increased adoption by the targeted population. 
General Notes/CommentsNurses play a critical role in program evaluation and implementation as patient and health population advocates (Milstead & Short, 2019). The need to address mental health issues implores nurses to develop innovative approaches to health care challenges within their communities and collaborate with others to implement these interventions in the most effective manner.

References

Duong, M. T., Bruns, E. J., Lee, K., Cox, S., Coifman, J., Mayworm, A., & Lyon, A. R. (2021).

Rates of mental health service utilization by children and adolescents in schools and other common service settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 48(3), 420-439. DOI: 10.1007/s10488-020-01080-9.

Horigian, V. E., Schmidt, R. D., & Feaster, D. J. (2021). Loneliness, mental health, and

substance use among US young adults during COVID-19. Journal of psychoactive drugs, 53(1), 1-9. DOI: 10.1080/02791072.2020.1836435.

Kecojevic, A., Basch, C. H., Sullivan, M., & Davi, N. K. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19

epidemic on mental health of undergraduate students in New Jersey, cross-sectional study. PloS one, 15(9), e0239696.

Lewinski, A. A., & Simmons, L. A. (2018). Nurse knowledge and engagement in health policy

making: Findings from a pilot study. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 49(9), 407-415.

Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.).

            Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis

Healthcare Program/Policy EvaluationThe COVID-19 Vaccination Program
DescriptionThe COVID-19 Vaccination Program, launched in late 2020, involved a collaborative effort to distribute and administer vaccines, effectively curbing the virus’s spread and reducing severe cases and deaths (Steele et al., 2022). However, ongoing challenges like vaccine hesitancy, global distribution, and emerging variants impact its overall effectiveness (Ali & Perera, 2023).
How was the success of the program or policy measured?Vaccination coverage: The program’s success was assessed by tracking the percentage of the population that received the vaccine (Rosen et al., 2023). This included monitoring the number of doses administered and the number of individuals who were fully vaccinated. Reduction in COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths: Success was measured by comparing COVID-19 case rates, hospitalization rates, and death rates before and after the implementation of the vaccination program. A downward trend in these metrics indicated the program’s effectiveness in controlling the pandemic.
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?The COVID-19 Vaccination Program had administered over 380 million doses in the United States and 5.7 billion doses globally (Gostin & Hodge, 2020). The program reduced COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, particularly in areas with high vaccination rates. It also effectively protected vulnerable populations such as the elderly and individuals with underlying health conditions.
At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?The COVID-19 Vaccination Program was evaluated continuously throughout its implementation, allowing for adaptations and responses to changing circumstances and challenges. Evaluations began with the initial rollout, focusing on distribution and coverage, identifying logistical challenges, and reaching target populations. As the program progressed, evaluations assessed vaccine effectiveness, safety, and impact on COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths (Rosen et al., 2023). Later evaluations concentrated on addressing vaccine hesitancy, equitable distribution, and effectiveness against emerging variants.
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?Vaccination records: Data on the number of doses administered, as well as the demographic information of vaccine recipients, were collected to assess coverage and equitable distribution among various population groups. COVID-19 case, hospitalization, and death data: Public health authorities collected and analyzed data on the number of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths to assess the impact of the vaccination program on reducing the virus’s spread and its overall burden on the healthcare system (Steele et al., 2022).
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?Vaccine hesitancy and misinformation: Misinformation and misconceptions about vaccines have contributed to vaccine hesitancy, leading to slower uptake, prolonged pandemic, and increased risk of new variants emerging (Ali & Perera, 2023). Inequitable distribution: The global vaccine distribution has been uneven, with high-income countries receiving a disproportionately higher share of doses. This has resulted in slower vaccination progress in less-developed regions, exacerbating global health disparities and prolonging the pandemic (Rosen et al., 2023).
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.Government agencies: Entities like the CDC would benefit from evaluation results to make informed decisions, allocate resources efficiently, and improve future vaccination campaigns. Healthcare providers: Hospitals, clinics, and healthcare professionals would use the results to optimize vaccine distribution, address logistical challenges, and enhance patient education. Public health organizations: Organizations such as the WHO and Gavi would benefit from evaluation results to improve their efforts in addressing health disparities and promoting vaccine equity.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?The COVID-19 Vaccination Program has effectively lowered the number of cases, hospitalizations, and fatalities while prioritizing high-risk individuals. However, ongoing challenges such as vaccine hesitancy caused by misinformation and unequal global vaccine distribution continue to influence the program’s overall success in controlling the pandemic (Ali & Perera, 2023).
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?The COVID-19 Vaccination Program has been successful in reducing virus spread, protecting vulnerable populations, and enabling a return to normalcy. Implementing it in your workplace is generally recommended for health and safety, as well as maintaining business continuity. Before implementation, consider legal and ethical aspects, and ensure effective employee communication and education. The decision to implement the program depends on your organization’s specific context, public health situation, and legal framework (Gostin & Hodge, 2020).
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.Participate in data collection and analysis: Nurses can provide valuable insights and data for evaluation. Contributing by collecting data on patient outcomes, program adherence, and patient satisfaction, as well as monitoring challenges during implementation, ensures a comprehensive and accurate evaluation process. Advocate for continuous improvement: Nurse advocates can promote program or policy improvements based on evaluation results. Sharing results with stakeholders, raising awareness of successes and areas needing improvement, and providing recommendations for modifications ensures healthcare programs and policies remain effective, efficient, and patient-centered.
General Notes/CommentsIn summary, program/policy evaluation in healthcare is crucial for assessing effectiveness and guiding improvements. Nurses play a vital role in this process. The COVID-19 Vaccination Program has seen successes and challenges, with ongoing efforts needed to address issues like vaccine hesitancy and inequitable distribution. Nurse advocates can contribute by participating in data collection, analysis, and advocating for continuous improvement to ensure better outcomes for the targeted populations.

References

Ali, Z., & Perera, S. M. (2023). International Medical Corps’ Approach to Solving COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy. Physician Leadership Journal10(2), 68–71. https://doi.org/10.55834/plj.5301644027

Gostin, L. O., & Hodge, J. G., Jr. (2020). US Emergency Legal Responses to Novel Coronavirus: Balancing Public Health and Civil Liberties. JAMA323(12), 1131–1132. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.2025

Rosen, A. D., Senturia, A., Howerton, I., Kantrim, E. U., Evans, V., Malluche, T., Miller, J., Gonzalez, M., Robie, B., Shover, C. L., Chang, A. H., Behforouz, H., Nguyen, A., & Thomas, E. H. (2023). A COVID-19 Vaccination Program to Promote Uptake and Equity for People Experiencing Homelessness in Los Angeles County. American Journal of Public Health113(2), 170–174.

Steele, M. K., Couture, A., Reed, C., Iuliano, D., Whitaker, M., Fast, H., Hall, A. J., MacNeil, A., Cadwell, B., Marks, K. J., & Silk, B. J. (2022). Estimated Number of COVID-19 Infections, Hospitalizations, and Deaths Prevented Among Vaccinated Persons in the US, December 2020 to September 2021. JAMA Network Open5(7), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.20385