Comprehensive Program Proposal Presentation

IHP 670 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric

Overview Imagine you are a unit manager or top level leader in your facility. You are responsible for planning and implementing a new program in your facility related to your research findings based on where you currently work (or a different facility of your choice). Perhaps there is a need for a program where you are working. The purpose of this project is to prepare you to understand the process of planning, implementing, and evaluating a new program. For your final project, you will assume a management role from which you will create a program proposal that addresses the design, implementation, and evaluation of a program within your healthcare organization. This project will allow you to work through the program proposal process in an orderly fashion using data from a facility of your choice. You have learned to perform a needs assessment, which includes creating a logic model, anticipating outcomes, justifying resource allocations, and evaluating the program by proposing expected benchmarks and other measures to evaluate the effectiveness of the implemented program. This process will provide you with a strong foundation in the development, implementation, and evaluation of a program proposal. The project is divided into three milestones, which will be submitted at various points throughout the course to scaffold learning and ensure a quality final submission. These milestones will be submitted in Modules Three, Five, and Seven. The final project will be submitted in Module Nine. In this assignment, you will demonstrate your mastery of the following course outcomes:

 Analyze U.S. healthcare delivery systems for identifying key organizational design concepts with regard to program planning and design

 Recommend programmatic strategies based on ethical guidelines for addressing disparities in community health services

 Assess healthcare programs for the extent to which they comply with cultural competence standards in ensuring healthcare equity across diverse populations

 Recommend programs that align with strategic objectives for improving the flow of healthcare delivery at the organizational level

 Justify resource allocation solutions for various healthcare programs for informing budget decision-making processes

 Develop comprehensive logic models that consider collaborative practice within healthcare settings

Prompt Using a product such as PowerPoint or Prezi, prepare a presentation that outlines your program proposal. Your presentation should be directed at the organization’s upper management and should include detailed speaker notes or an audio recording. Your presentation must specifically address the following critical elements:

I. Introduction: Identify and describe the institution in which the new program would take place. Be sure to include the institution’s name, location, focus (such as hospital or other acute healthcare facility) and any other pertinent demographic identifiers.

II. From a management perspective, perform the following assessments for implementation of a program: A. Assess the organizational design for potential program development. B. Assess the community needs in terms of healthcare disparities. C. Assess the organization’s current healthcare programs in terms of the level of cultural competence they exhibit. D. Recommend an appropriate and logical programmatic strategy, based on the results of your assessments. E. How does your recommended programmatic strategy align with ethical guidelines? Be sure to justify your response.

III. Design the program by developing a logic model.

A. Identify key organizational stakeholders and discuss their relationship to your proposed program. In other words, what role will these stakeholders play with regard to the components of your logic model?

B. Create a logic model based on the critical components of a logic model: 1. Resources or inputs: Consider human, financial, organizational, and community resources. 2. Activities: What does the program do with the resources? Activities are the processes, tools, events, technology, and actions that are an

intentional part of the program implementation. 3. Outputs: These are short-, medium-, and long-term definitions of outcome criteria.

C. Assign appropriate connections and feedback loops for the logic model.

IV. Discuss the anticipated outcomes of your program. A. What is your anticipated end result? How do you see the program producing results within your organization? B. How does this program fit into the organization? How does it affect the overall flow of healthcare delivery within the organization? C. What will be the impact of this program on other areas within the organization or community? Why? If you feel there will be no effect on other

areas, be sure to explain your reasoning. D. What will be the impact from this program with respect to complying with cultural competence standards? If you feel there will be no effect in

this regard, be sure to explain your reasoning.

V. Attend to the financial aspects of your program. A. What specific resources would you suggest for use in your program? For example, what staffing and equipment suggestions would you make? Be

sure to explain your rationale. B. How will the program fit into the organization’s current budget? In other words, will the program fit into the existing budget, or will concessions

need to be made? C. What recommendations would you make for ensuring the program is financially sustainable?

VI. Consider the evaluation methods and results for your program.

A. What will you measure (such as benchmarks, patient outcomes, or other measurable data) in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the program implementation?

B. What tools will you use to measure the effect of your program on reducing the incidence of healthcare disparities?

C. How will these evaluation tools tell you whether the program is successful? D. To what extent will the program help ensure healthcare equity across diverse populations? Be sure to justify your reasoning.

VII. Provide a brief summary of the key points and findings of your program proposal.

Milestones Milestone One: Program Plan In Module Three, you will submit a short paper that will include a brief description of your chosen organization, a needs assessment, and an identification of expected outcomes. This milestone will be graded with the Milestone One Rubric. Milestone Two: Program Design Map In Module Five, you will submit a program design map in the form of a logic model. This milestone will be graded with the Milestone Two Rubric. Milestone Three: Evaluation Plan In Module Seven, you will submit a paper in which you describe an evaluation plan and explain the financial aspects of your program as well as your evaluation methods. This milestone will be graded with the Milestone Three Rubric. Final Submission: Comprehensive Program Proposal Presentation In Module Nine, you will submit your final project. It should be a complete, polished artifact containing all of the critical elements of the final product. It should reflect the incorporation of feedback gained throughout the course. This submission will be graded with the Final Project Rubric.

Deliverables Milestone Deliverable Module Due Grading

One Program Plan Three Graded separately; Milestone One Rubric

Two Program Design Map Five Graded separately; Milestone Two Rubric

Three Evaluation Plan Seven Graded separately; Milestone Three Rubric

Final Submission: Comprehensive Program Proposal Presentation

Nine Graded separately; Final Project Rubric

Final Project Rubric Guidelines for Submission: Your presentation should be between 15 and 20 slides (in addition to title and references slides) and should contain detailed speaker notes or an audio recording. Please feel free to be creative with this project, experimenting with backgrounds and slide-to-slide transitions; however, be sure that any citations and references are formatted according to APA guidelines.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Introduction Meets “Proficient” criteria and employs industry-specific language to establish expertise

Identifies and describes the institution where the new program would be implemented, including institution name, location, focus, and other pertinent demographic identifiers

Identifies and describes the institution where the new program would be implemented, but response is cursory, ambiguous, or lacking necessary detail

Does not identify and describe the institution where the new program would be implemented

3

Assessments: Potential Program Development

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response meaningfully synthesizes connections between organizational design and assessment of needs for potential program development

Assesses the organizational design for potential program development

Assesses the organizational design for potential program development, but response is cursory, vague, or inaccurate

Does not assess the organizational design for potential program development

5.05

Assessments: Disparities

Meets “Proficient” criteria and meaningfully synthesizes connections between the organization and community needs in terms of healthcare disparities

Assesses community needs in terms of healthcare disparities

Assesses community needs in terms of healthcare disparities, but response is cursory, vague, or inaccurate

Does not assess community needs in terms of healthcare disparities

3.79

Assessments: Cultural Competence

Meets “Proficient” criteria and meaningfully synthesizes connections between the organization’s healthcare programs and cultural competence

Assesses the organization’s healthcare programs in terms of the level of cultural competence they exhibit

Assesses the organization’s healthcare programs in terms of the level of cultural competence they exhibit, but response is cursory, vague, or inaccurate

Does not assess the organization’s healthcare programs in terms of the level of cultural competence they exhibit

5.05

Assessments: Strategy

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and recommendation demonstrates keen insight into organizational and community needs

Recommends an appropriate and logical programmatic strategy, based on results of assessments

Recommends a programmatic strategy, but strategy is inappropriate or illogical or is not based on results of assessments

Does not recommend a programmatic strategy

3.79

Assessments: Alignment

Meets “Proficient” criteria and meaningfully synthesizes connections between recommended programmatic strategy and current ethical guidelines

Logically assesses programmatic strategy for alignment with ethical guidelines

Assesses programmatic strategy for alignment with ethical guidelines, but assessment is cursory, vague, or illogical

Does not assess programmatic strategy for alignment with ethical guidelines

3.79

Logic Model: Stakeholders

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the relationship between stakeholders and organizational programs

Identifies key stakeholders and discusses their relationship to proposed program

Identifies key stakeholders and discusses their relationship to proposed program, but response is cursory, vague, or inaccurate

Does not identify key stakeholders and does not discuss their relationship to proposed program

5.06

Logic Model: Components

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and logic model is exceptionally clear and well informed

Creates a comprehensive logic model, based on critical components

Creates a logic model, but it is not based on critical components, or it has gaps in detail or clarity

Does not create a logic model 5.06

Logic Model: Connections

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates nuanced insight into relevant directional and feedback connections for logic models

Assigns appropriate connections and feedback loops for logic model

Assigns connections and feedback loops for logic model, but connections and feedback loops are inappropriate or unclear

Does not assign connections and feedback loops for logic model

5.06

Outcomes: Anticipated

Meets “Proficient” criteria and meaningfully synthesizes connections between the organization and the program with regard to producing results for the organization

Articulates the anticipated end result and explains how the program will produce results within the organization

Articulates the anticipated end result and explains how the program will produce results within the organization, but response is cursory or vague

Does not articulate the anticipated end result and does not explain how the program will produce results for the organization

5.06

Outcomes: Fit

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates meaningful insight into how the program will fit and interact within the organizations

Describes how the program will fit into and interact with the rest of the organization

Describes how the program will fit into and interact with the rest of the organization, but response is cursory, vague, or illogical

Does not describe how the program will fit into and interact with the rest of the organization

5.06

Outcomes: Other Areas

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates meaningful insight into the interrelationship between the program and the organization and community

Assesses the impact, or lack thereof, of the program on other areas of the organization or the community, explaining why

Assesses the impact, or lack thereof, of the program on other areas of the organization or the community, explaining why, but response or reasoning is cursory, vague, or illogical

Does not assess the impact, or lack thereof, of the program on other areas of the organization or the community

5.06

Outcomes: Standards

Meets “Proficient” criteria and meaningfully synthesizes connections between the proposed program and cultural competence standards

Assesses the impact of this program with respect to complying with cultural competence standards

Assesses the impact of this program with respect to complying with cultural competence standards, but response is cursory, vague, or inaccurate

Does not assess the impact of this program with respect to complying with cultural competence standards

5.05

Financial Aspects: Resources

Meets “Proficient” criteria and meaningfully synthesizes connections between the organization’s available resources and the rationale for suggested resources

Suggests specific resources to be used in program, explaining rationale

Suggests resources to be used in program, explaining rationale, but response or reasoning is cursory or illogical

Does not suggest specific resources to be used in program

5.06

Financial Aspects: Budget

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates exceptional insight into the organizational budgeting process

Explains how the program will fit into the organization’s current budget

Explains how the program will fit into the organization’s current budget, but response is illogical or contains inaccuracies

Does not explain how the program will fit into the organization’s current budget

5.06

Financial Aspects: Sustainable

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates exceptional knowledge of the organizational budgeting process

Makes recommendations for ensuring the program will be financially sustainable

Makes recommendations for ensuring the program will be financially sustainable, but recommendations are cursory or inappropriate for the purpose

Does not make recommendations for ensuring the program will be financially sustainable

5.06

Evaluation: Measure

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates nuanced insight into measuring program effectiveness

Determines appropriate measures for evaluating program implementation effectiveness

Determines measures for evaluating program implementation effectiveness, but measures are cursory or inappropriate for the purpose

Does not determine appropriate measures for evaluating program implementation effectiveness

5.05

Evaluation: Reducing

Meets “Proficient” criteria and meaningfully synthesizes connections between theory and practice to demonstrate nuanced insight into measuring programmatic reduction of healthcare disparities

Identifies appropriate tools for measuring effect of program on reducing healthcare disparities

Identifies tools for measuring effect of program on reducing healthcare disparities, but tools are cursory or inappropriate for the purpose

Does not identify tools for measuring effect of program on reducing healthcare disparities

3.79

Evaluation: Successful

Meets “Proficient” criteria and meaningfully synthesizes connections between theory and practice to demonstrate nuanced insight into using tools for measuring program success

Details how the evaluation tools will denote program success

Details how the evaluation tools will denote program success, but response is cursory, vague, or illogical

Does not detail how the evaluation tools will denote program success

5.05

Evaluation: Equity

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates exceptional consideration of social responsibility with regard to ensuring healthcare equity

Assesses the extent to which the program will help ensure healthcare equity and justifies reasoning

Assesses the extent to which the program will help ensure healthcare equity and justifies reasoning, but response or reasoning is cursory, vague, or illogical

Does not assess the extent to which the program will help ensure healthcare equity and does not justify reasoning

5.05

Summary Meets “Proficient” criteria and expertly balances brevity with detail

Briefly summarizes key points and findings of program proposal

Summarizes key points and findings of program proposal, but response is wordy or lacks necessary detail

Does not summarize key points and findings of program proposal

3

Articulation of Response

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

3

Total 100%