Question
Paper Details
Length: 1000 words (report style)THIS IS A REPORT
harvard style referencing
references only published articles in peer reviewed journals and only which are published after 2004
Evaluation of a Health Services Plan
Evaluation of a Health Services Plan
Order Description
Assessment task 3: Evaluation of a Health Services Plan
Intent: This assessment item focusses on how to evaluate a health service plan.
NB You are not expected to undertake the evaluation, but merely to describe how the plan should be evaluated.
Objective(s): Thisassessmenttaskaddressessubjectlearningobjective(s):
A, C and D
This assessment task contributes to the development of graduate attribute(s): 1.1, 1.2, 3.1 and 3.2
Weight: 40%
Length: 1000 words (report style)
Task: 1. Select a health service plan from your local health network/district or healthcare organisation, or alternatively access the NSW Renal Dialysis Service Plan to 2011 or the Radiotherapy Service in NSW Strategic Plan to 2016 provided at UTSOnline.
- Read the health service plan and material on expected implementation of the plan, where available.
- Outline an evaluation strategy which could be used in 3-5 years to evaluate the plan and its implementation, ensuring you are clear about what aspects of the plan can be evaluated in this timeframe.
The evaluation strategy should include:
the importance of evaluation in the health service planning cycle, supported by current literature an evaluability assessment
an indication of whether process, impact, and/or outcome evaluation/s are proposed, and the information required which addresses each component.
- Demonstrate coherence and balance of information and present the information via headings that clearly identify the linkage between the literature, the chosen plan and the evaluation strategy.
- Demonstrate consideration for the cost and feasibility of your suggested information collection methodology for the evaluation.
- Ensure all tables, graphs, and diagrams are clearly labelled, are referred to in the text prior to their appearance, and are accompanied with some explanatory information.
Criteria:
15% Formulates a clearly supported argument of the importance of evaluation in the health service planning cycle
15% Considers the steps and stages in evaluating a health service plan 20% Explains approaches to process, impact and outcome evaluation 20% Constructs an appropriate evaluability assessment
10% Formulates a clear and logical approach to the evaluation
10% Validates perspectives through correct interpretation and explicit linkage of relevant and current literature (> year 2004) to the assessment focus
10% Produces correct grammar, spelling, formatting, style (report), and referencing
Subject objectives
Upon successful completion of this subject students should be able to:
- Consider the principles and components of planning when devising or evaluating a healthcare program,
- Determine the major theoretical issues and frameworks that underpin health services planning and evaluation, including facilitating and constraining factors;
- Create a variety of ways in which complex issues can be effectively communicated for a variety of target audiences.
This subject also contributes specifically to the following graduate attributes:
Critique, interpret and synthesise data and research findings to develop safe, effective and evidence-based solutions to healthcare challenges. (1.1)
Propose relevant problem solving and human factors theories to the analysis of common issues inherent in the management and evaluation of healthcare services . (1.2)
Create and lead social and ethical accountability to enable efficient use of resources and equity of access to optimal and safe health care. (3.1)
Validate the importance of integrating stakeholder partnerships in all healthcare decision making activities. (3.2)
[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version="4.9.3" _module_preset="default" width_tablet="" width_phone="100%" width_last_edited="on|phone" max_width="100%"]
| Subject | Nursing | Pages | 5 | Style | APA |
|---|
Answer
Evaluation strategy of a Health Services Plan
The principle purpose of evaluation is to provide health service programs with information to maximize the learning from the service and offer a basis for refinement of service and policy development. Evaluation is focused on assessing the extent to which the health service plan strategy has achieved its objective and goals. It involves assessing effectiveness of the strategy in achieving its desired change, enhancing capacity of target group, contributing to service satisfaction, and contributed to improved wellbeing and health outcomes for the target clientele (Lizarondo, Grimmer, & Kumar, 2014, p. 572). This paper proceeds to analyse the various steps in evaluating the strategy of the NSW Renal Dialysis Service Plan to 2011.
Evaluation in health service plans should be undertaken in eight major steps including describing of the proposed programme. The next step includes identifying the questions and issues of concern. The third step involves devising the process of obtaining the required information by deciding on the aspects to be assessed, methods of measurement, and when data is to be collected. The fourth step should be collection of data through the established methods and procedures. Step five should involve analysing and evaluating the collected data. The sixth step entails providing recommendations while step seven is about disseminating the findings to stakeholders in a useful and meaningful way. The final step involves taking action (Chambers, Gillard, Turner, & Borschmann, 2013, p. 363). These steps can be summarized in the diagram below:
Figure 1: Steps involved in evaluation
(Lizarondo, Grimmer, & Kumar, 2014, p. 572)
Step 1: Logic Model
The evaluation strategy should be able to respond to these key issues. The logic model supports the evaluation strategy and encompasses all the aspects of the Health Service Plan. The logic model recognizes the various approaches to the plan delivery and key elements at all levels of service (Lizarondo, Grimmer, & Kumar, 2014, p. 572).
System level: This encompasses the health service plan system as a whole
Model level: This encompasses the human service plan model
Delivery site level: It encompasses where the human service plan services will be delivered.
The logic model focuses on assessing the elements that facilitate system and model level change/enablers. The model and system level enablers are the factors that facilitate the transformational change in human service plan which in turn result in improved quality of health outcome (Blewett, & Owen, 2015, p. 622). The five evaluation framework includes:
Contract management: This involves informing the contract management the requirements of reporting for human service plan models
Performance monitoring: It includes assessing performance of individual program delivery sites and the program as a whole through a set of measures created to align with objectives
Assessment of the system and model enablers: This concerns assessing and enhancing performance of the model and system level enablers.
Applied evaluation: It entails evaluation of the complex aspects of models including process, activities, and outcomes to facilitate understanding critical success contributors.
Formal independent evaluation: This entails the model comparisons and system level outcomes.
Step 2: Identifying the Questions and Issues
There are three issues of concerns that characterise health service plan evaluations namely; processes, impact, and concept and design. Other crucial issues concern effects, achievement of objectives, alternatives to the intervention, and operation of the initiative ('An evaluation of the development,' 2014, p. 84).
The NSW Renal Dialysis Service Plan to 2011 program focuses on establishing a robust response mechanism to an area of critical growth in demand for health services. The renal prevention and transplantation services programs involved haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. The aim is to deliver 50 percent home-based services in peritoneal dialysis and home haemodialysis and 50 percent facility-based services in hospital dialysis and satellite dialysis (NSW Renal Dialysis Service Plan to 2011, 2007, p. 1). The plan’s key focus points in the plan include (NSW Renal Dialysis Service Plan to 2011, 2007, p. 11):
- Workforce
- Anticipated technology advances in dialysis and transplantation
- Quality processes
- Access considerations of home haemodialysis
- Patient and carer education and self-management support
- Research capacity
- Clinical practice guidelines
- Patient transport
- Emergency dialysis capacity
- Rural issues
The core evaluation questions are:
- Do patients in NSW have improved access to dialysis?
- Do patients in NSW have greater access to a regular provider or team?
- Are more patients in NSW receiving quality care?
- Are clients experiencing better health service outcomes?
- Has health service experience improved for clients?
- Are clients making healthier choices?
- Is the health service program becoming more efficient over time?
- Is there more accountability in the health service system?
Step 3: Data-collection Process Design
The data collection design is dependent on the questions and issues selected for the evaluation and the use of the findings. The method of data collection for the health service plan will be self-reported questionnaires. Participants will be requested participation and informed of the potential use of the data generated as a basis for informed consent. Stakeholder involvement is key at this stage to ensure that the choice made is arrived through an open debate between the diverse paradigms and priorities. Questionnaires are a cost effective method of data collection because of their convenience and ease of analysis. The decision made will depend on (Beatty, Wilson, Ciecior, & Stringer, 2015, p. 337):
The objectives of the evaluation program are:
- The criteria for successful achievement
- Indicators of a successful achievement
- Perspectives of the different stakeholders
Step 4: Data Collection
All procedures must be followed in an ethical and rigorous manner. There is need for confidentiality in the use of the participant information. The evaluation process should be participatory. By endorsing and allowing the active involvement of all stakeholders, participants will be aware of the potential constraints as well as the validity and reliability of the outcomes (Reynolds, & Sutherland, 2013, p. 7).
Step 5: Data Analysis and Interpretation
Analysis and interpretation should involve all stakeholders. This will enable the understanding of the strengths and limitations of data and make it more receptive to qualitative data. It is also imperative that stakeholders at this stage understand the comparisons that are being made as well as the way that the results are being presented (McCoy & Morehouse, 2013, p. 81).
Step 6: Recommendations
Recommendations should cover all the immediate practical changes needed and clarify what is useful. They should challenge the existing beliefs and include the benefits and costs of not executing the findings and those of implementing them. In making recommendations, stakeholder participation is critical. It is important that people are involved in making recommendations since this will make them be committed to responding on the findings and to be receptive of the outcomes. In addition, participation enhances the accountability of the policy makers (Murphy, Stockton, Kolbe, Hulme-Chambers, & Smythe, 2015, p. 14).
Step 7: Dissemination
Investment in dissemination of evaluation and recommendations is very important especially in health promotion programs where information is a powerful tool in empowering individuals and communities. If effectively done, dissemination reduces the need for additional evaluations that are often time-consuming (Pennel, McElroy, Burdine, & Matarrita-Cascant, 2015, p. 103). Guidance should be disseminated both on evaluation as well as the way practitioners make the best use of it. Effective handling of the dissemination process enhances the standards of execution of the program.
Step 8: Taking Action
Key decisions in translating learned lessons from the short-term project into action include identification of resources required for the change as well as establishing appropriate action plans (Gyllstrom, Gearin, Frauendienst, Myhre, Larson, & Riley, 2015, p. 311). These steps complete the cycle and initiate it again. The step automatically forms the next step in the next evaluation planning cycle.
References
|
'An evaluation of the development of a marketing strategy in mental healthcare delivery' 2014, International Journal Of Healthcare Management, 7, 2, pp. 84-91 Beatty, K, Wilson, K, Ciecior, A, & Stringer, L 2015, 'Collaborations Among Missouri Nonprofit Hospitals and Local Health Departments: Content Analysis of Community Health Needs Assessments', American Journal Of Public Health, 105, S2, pp. S337-S344 Blewett, L, & Owen, R 2015, 'Accountable Care for the Poor and Underserved: Minnesota's Hennepin Health Model',American Journal Of Public Health, 105, 4, pp. 622-624 Chambers, M, Gillard, S, Turner, K, & Borschmann, R 2013, 'Evaluation of an educational practice development programme for staff working in mental health inpatient environments', Journal Of Psychiatric & Mental Health Nursing, 20, 4, pp. 362-373 Gyllstrom, E, Gearin, K, Frauendienst, R, Myhre, J, Larson, M, & Riley, W 2015, 'Local Health Department Factors Associated With Performance in the Successful Implementation of Community-Based Strategies: A Mixed-Methods Approach', American Journal Of Public Health, 105, S2, pp. S311-S317 Lizarondo, L, Grimmer, K, & Kumar, S 2014, 'Assisting allied health in performance evaluation: a systematic review',BMC Health Services Research, 14, 1, pp. 572-12 McCoy, A, & Morehouse, K 2013, 'What about children's mental health?: Evaluation findings from the family life shine children's mental health pilot project', Developing Practice: The Child, Youth And Family Work Journal, 34, p. 81 Murphy, K, Stockton, D, Kolbe, A, Hulme-Chambers, A, & Smythe, G 2015, 'Building Research Capacity in a Regional Australian Health Service: a management strategy analysis', Asia Pacific Journal Of Health Management, 10, 1, pp. 14-22 NSW Renal Dialysis Service Plan to 2011 (2007). Statewide Services Development Branch: NSW DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. Retrieved on May 30, 2015 from http://www.aci.health.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/155059/nswrenalplan_jan2007_final.pdf Pennel, C, McLeroy, K, Burdine, J, & Matarrita-Cascant, D 2015, 'Nonprofit Hospitals’ Approach to Community Health Needs Assessment', American Journal Of Public Health, 105, 3, pp. e103-e113 Reynolds, H, & Sutherland, E 2013, 'A systematic approach to the planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of integrated health services', BMC Health Services Research, 13, 1, pp. 1-11
|