Program Implementation in Health Care and Community
How to Implement Public Health Program in Health Care Setting for Scenario 1
The public health program would be implemented in the health care setting by providing parents with brochures and pamphlets about Malaria. These materials could also contain information about the epidemiology of the disease and the steps that they could take to prevent it. This implementation plan could also involve putting up posters, talk boards, and flip charts within the premise of the health care facility where parents could read about malaria and understand the symptoms to look out for in their children, as a prerequisite for visiting the health care facility (Aston, Meagher-Stewart, Edwards, & Young, 2009).
How to Implement the Public Health Program in the Community Setting for Scenario 1
The public health program for scenario 1 could be implemented in the community setting by forming a coalition comprising of groups of people, organizations, or individuals, who represent diverse interests in the community (Aston et al., 2009). This coalition could be brought together by the need to promote common health goals and to empower parents to make informed decisions about Malaria in their families (Dew, 2012).
Strategy to Ensure Health Program Achieves intended Outcome
One strategy I would use to make sure the public health program for scenario 1 meets the intended health goals is to make sure that the goals are specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and time-sensitive (SMART). Complementing this strategy would be an informed monitoring and evaluation plan that would include conducting periodic reviews of the implementation strategy (Erwin & Brownson, 2016).
Strategy to Ensure Community Health Strategy meets Intended Goals
To make sure that the community health strategy meets the intended goals, I would formulate an action plan that would outline the main steps to take to achieve specific goals of the health strategy. Within the plan, each member of the coalition team would understand his or her role in making the health strategy successful. The action plan would also involve the formulation of a timetable for implementing the health strategy and the setting up of clear steps that would help to complete each phase of the health strategy (Dew, 2012).
How Community and Health Care Settings Influence Implementation of Public Health Program for Scenario 2
The community and the health care settings have different dynamics that influence the implementation of the public health program to reduce tobacco consumption, as highlighted in scenario 2. For example, the community health setting is more complex than the health care setting because it is subject to different factors within the community, such as the cultural beliefs and attitudes about the specific health issues (Fertman & Allensworth, 2017). Comparatively, the health care setting could only be subject to professional medical interests only. Alternatively, the community setting may influence the implementation of the public health program by only being responsive to health issues affecting the community (LaPelle, Zapka, & Ockene, 2006). In other words, health strategies have to be responsive to community health needs. This way, they would be more localized, as opposed to those implemented in the health care setting. Comparatively, health promotion strategies implemented in the health care setting should be formulated with the understanding that they should not contravene existing medical codes of conduct, or institutional policies on health promotion (Erwin & Brownson, 2016). Public health strategies implemented in the community setting do not have to adhere to these policies. These dynamics explain how the community and health care settings may affect the implementation of the health promotion strategy.
Strategies for Ensuring Intended Outcomes in a Health Care and Community Setting for Scenario 2
One strategy for ensuring the intended outcomes for scenario 2 in the health care setting includes using multiple interventions to decrease the number of smokers in the community. This strategy could involve combining program and policy interventions to achieve the same outcome. The justification for the use of this strategy stems from studies done by Smith et al. (2010), which show that using multiple interventions to achieve an intended health outcome is better than using one intervention. In a community setting, I would use an intervention that addresses multiple health issues, as opposed to one. This strategy should help reduce the incidence of smoking behavior. For example, I could use an intervention that appeals to the need to reduce incidences of cancer and another one that appeals to the community to create smoke-free environments where those wishing to smoke do not necessarily affect non-smokers. This strategy is akin to “killing two birds with one stone” because community members would understand the importance of smoking cessation as a strategy to reduce their likelihood of developing cancer and to create a smoke-free environment where people could live harmoniously. This strategy could also ensure the realization of the desired health goal, which is to reduce the number of people who smoke because studies by Dew (2012) show that using interventions that address multiple health issues affecting a community is better than adopting interventions that address only one health issue.
Program Implementation in School and Workplace Settings
How to Implement Public Health Program in School Setting
The health promotion strategy for scenario 1 could be implemented in a school setting by creating parent-child social days where parents come to the school to learn and share information about Malaria. During these days, teachers, parents, and students could be involved in open discussions about the disease where they would learn about the symptoms to look out for and understand when to seek medical attention (Dew, 2012).
How to Implement Public Health Program for Scenario 1 in Workplace Setting
The public health strategy for scenario 1 could be implemented in the workplace setting through staff training (Fertman & Allensworth, 2017). Such training activities could occur in workshops and conferences where employees learn about Malaria, its symptoms, epidemiology, and prevention methods. The process should be spearheaded by a health professional that has adequate knowledge of the disease and can impart the same to the employees (Sim & Wright, 2014). The training could be organized periodically – annually, bi-annually, or quarterly. Through the knowledge they learn this way, they can be better informed about how to prevent it from occurring in their families, as well as when to seek medical attention whenever they notice its signs.
Strategy for Ensuring Scenario 1 meets the Intended Health Goals
To achieve the intended outcomes for the public health program outlined in the first scenario, for a school setting, it is pertinent for the program developers to have a clear set of roles and responsibilities for defining the roles between the parents, teachers, project managers, and schools (Sim & Wright, 2014). This strategy emphasizes the need for managerial support, which is pertinent to the realization of the desired health outcomes. Similarly, this strategy would be vital in creating a professional support system that would be useful in helping to realize the same outcome (Fertman & Allensworth, 2017).
One strategy to use in the Workplace Setting to Ensure Implementation of Public Health Strategy for Scenario 1
One strategy that could be applied in the workplace setting is integrating health education as part of the company’s policy (Dew, 2012). Depending on the workplace setting, employees should learn the signs and symptoms of Malaria and understand what symptoms to watch out for as a prerequisite for seeking medical attention. Integrating health education in the company policy could be done the same way companies integrate first aid education in their policies. Implementing the health strategy this way would ensure all employees learn about Malaria, thereby improving the likelihood of success in meeting the health objectives of scenario 1.
How School and Workplace Settings Influence the Implementation of Health Plan for Scenario 2
According to Aston, Meagher-Stewart, Edwards, and Young (2009), different settings have unique implications for the implementation of public health plans. This is the same situation for the school and workplace settings because both of them imply the implementation of public health programs for scenario 2. For example, issues regarding the ethics of providing age-appropriate data could emerge in the school setting where the audience is mostly comprised of minors. The workplace setting could also pose similar challenges to the implementation of the public health strategy for scenario 2 because most work environments are tailored to improving the productivity of the organization and not necessarily changing the lifestyle habits of the employees. Based on this review, ethical issues relating to privacy and confidentiality could emerge in the workplace setting because unlike the school setting, where the audience is mostly minors, the workplace setting is mostly comprised of adults who are legally in a position to make choices regarding their lifestyles, regardless of whether they are good or bad for them. Based on this analysis, the public health strategies proposed in scenario 2 may seem imposing to them, thereby creating some of the problems highlighted above.
Strategy for Ensuring Intended Outcomes for Scenario 2
One strategy for safeguarding the intended outcomes for scenario 2 is introducing a monitoring and evaluation plan to the health promotion strategies outlined in the workplace and school settings (LaPelle, Zapka & Ockene, 2006). This strategy would help program implementers to know whether positive strides are being made towards the accomplishment of the desired health goals. The same strategy would also empower the project implementation team to know whether there is a need to make strategic changes to the implementation plan or to make it more effective or efficient (Sim & Wright, 2014).
Monitoring and evaluation could occur in both the school and workplace settings. Additionally, key tenets of the monitoring and evaluation strategy could include an overall evaluation of the implementation strategy and realistic monitoring of the outputs for both the workplace and school settings (Smith et al., 2010). The monitoring process could also include a review of the outcomes and impacts of the implementation strategy. As Sim and Wright (2014) observe, this strategy should introduce accountability and transparency in the implementation of the health strategies for both the workplace and school settings, which will be pivotal in making sure that the intended outcomes for both settings are achieved.
Program Implementation — Choosing a Setting
The Ebola awareness campaign could be implemented in four settings – community setting, workplace setting, school setting, and health care setting. Each setting has its unique dynamics that warrant the application of different implementation strategies for the Ebola awareness campaign. The strategies that could be used to implement the program in these settings appear below:
The Ebola awareness campaign could be applied in the workplace setting through staff training. Here, employees could be trained in seminars and workshops about Ebola and how to prevent the disease. This setting provides the context for individual education about the disease and provides a platform for disseminating the same information to the community because employees will share the same knowledge they have learned in the workshops with their families and friends (Allender, Rector, & Warner, 2013).
In the community setting, implementing the Ebola awareness program could occur through mass media and communication platforms where partners working in the mass media sector are involved in broadcasting messages concerning Ebola to the community. The main types of media that could be used in this strategy include television and radio. This type of implementation strategy is ideal for the community setting because the desired health outcomes (awareness of Ebola) rest on changing the behaviors and actions of individuals within the community setting (Dew, 2012).
Health Care Setting
To implement the Ebola awareness campaign in the health care setting, it would be prudent to focus on developing policies that would help to improve people’s awareness of Ebola. This strategy should be focused on promoting structural changes within the health care setting where a policy could be introduced to mandate health workers to inform patients about Ebola, regardless of their reasons for their visit (LaPelle, Zapka, & Ockene, 2006). This strategy would make health promotion a central component in the health care setting. This implementation strategy is ideal for the health care setting because the transmission and prevention of Ebola mostly depend on the efficiency of the health care setting (CDC, 2014).
It would be prudent to implement the Ebola health promotion strategy in the school setting by formulating policies that would require the integration of Ebola education into the school curriculum. Alternatively, program leaders could promote structural change in the school setting by screening videos and films about Ebola to students and teachers. This strategy could involve using feeder information from mass media campaigns to educate people about the disease and integrate such information into the school curriculum. The school setting could also be ideal in increasing the awareness of Ebola in Sierra Leone because it could provide an appropriate venue for highlighting the seriousness of the disease. Furthermore, by implementing the health promotion strategy in the school setting, people would have a greater impetus for implementing the same health care strategies in a broader setting environment (Dew, 2012). Thus, the implementation of the campaign in this setting would provide a vehicle for creating more change in the community.
Stakeholders to Involve in each of the Four Settings
Some of the main stakeholders to involve in the school setting include students, teachers/school administration, the government, and health agencies (Allender et al., 2013). Teachers and the school administration are important stakeholders because they implement the school curriculum. The government should also be consulted because education is a matter of public interest and is subject to government policies. Health agencies are also an important stakeholder group because they are the main sources of information and expertise needed to create awareness about Ebola. Lastly, students also form an important stakeholder group because they are the main audience for the health message.
Employees and management are the main stakeholder groups in the workplace setting because employees are the target audience and the management is the formulator of organizational policies. Without their permission, it would be difficult to implement the health promotion strategy (Allender et al., 2013).
Health Care Setting
The main stakeholder groups to consider when implementing the proposed health promotion plan in the health care setting are the health workers, patients, and the government. The government is an important stakeholder group because the health care environment remains one of the most regulated sectors in Sierra Leone. Therefore, the proposed health promotion plan should not contravene existing government policies. Patients are also an important stakeholder group because they form the target market, while health workers emerge as an important stakeholder group because they are the implementers of the campaign.
The main stakeholders in the community setting include the community members, health care personnel, the government, and the media (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Community Preventative Services Task Force, 2012). The media are an important stakeholder group because they are the instruments of spreading health information. The government would step in to regulate the process of doing so, while health care personnel would be instrumental in designing health messages (Allender et al., 2013). Lastly, community members are an important stakeholder group because they are the audience of the health campaign.
The setting is most appropriate?
The community is the most appropriate setting for implementing the Ebola awareness campaign because the health issue (Ebola) is mostly a communal one (CDC, 2014). Furthermore, the community setting provides the access to individuals because they are the main people who have the power to create the desired health outcomes (Smith et al., 2010).
Steps to Implement Public Health Program in Community Setting
Implementing the Ebola awareness campaign in Sierra Leone and within the community, the setting could happen in three major steps. The first step would involve designing health promotion messages that would be disseminated via different media platforms (Fertman & Allensworth, 2017). The second step would involve collaborating with community stakeholders to educate the public about Ebola and to conduct door-to-door campaigns to undertake individual education on the same. Lastly, the implementation strategy would include a monitoring and evaluation plan modeled after the MAP-IT structure that aims to mobilize, assess, plan, implement, and track the health campaign (Wukitsch, 2012). Program planners could use this framework to evaluate the program’s progress and to modify specific areas that need such adjustments.
Why the Program Implementation Plan would Achieve Intended Outcomes
The program implementation plan would achieve the intended outcomes because progress will be reviewed periodically, using the monitoring and evaluation strategy. This way, program planners would be able to detect problematic areas early and rectify the same. Similarly, the implementation plan would be successful because it is participatory. In other words, it involves the input of multiple stakeholders, which as Aston, Meagher-Stewart, Edwards, and Young (2009) observe is a prerequisite for the successful implementation of public health promotion strategies.
Aston, M., Meagher-Stewart, D., Edwards, N., & Young, L.M. (2009). Public health nurses’ primary health care practice: Strategies for fostering citizen participation. Journal of Community Health Nursing, 26(1), 24–34. Web.
Dew, K. (2012). The cult and science of public health: A sociological investigation. London, UK: Berghahn Books.
Erwin, P., & Brownson, R. (2016). Scutchfield and Keck’s principles of public health practice. London, UK: Cengage Learning.
Fertman, C.I., & Allensworth, D.D. (Eds.). (2017). Health promotion programs: From theory to practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
LaPelle, N.R., Zapka, J., & Ockene, J.K. (2006). Sustainability of public health programs: The example of tobacco treatment services in Massachusetts. American Journal of Public Health, 96(8), 1363–1369.
Smith, M.C., Lambert, W., Boehm, F., Finkelstein, J.L., Singler, J.M., Léandre, F.,… Mukherjee, J.S. (2010). Economic risk factors for HIV infection among women in rural Haiti: Implications for HIV prevention policies and programs in resource-poor settings. Journal of Women’s Health, 19(5), 885–892. Web.
Sim, F., & Wright, J. (2014). Working in public health: An introduction to careers in public health. London, UK: Routledge.
Allender, J., Rector, C., & Warner, K. (2013). Community & public health nursing: promoting the public’s health. London, UK: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
CDC. (2014). Ebola outbreaks 2000–2014. Web.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Community Preventative Services Task Force. (2012). The community guide. Web.
Wukitsch, K. (2012). MAP-IT: A model for implementing Healthy People 2020. Web.