Introduction and Engagement of Stakeholders
The purpose of this formative evaluation is to take an intricate look into the health problems that have affected San Joaquin County in California. They include the following: The asthma problems affecting the young population due to air pollution, the problem of Obesity, which is still prevalent among the young children, and the risk of cervical cancer. All these issues have been cited in the health assessment and it is therefore prudent to look into the planning of how this health promotion program is going to be developed in order to benefit all those at stake in the county (i.e. the children, parents, health institutions, policy makers, schools, insurance companies and government), whilst taking into account the needs of the people and the proper channels and tools to employ.
Description of the San Joaquin County Health Intervention
The people of this County require a program that will help them set up the necessary health interventions in order to cater for those who are sick in this county. The intervention seeks to bring to light the environmental hazards that maybe contributing to the number of children getting sick, and solutions to this problem. In addition, this program is intended to educate citizens and families of San Joaquin County regarding the issues of obesity and cancer. i.e. cervical and lung cancer. The program is set to begin with immediate effect since the community cannot afford to ignore these issues(Saunders, Evans, and Joshi 2005). Several people are involved including the community volunteers, doctors, researchers and scientists with special knowledge in these sectors. The local government and the department of health services have allocated resources in terms of finances and staff.
The design employed to make this evaluation is in form of case studies. An example of a study used in this evaluation is by USF Fresno and CSU Fresno, which show that those children living in San Joaquin are at a higher risk of developing asthma. This evaluation will greatly benefit the county of San Joaquin, families in this community, the health care providers in this community as well as the health policy makers. For this evaluation to be beneficial to all parties involved they all require to be educated about these diseases as well as what may be causing them so that they can understand the importance of the evaluation(Habicht, Victora, and Vaughan 1999). The findings will assist the county to be more involved in the community’s health. The health practioners will be able to use the families as resources with an aim of ensuring that proper interventions are put in place. Policies can also be developed because of the findings(Potvin, L., Haddad, S., and Frohlich 2001).
Some of the questions this evaluation seeks to answer include; will all the stakeholders benefit from this intervention? What is required to make this program a success? Are the findings conclusive? All these questions will ensure that the community has completely benefited.
Gathering of credible Evidence
The statistical data that has been collected in aid to this intervention is derived from secondary data i.e. The United states census bureau provided adequate information regarding the population distribution, and other demographic aspects which are necessary in planning of this intervention. In addition credible information was gathered from previous researches e.g. UCSF Fresno and CSU Fresno provided information regarding Asthma visits of children and the correlation to the environment which was polluted and had unclean air. The existing data is valuable since it will shed light on the places that urgently require intervention of the program that has already been put into motion.
Justification of conclusions Through Data Analysis and Interpretation
After the various interventions mentioned in the assessment have been employed, more data is to be collected and records should be kept consistently to provide numerical evidence to prove a possible change in comparison to the initial data of people suffering from the health issues mentioned.
Use of communication of Evaluation findings
The aspect of evaluating the findings is very important because the correct information needs to go to the necessary people. Starting with the stakeholders at the top of the food chain is important because when information comes from those at the top they are likely to be seen as valid and important. In this case, the San Joaquin county officials and the head of the health services in this community should receive the findings then communicate it to the stakeholders like the individuals living in this community. Different methods can be put in place to pass on information for example through meetings with the stakeholders, conferences, home visits, and the media. Since San Joaquin is an intact community using media advocacy can be of great be of great benefits since the media energizes the community to directly participate in issues to do with their health. Through media advocacy, the different policies that ought to be put in place can easily be initiated. This is because the media has the ability to prime, frame, and spin content and affect the way people tend to view and look at issues(Neiger et al. 2012). Therefore using it as a tool to inform people on the new interventions and programs will ensure that the individuals think twice about their well-being, which is important to them.
The evaluation will be closely monitored by the county and health practioners to ensure that all the interventions have been put in place. The Department of Health services will also provide the necessary feedback so that further improvements can be made if need be. The county government of San Joaquin have been given the responsibility to ensure that the progress concerning this evaluation is carefully and clearly communicated to the people of San Joaquin. They will also give feedback to the people on whether the interventions that have been suggested are being carried out. All the necessary measures that put in place towards the accomplishment of these interventions will all be electronically stored for further reference later.
It’s important to note that good health is very important in order to ensure individual productivity in all spheres of their life. It’s evident that people globally are well aware that being healthy is not just the mere absence of disease or infirmity but being healthy is determined by many factors which fall under the social, psychological, physical and spiritual well-being(Smith, Tang, and Nutbeam 2006). Health promotion is therefore very important because people need to be aware of all these spheres of their lives and how they are a major contribution in determining whether one is healthy or not. Health promotion needs to take a holistic perspective, which incorporates all these spheres of wellness.
It’s therefore very important that a lot of planning should be put in place to come up with health promotion interventions. To ensure that these interventions will work it’s important to carry out assessments to collect data and validate this data so as to see where it applies in your health promotion interventions. To experience positive outcomes health promotion ought to be taken seriously in all different contexts and settings.
Habicht, J. P., C. G. Victora, and J. P. Vaughan. 1999. “Evaluation Designs for Adequacy, Plausibility and Probability of Public Health Programme Performance and Impact.” International Journal of Epidemiology 28(1): 10–18.
Neiger, Brad L et al. 2012. “Use of Social Media in Health Promotion.” Health Promotion Practice 13(2): 159–64. http://hpp.sagepub.com/content/13/2/159.abstract.
Potvin, L., Haddad, S., and Frohlich, K.L. 2001. “Beyond Process and Outcome Evaluation: A Comprehensive Approach for Evaluating Health Promotion Programmes.” WHO Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and perspectives (92): 45–62. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/108934/E73455.pdf.
Saunders, Ruth P, Martin H Evans, and Praphul Joshi. 2005. “Developing a Process-Evaluation Plan for Assessing Health Promotion Program Implementation: A How-to Guide.” Health promotion practice 6(2): 134–47.
Smith, Ben J., Kwok Cho Tang, and Don Nutbeam. 2006. “WHO Health Promotion Glossary: New Terms.” Health Promotion International 21(4): 340–45.