Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The evaluation plan is designed for HIV/AIDS among the Kenyan community as this country was severely affected by HIV/AIDS. About 1.5 million people live with this infection, so the need to improve the situation is obvious (ICF Macro and National Coordinating Agency for Population and Development 1).
The designed programs should be evaluated to see its value and improve when necessary. My evaluation plan concentrates on the question, Can the program decrease the number of people with HIV/AIDS in the Kenyan community? . This question is important as it correlates with the main topic, and its answer includes the most relevant information regarding it. It reveals the number of people with infection, the way the population will be treated in order to prevent further expansion and the expected results of the program.
To evaluate the program, the evaluation design is to be chosen. The pretest/posttest design is considered to be the best variant as it allows us to collect all necessary data before the intervention and after it (Issel 418). The information that was gained before the program shows the real situation regarding HIV/AIDS among the Kenyan community. When the program is adopted, it influences the participants and changes the results. Thus, the data gathered later shows whether the difference between the information is substantial or not and if it proves the value of the program.
This kind of evaluation design has its advantages and disadvantages. Among the positive factors is its easiness in usage. The ability to control the main knowledge gained by the participants is also of advantage. Moreover, it shows accurate evidence of the effectiveness or inefficiency of the program. However, it enables us to distinguish the non-program impact on the results. To use self-reporting, in this case, is also a bad idea. The participants may overestimate themselves during one of the tests and change the results in this way. It is even possible that posttest data might be lower than the pretest one ( Types of Evaluation Designs par. 3).
To reduce such threats, I would take some precautions. First of all, I would ask the participants to note the information and its sources if they get some within the program. I would also use the objective measures for the tests in order to minimalize the human factor interaction.
According to the process outcome orientation, my design is concentrated on the outcome. It proves whether the expected results were achieved and to what extent. The outcomes are divided into short-term, intermediate, and long-term.
( Introduction to Program Evaluation for Public Health Programs par. 16).
The outcomes deal with a range of changes. These changes include the attitude of the participants towards the HIV/AIDS and people who are infected; possible risks and protective actions, changes in such spheres as policies, regulations, social norms, and other things connecting with the society; and increase or decrease in morbidity and mortality. The central question that stays unsolved in this situation is connected with the assurance that the program was the thing to bring the effectiveness, and not some other events happening around it ( Introduction to Program Evaluation for Public Health Programs par. 10). As it was said earlier, the best way out that I can apply in this case is to insist on taking all necessary notes and generalize the information mentioning that some other things that were happening at that time might also partially influence the outcome. Thus, the focus will be on the results, but not the activities that created them.
There are various methods that can be used in order to answer the evaluation question basing on its context and content. It is better to combine the methods that will provide both qualitative and quantitative data. For a pretest, it is better to use exciting information through the method of document review and analysis, which is one of the easiest and accurate. A lot of researches is done regarding this topic. It is even possible to compare the information gained in different years. Moreover, some conclusions and predictions might be in the text, which will help to deepen the topic. The sources of existing information are articles from the newspapers and journals, annual reports, etc. If it is possible to get the current year paper, it can be used in the posttest; if no, then other methods should be chosen.
As people are commonly considered a good source of information, their knowledge can also be used. Among the best variants are an interview and a test. They are relatively easy and quick. The results are seen almost immediately, and a little time is needed to evaluate them. These methods can be conducted personally, which is not very convenient when a lot of people participate in the program. With the help of e-mail, I will not be that limited in time and location. However, the best variant is to use a telephone. I believe that it is the quickest method. The participants can be chosen randomly, which proves impartiality. The process can be controlled as the conversation will happen on the spot (Pulliam-Phillips and Stawarski 23).
I believe that the existing instrument may need modification if the progress in the goal achievement is not vividly seen. Some outdated sources are to be excluded as the peculiarities of measurement might change. For example, the number of people who are living with HIV/AIDS at the begging of the epidemics and now are treated differently by the scientists of that time and nowadays. If during the program, some changes in population and peoples condition happened, the existing records should be adopted, and the data should be modified to meet the requirements. If it occurs that the participant misunderstood the task, the data provided by one should be changed or excluded. The instruments are to be changed if, in the process, it occurs that they do not satisfy the expectations and are not well adapted for the current user. It should be done as such things are likely to influence the outcome and ruin the program.
The results are likely to influence the population as they provide people with data that shows their poor condition regarding HIV/AIDS. The programs utility depends on the results of the evaluation as only they can prove that the work was not done in vain and show improvement with the help of the contrast of pretest and posttest evaluation. The quality of the program will also change, as the accurate data proves its value and makes it look more authoritative. If the program had some imperfections, it would be clearly seen in the evaluation plan.
Works Cited
Developing an Evaluation Plan n.d. Web.
ICF Macro, and National Coordinating Agency for Population and Development 2011, Effects of the Community Response to HIV and AIDS in Kenya: Final Report. Web.
Introduction to Program Evaluation for Public Health Programs: A Self-Study Guide. 2012. Web.
Issel, Michele. Health Program Planning and Evaluation, Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2014. Print.
Pulliam-Phillips, Patricia, and Cathy Stawarski. Data Collection: Planning for and Collecting All Types of Data, San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, 2008. Print.
Types of Evaluation Designs. 2006. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.