NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE

Walden University NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE-Step-By-Step Guide

 

This guide will demonstrate how to complete the Walden University NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.

 

How to Research and Prepare for NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE                     

 

Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Walden University NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.

 

After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.

 

How to Write the Introduction for NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE                     

The introduction for the Walden University NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.

 

How to Write the Body for NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE                     

 

After the introduction, move into the main part of the NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.

 

Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.

 

How to Write the Conclusion for NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE                     

 

After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.

 

How to Format the References List for NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE                     

 

The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.

Stuck? Let Us Help You

 

Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease. 

 

Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW. 

Sample Answer for NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE Included After Question

How was the success of the program or policy measured?
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected? nurs-6050-healthcare program policy evaluation analysis template
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE
Title: NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE

The primary goal of a healthcare program is to prevent or control disease, injury, disability, and death. Evaluation of a healthcare program allows stakeholders to analyze its operations, including which activities took place, who conducted the activities, and who was reached as a result (Adams & Neville, 2020). Healthcare programs are evaluated to track progress toward the program’s objectives and establish whether the program’s interventions generate the expected progress on outcomes (Adams & Neville, 2020). Evaluation results are used to validate the need for additional funding and support and to identify opportunities for continuous quality improvement. This paper seeks to describe an evaluated healthcare program, including how success was measured, people reached by the program, data used for evaluation, impacted stakeholders, and my recommendations for the program.

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation	Better Choices Better Health Diabetes (BCBH-D) Self-Management Program.
Description	BCBH-D program is an all-online workshop. Participants of the program logged on at their convenience to learn about: Healthy eating and menu planning. Managing blood glucose (Turner et al., 2018). Strategies to address problems such as frustration, fatigue, and isolation. Appropriate exercise for controlling blood glucose and maintaining and improving strength, flexibility, and endurance (Turner et al., 2018). Appropriate use of Diabetes medications. Communicating effectively with family, friends, and health professionals (Turner et al., 2018). Goal-setting. Disease-related problem-solving. The program ran for six weeks, with new lessons being posted every week. The participants logged on 2-3 times per week for a total of 1-2 hours (Turner et al., 2018).
How was the success of the program or policy measured?	The success of the BCBH-D program was measured by its impact on comorbid illness attributed to DM, Health care utilization, and Health care costs within 12 months after establishing the program (Turner et al., 2018). The impact was compared with a propensity score-matched control cohort of DM patients who were provided usual care but did not participate in the BCBH-D program.
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?	The BCBH-D program reached 558 persons with Diabetes Mellitus. The health program had a significant impact since the participants had a reduced all-cause health care utilization and medical costs (Turner et al., 2018). The impact realized with the BCBH-D program include: Decreased all-cause utilization. Reduced ED visits and outpatient visits (Turner et al., 2018). Decreased unadjusted total all-cause medical cost by $2207 (Turner et al., 2018). Direct cost savings of the BCBH-D were $815.
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?	Outcome evaluation data included pre-and post-intervention all-cause and diabetes-specific utilization and costs. Diabetes-specific utilization referred to hospitalizations and ED visits with a primary diagnosis of Diabetes (Turner et al., 2018). It also includes outpatient services such as office visits, laboratory tests, imaging, and procedures with any diabetes diagnosis on the claim. All-cause utilization referred to any claims-based health care utilization inclusive of Diabetes and any other diagnosis on the claim (Turner et al., 2018). All-cause and Diabetes specific utilization data for the 12-month pre-and post-intervention periods included ED visits, hospitalizations, and outpatient services, reported as visits per 1000 participants (Turner et al., 2018).
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?	Some participants did not attend all the program’s sessions and, as a result, did not complete the program’s entire course (Turner et al., 2018).
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.	Stakeholders identified in the evaluation of the BCBH-D program include persons diagnosed with Diabetes mellitus (Turner et al., 2018). Patients with Diabetes would benefit the most from the results and reporting of the BCBH-D program (Turner et al., 2018). The program’s impact would influence the development of other Diabetes self-management programs, which would help reduce healthcare utilization and costs for diabetic patients. DM patients would also benefit from improved health outcomes such as controlled glycemic levels, reduced DM comorbidities, and reduced DM-related complications.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?	The original goal of the BCBH-D self-management program was to reduce healthcare utilization and healthcare costs attributed to the management of Diabetes (Turner et al., 2018). The program adequately met its goal, as evidenced by results showing that participants in the peer-facilitated BCBH-D program experienced decreased all-cause health care utilization and medical costs (Turner et al., 2018). Based on the results, there was a significant decrease in all-cause utilization and costs for the participants for ED, inpatient, and outpatient services. There was also a decrease in total all-cause medical and pharmacy costs (Turner et al., 2018). There was a decreased utilization in the participants for DM comorbid chronic conditions. Notably, there were reduced claims for hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and depression among participants in the BCBH-D program during the follow-up period (Turner et al., 2018).
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?	I would highly recommend implementing a health program similar to the BCBH-D Self-Management Program in my current healthcare organization. Implementation of the program would significantly reduce healthcare costs used in the management of DM, which has the highest expenditures (Adam et al., 2018). It would also reduce ED visits and hospitalizations of patients and thus enable the organization to channel the resources to manage other conditions. I recommend the program because it would significantly improve health outcomes for persons with DM, who have one of the worst morbidity and mortality rates in our healthcare setting and other healthcare systems (Adam et al., 2018).
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.	A nurse advocate can become involved in a program’s evaluation after implementation by: Disseminating a program evaluation, particularly a program that extends over to the public health pyramid, to interdisciplinary health care audiences interested in the health problem or interventions used to address the health problem (Issel, 2016). Nurse advocates can also submit a health program’s evaluation reports to a myriad of health journals. This can inform other health providers and organizations of the program’s impact in improving health outcomes and efficiencies in patient care, influencing them to implement similar programs (Issel, 2016).
General Notes/Comments	The BCBH-D Self-Management Program is an ideal healthcare program that should be implemented in all healthcare organizations providing care to diabetes patients. Similar programs can also be established to include patients with other chronic or lifestyle conditions such as hypertension, heart failure, hyperlipidemia, and obesity. The State governments should facilitate health care organizations to establish such programs through funding and mobilization to help improve health outcomes in the population and lower health care costs.

Conclusion

Healthcare programs aim to solve complex health problems, in which the solutions must include engaging community members and organizations in a coalition. The BCBH-D Self-Management Program was an online program that enrolled 558 diabetic patients. The goal of the program was to reduce healthcare utilization and costs associated with Diabetes. The success of the program was measured using data on diabetes-specific utilization and costs. It led to decreased all-cause utilization, reduced ED and outpatient visits, reduced unadjusted total all-cause medical costs, and increased direct cost savings. I would recommend a similar program in our organization and include interventions for patients with other chronic illnesses to reduce healthcare costs and improve healthcare outcomes.

References

Adam, L., O’Connor, C., & Garcia, A. C. (2018). Evaluating the impact of Diabetes self-management education methods on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 42(5), 470-477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjd.2017.11.003

Adams, J., & Neville, S. (2020). Program Evaluation for Health Professionals: What It Is, What It Isn’t and How to Do It. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1609406920964345. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920964345

Issel, L. M. (2016). Health Program Planning And Evaluation: What Nurse Scholars Need To Know. Practice-Based Clinical Inquiry in Nursing: Looking Beyond Traditional Methods, 3.

Turner, R. M., Ma, Q., Lorig, K., Greenberg, J., & DeVries, A. R. (2018). Evaluation of a Diabetes Self-Management Program: Claims Analysis on Comorbid Illnesses, Health Care Utilization, and Cost. Journal of medical Internet research, 20(6), e207. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9225

A Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment: NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE
Title: NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template

The purpose of this assignment is to highlight the significance of policy analysis or evaluation in provision of successful health care delivery. Successful policies and programs require developers to consider different aspects of evaluation from their initial point. Policy or program evaluation informs

stakeholders about the impact it has had since its implementation and what can be done to enhance its effectiveness to different health populations. The paper evaluates the Affordable Care Act 2010 based using this template.

Click here to ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT on NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation	Affordable Care Act 2010 Policy
Description	The aim of the policy is to increase the number of individuals covered by medical insurance. The policy also aims at improving the quality of medical care and costs.
How was the success of the program or policy measured?	The success of the policy is measures using health insurance companies and effects on the number of individuals with health insurance. These firms reported an increase in enrollment based on estimated projections by the policy (Courtemanche et al., 2018). For instance, the rate of uninsured individuals dropped by close to 20% since the policy’s enactment.
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?	Over 20 million people that were never insured got covered through the Affordable Care Act. These include individuals with pre-existing conditions (Sommers et al., 2017). The uninsured levels fell in all levels of income, households, level of education and among the various ethnic groups. The issue of paying bills was resolved as more people who did not visit healthcare providers dropped with more accessing care interventions.
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?	The enactment of ACA policy was based on the declining rates of employer-based insurance coverage and an increase in the number of individuals without medical insurance. For instance, the level of uninsured nonelderly individuals was a concern as soon as their parents’ coverage stopped due to high cost of insurance premiums.
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?	The insured will have limited access to healthcare providers and get sub-standard service since only a small number of providers will accept lower rates than those in the private market. Healthy young adults were mandated to buy extensive policies without any need due to subsidies for the uninsured. The plan leaves limited options for the participants and discourages entry of new players as they cannot dictate prices which reduces competitiveness.
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.	The involved stakeholder in policy evaluation included state and federal government and agencies, health insurance firms, political leaders, the Supreme court and the public. The main beneficiaries of the policy include young adults since the premiums were reduced to allow them purchase insurance coverage (Milstead & Short, 2019). Irrespective of the ethnic group, income or education level, everyone would benefit from the policy upon enrollment due to the lower rates of premium.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?	The Affordable Care Act 2010 met its original intent and objectives since the number of uninsured individuals and households dropped significantly. The policy subsidized insurance premium rates. Insurance companies reported improved enrollment rates while hospitals recorded a rise in the number of visits by patients covered for different health care needs (Sommers et al., 2017). The policy’s ability to increase health insurance markets and options is considered as a fundamental part of its effectiveness and attaining intended objectives.
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?	Yes, I would highly recommend the policy in my workplace because of the benefits that it offers to employees and even employers. The policy promotes health through subsidized insurance premiums that allow individuals with pre-existing conditions to enroll and get medical care. The policy promotes primary care interventions as individuals can access healthcare services for reviews and screening (Courtemanche et al., 2018). The policy also demonstrates the need for state and federal governments to understand the importance of health insurance coverage in reducing the cost of healthcare.
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.	As a nurse advocate, evaluation of the policy is essential, especially its outcomes and impacts on the targeted populations. In this case, the policy had intended and unintended consequences and its evaluation is important in informing better interventions to address the negative effects. Through the evaluation, one makes a comparison on outcomes and anticipated results to ascertain the difference (Laureate Education, 2018). Secondly, evaluation of cost and benefit is essential as it demonstrates the overall economic viability and sustainability of the policy, particularly in the long-term (Williams & Anderson, 2018). Cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness studies cane be critical in understanding the effects of the policy.
General Notes/Comments	The enactment of the ACA 2010 remains a historic and landmark decision that transformed healthcare forever and ensured that more Americans could access better health interventions. The positive effects of ACA 2010 are critical for cost-reduction efforts and quality of care. Conversely, the act has unintended effects like reduced competitiveness of the healthcare environment. However, the policy remains a critical part of enhancing quality care and affordable health in the country.

References

Courtemanche, C., Marton, J., Ukert, B., Yelowitz, A., & Zapata, D. (2018). Effects of the Affordable Care Act on health care access and self-assessed health after 3 years. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing, 55, 0046958018796361.

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). The Importance of Program Evaluation [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett

A Sample Answer 3 For the Assignment: NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE
Title: NURS 6050 Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template SAMPLE

Learning.

Williams, J. K., & Anderson, C. M. (2018). Omics research ethics considerations. Nursing Outlook, 66(4), 386–393. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2018.05.003

Sommers, B. D., Maylone, B., Blendon, R. J., Orav, E. J., & Epstein, A. M. (2017). Three-year impacts of the Affordable Care Act: improved medical care and health among low-income adults. Health Affairs, 36(6), 1119-1128. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0293

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis   Template

 

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template

Use this document to complete the Module 5 Assessment Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
Description
How was the success of the program or policy measured?
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.
General Notes/Comments

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis  Template  

Use this document to complete the Module 5 Assessment Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
Description
How was the success of the program or policy measured?
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.
General Notes/Comments

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template

Use this document to complete the Module 5 Assessment Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
Description
How was the success of the program or policy measured?
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.
General Notes/Comments

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template

The primary goal of a healthcare program is to prevent or control disease, injury, disability, and death. Evaluation of a healthcare program allows stakeholders to analyze its operations, including which activities took place, who conducted the activities, and who was reached as a result (Adams & Neville, 2020). Healthcare programs are evaluated to track progress toward the program’s objectives and establish whether the program’s interventions generate the expected progress on outcomes (Adams & Neville, 2020). Evaluation results are used to validate the need for additional funding and support and to identify opportunities for continuous quality improvement. This paper seeks to describe an evaluated healthcare program, including how success was measured, people reached by the program, data used for evaluation, impacted stakeholders, and my recommendations for the program.

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation	Better Choices Better Health Diabetes (BCBH-D) Self-Management Program.
Description	BCBH-D program is an all-online workshop. Participants of the program logged on at their convenience to learn about: Healthy eating and menu planning. Managing blood glucose (Turner et al., 2018). Strategies to address problems such as frustration, fatigue, and isolation. Appropriate exercise for controlling blood glucose and maintaining and improving strength, flexibility, and endurance (Turner et al., 2018). Appropriate use of Diabetes medications. Communicating effectively with family, friends, and health professionals (Turner et al., 2018). Goal-setting. Disease-related problem-solving. The program ran for six weeks, with new lessons being posted every week. The participants logged on 2-3 times per week for a total of 1-2 hours (Turner et al., 2018).
How was the success of the program or policy measured?	The success of the BCBH-D program was measured by its impact on comorbid illness attributed to DM, Health care utilization, and Health care costs within 12 months after establishing the program (Turner et al., 2018). The impact was compared with a propensity score-matched control cohort of DM patients who were provided usual care but did not participate in the BCBH-D program.
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?	The BCBH-D program reached 558 persons with Diabetes Mellitus. The health program had a significant impact since the participants had a reduced all-cause health care utilization and medical costs (Turner et al., 2018). The impact realized with the BCBH-D program include: Decreased all-cause utilization. Reduced ED visits and outpatient visits (Turner et al., 2018). Decreased unadjusted total all-cause medical cost by $2207 (Turner et al., 2018). Direct cost savings of the BCBH-D were $815.
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?	Outcome evaluation data included pre-and post-intervention all-cause and diabetes-specific utilization and costs. Diabetes-specific utilization referred to hospitalizations and ED visits with a primary diagnosis of Diabetes (Turner et al., 2018). It also includes outpatient services such as office visits, laboratory tests, imaging, and procedures with any diabetes diagnosis on the claim. All-cause utilization referred to any claims-based health care utilization inclusive of Diabetes and any other diagnosis on the claim (Turner et al., 2018). All-cause and Diabetes specific utilization data for the 12-month pre-and post-intervention periods included ED visits, hospitalizations, and outpatient services, reported as visits per 1000 participants (Turner et al., 2018).
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?	Some participants did not attend all the program’s sessions and, as a result, did not complete the program’s entire course (Turner et al., 2018).
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.	Stakeholders identified in the evaluation of the BCBH-D program include persons diagnosed with Diabetes mellitus (Turner et al., 2018). Patients with Diabetes would benefit the most from the results and reporting of the BCBH-D program (Turner et al., 2018). The program’s impact would influence the development of other Diabetes self-management programs, which would help reduce healthcare utilization and costs for diabetic patients. DM patients would also benefit from improved health outcomes such as controlled glycemic levels, reduced DM comorbidities, and reduced DM-related complications.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?	The original goal of the BCBH-D self-management program was to reduce healthcare utilization and healthcare costs attributed to the management of Diabetes (Turner et al., 2018). The program adequately met its goal, as evidenced by results showing that participants in the peer-facilitated BCBH-D program experienced decreased all-cause health care utilization and medical costs (Turner et al., 2018). Based on the results, there was a significant decrease in all-cause utilization and costs for the participants for ED, inpatient, and outpatient services. There was also a decrease in total all-cause medical and pharmacy costs (Turner et al., 2018). There was a decreased utilization in the participants for DM comorbid chronic conditions. Notably, there were reduced claims for hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and depression among participants in the BCBH-D program during the follow-up period (Turner et al., 2018).
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?	I would highly recommend implementing a health program similar to the BCBH-D Self-Management Program in my current healthcare organization. Implementation of the program would significantly reduce healthcare costs used in the management of DM, which has the highest expenditures (Adam et al., 2018). It would also reduce ED visits and hospitalizations of patients and thus enable the organization to channel the resources to manage other conditions. I recommend the program because it would significantly improve health outcomes for persons with DM, who have one of the worst morbidity and mortality rates in our healthcare setting and other healthcare systems (Adam et al., 2018).
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.	A nurse advocate can become involved in a program’s evaluation after implementation by: Disseminating a program evaluation, particularly a program that extends over to the public health pyramid, to interdisciplinary health care audiences interested in the health problem or interventions used to address the health problem (Issel, 2016). Nurse advocates can also submit a health program’s evaluation reports to a myriad of health journals. This can inform other health providers and organizations of the program’s impact in improving health outcomes and efficiencies in patient care, influencing them to implement similar programs (Issel, 2016).
General Notes/Comments	The BCBH-D Self-Management Program is an ideal healthcare program that should be implemented in all healthcare organizations providing care to diabetes patients. Similar programs can also be established to include patients with other chronic or lifestyle conditions such as hypertension, heart failure, hyperlipidemia, and obesity. The State governments should facilitate health care organizations to establish such programs through funding and mobilization to help improve health outcomes in the population and lower health care costs.

Conclusion

Healthcare programs aim to solve complex health problems, in which the solutions must include engaging community members and organizations in a coalition. The BCBH-D Self-Management Program was an online program that enrolled 558 diabetic patients. The goal of the program was to reduce healthcare utilization and costs associated with Diabetes. The success of the program was measured using data on diabetes-specific utilization and costs. It led to decreased all-cause utilization, reduced ED and outpatient visits, reduced unadjusted total all-cause medical costs, and increased direct cost savings. I would recommend a similar program in our organization and include interventions for patients with other chronic illnesses to reduce healthcare costs and improve healthcare outcomes.

References

Adam, L., O’Connor, C., & Garcia, A. C. (2018). Evaluating the impact of Diabetes self-management education methods on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 42(5), 470-477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjd.2017.11.003

Adams, J., & Neville, S. (2020). Program Evaluation for Health Professionals: What It Is, What It Isn’t and How to Do It. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1609406920964345. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920964345

Issel, L. M. (2016). Health Program Planning And Evaluation: What Nurse Scholars Need To Know. Practice-Based Clinical Inquiry in Nursing: Looking Beyond Traditional Methods, 3.

Turner, R. M., Ma, Q., Lorig, K., Greenberg, J., & DeVries, A. R. (2018). Evaluation of a Diabetes Self-Management Program: Claims Analysis on Comorbid Illnesses, Health Care Utilization, and Cost. Journal of medical Internet research, 20(6), e207. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9225

Evaluation of health policies and programs is critical as it assists in improving the outcomes and effectiveness of such initiatives on target population. Evaluation entails collections and analysis of information concerning policy features activities and results so that stakeholders can enhance the initiative. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate a program on HIV/AIDS aimed at reducing the spread of the disease by the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care (AIPAC) to ascertain its effectiveness

Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation	International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care (IAPAC) Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) as a health issue has different aspects that include social, political and economic impacts. IAPAC is an association of physicians established in 1995 with the aim of representing HIV-treating doctors and allied healthcare providers across the world.
Description	The IAPAC program focuses on a host of components on HIV, right from treatment and prevention to developing a heterogeneous response to HIV. The aim of the IAPAC program and institution is to development of normative guidance, carrying out capacity building activities and engagement in advocacy to support efforts to control the HIV epidemic at all levels.
How was the success of the program or policy measured?	IAPAC program utilizes its annual Adherence Conference to evaluate or assess the success of its initiatives. The objectives of the conference include assessing effectiveness of self-reports, evaluating the use of clinical trials in relation to objective adherence and use of other evidence-based interventions. Therefore, measuring the success of the program is critical to its overall effectiveness on the target population.
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?	The IAPAC program has reached millions of individuals in different parts of the world living with HIV/AIDS. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) close to 40 million people were living with HIV/AIDS. Further, about 1.7 million get infected each year. All these people are potential beneficiaries of the program (IAPAC, 2021). The IAPAC has services in five regions across the world. These include Africa, which is the most affected, Asia/Pacific, Latin America, North America, and Europe. The program’s impacts include reducing AIDS-related deaths by close to 35% between 2010 and 2017, and preventing new child infections by close to 1.5 million incidents (Brazier et al., 2019). The program has allowed countries to develop effective interventions to prevent further spread of the condition among vulnerable population through resource provision.
At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?	Evaluation of the IAPAC program is done annually through its Adherence Conference where new objectives are set for the coming year. This implies that each year, the stakeholders review the program and seek better ways to enhance its effectiveness to the targeted population (IAPAC, 2021b).
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?	Program evaluation focuses on various aspects that include processes, resource allocation, feedback and overall impact on target population. Program implementers attain this data through surveys where they collect both qualitative and quantitative information. IAPAC program has used all these approaches to evaluate the impact of this initiative. For instance, it has conducted surveys by contracting firms to evaluate the effects of its interventions in five different regions around the world. These surveys were critical as they revealed significant information on various components like health status, adherence and tolerance to present regime and side effects of different HIV/AIDS medications, and resistance in HIV/AIDS medications.
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified?	The program’s unintended consequences included increased stigmatization and discrimination of individuals with HIV/AIDS that reduce the use of services rolled out through the initiative. IAPAC also observes that the program’s rollout also increased isolation and marginalization of individuals with the condition. The program’s rollout also affected the ability of HIV/AIDS patients to lead healthy lives. A core aspect of the unintended effects of the program was the passage of legislations in over 32 states and two territories in the U.S. that criminalize the failure to disclose an individual’s HIV status (HIV.GOV, n.d). Before the program, many states did not have these laws.
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.	HIV/AIDS affects different types of stakeholders and it is essential to engage, coordinate with, and mobilize them to encounter the disease. Stakeholders in such programs play different roles. Therefore, it is essential to develop, maintain, and leverage both formal and informal interactions among the different stakeholders; right from government agencies to civil society (IAPAC, 2021). The program’s stakeholders include individuals living with HIV/AIDS, healthcare workers, governments and their agencies, local community leaders, medical associations, nursing association and faith-based organizations as well as nongovernmental bodies. Individuals living with HIV/AIDS and their families, healthcare workers, and government would benefit the most from effective outcomes of this program. People living with HIV/AIDS benefit through access to better treatment regimes, healthy living information, and increased evidence on the best way to manage the condition (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2019). Healthcare workers attain benefits as they understand new treatment trends and how to deal with patients. Healthcare workers benefit from more knowledge on attainment of safety measures to counter the problem.
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?	The program’s ambitious but achievable targets require more resources and involvement of more stakeholders. Basing on targets by the UNAIDS, the program hoped to reduce infections, increase access to antiretroviral therapy and more suppression of the virus. The program hoped to attain all these by close to 90% by 2020 (IAPAC, 2021). However, this has not happened since not close to 90% of individuals with HIV/AIDS across the world have access to quality antiretroviral treatment. For instance, the success in saving lives does not align with the overall goal of reducing new HIV infections. Further, stigma and discrimination are still a significant concern with women and girls being disproportionately impacted by the disease in different parts of the world, especially in developing countries. The program may have attained close to 75% of its original intent and requires more efforts to achieve the set objectives (IAPAC, 2021).
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?	The program continues to register success in different countries and regions across the world because of its benefits and efforts to reduce HIV/AIDS and its effects to populations. The IAPAC developed this program for an international perspective and not for institutional implementation. Therefore, while I would recommend the program for the workplace, it is not feasibility because of its overall scope.   I would not recommend it because it requires more resources and involvement of different stakeholders, which the organization lacks the capacity to rollout.
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation.	Nurses can apply similar principles in assessing the impact and effectiveness of the program just like the evaluate clinical interventions, processes and procedures (Milstead & Short, 2019). Nurses are critical players in policy planning and evaluation with the aims of promoting and illustrating leadership among professional nurses and meeting the quadruple aims of healthcare.   Nurses possess knowledge, experience and skills that allow them to participate in policy evaluation in different ways that include developing interventions to assess the effectiveness of the set policies (Milstead & Short, 2019). Nurses can also leverage their skills to develop better ways of engaging stakeholders like legislators to establish policies that align with the healthcare needs of their respective populations.
General Notes/Comments	The IAPAC program is an initiative whose mission is to enhance access to and improve the quality of life of individuals living with HIV/AIDS in different parts of the world. The program’s focus includes improving the quality of prevention, care, and intervention regimens offered to individuals living with and impacted by HIV and the associated comorbidities. The program is an initiative where the U.S. plays a critical role in providing resources from human expertise to material input to reduce the rate of infections and other components of HIV/AIDS around the world.

Conclusion

Policy evaluation allows stakeholders to assess the effectiveness of a health care program to enhance quality and delivery of care. The evaluation of this policy shows that significant strides have been made and achieved in controlling the prevalence of HIV/AIDS across the world. The implication is that health care policies should focus on communities and individuals that require interventions to improve access to health services. The policy has played a critical role in reducing the effects of HIV/AIDS in the world, especially the worst hit areas in developing world.

References

Brazier, E., Maruri, F., Duda, S. N., Tymejczyk, O., Wester, C. W., Somi, G., … & Wools‐Kaloustian, K. (2019). Implementation of

“Treat‐all” at adult HIV care and treatment sites in the Global Ie DEA Consortium: results from the Site Assessment Survey. Journal of the International AIDS Society, 22(7), e25331. doi: 10.1002/jia2.25331

HIV.GOV (n.d). U.S. Government Global HIV/AIDS Activities.

https://www.hiv.gov/federal-response/pepfar-global-aids/us-government-global-aids-activities

International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC) (2021). About: History.

The U.S. Government and Global Health

International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC) (2021b). Adherence 2021.

https://web.cvent.com/event/43ce2fde-9727-4b0a-81a4-6353bd5a08c6/summary

Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) (2019). The U.S. Government and Global Health.

The U.S. Government and Global Health

Milstead, J.A., & Short, N.M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed). A. Derouin (Ed.). Health policy and Social program evaluation (pp. 116-1214). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.