Health Program Planning and Evaluation

This assignment focuses on the crucial aspects of health program planning and evaluation. It utilizes a range of resources to delve into topics such as intervention mapping, cost-effectiveness analysis, and engaging diverse stakeholders like fathers in parenting interventions. The assignment encourages critical thinking about the effectiveness and impact of healthcare programs within Australia's context.

Running head: EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Evaluation of a review of Medicare Australia
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Executive summary:
The aim of this report was to insight the similarities and difference between the studies done
by Pawson and Tilley with that of Michelle Issle. It also examines a review done by the
Practitioner’s review program Australia on the Medicare Australia program. The report also
emphasizes on the development of a new model for evaluation of various health care
programs. The report concludes that the evaluation studies are necessary and need to be
remodeled regularly on the basis of the need of the public taken into consideration.

2EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Table of Contents
Introduction:...................................................................................................................3
Discussion:.....................................................................................................................4
Part 1:.........................................................................................................................4
The realist evaluation studies of Pawson and Tilley:.................................................4
Similarities and Differences between the evaluation model of Pawson and Tilley
with that of Michelle Issel:.....................................................................................................5
Similarities:................................................................................................................5
Differences:................................................................................................................5
Part 2:.........................................................................................................................6
The Medicare program of Australia:..........................................................................6
Evaluation of the Medicare Australia program by the Practitioners review program:
................................................................................................................................................7
Review of the evaluation done on Medicare Australia by the Practitioner’s Review
program:.................................................................................................................................8
Development of an evaluation process to improve the Medicare Australia program:
................................................................................................................................................9
Conclusion:..................................................................................................................10
References:...................................................................................................................12

3EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Introduction:
Evaluation of any program, be it a health program or any other public service
program, is important for checking how perfectly the program fits for the public of a
particular place (Issel and Wells, 2017). Most of the countries have evaluation programs,
which are done by various governmental and non-governmental officials that are directed by
governmental officials of the particular region. The most important programs for evaluation
are the health programs as the wellness of the citizens of a country decides its gross
productivity. It also is important to have a healthy population (Sonifield, Hasstedt and Gold,
2014).
The report discusses about the studies on the health programs, done by Pawson and
Tilley in the year of 1997 and 2004. The points that have to be kept in mind before evaluation
of any health program as assisted by the above mentioned researchers are also going to be
elaborated. It also emphasizes on the similarities and differences between the Pawson, Tilley
evaluation study with that of the model designed by the Researcher Michell Issel. The report
will also discuss about evaluation of an already existing evaluation of the program Medicare
Australia by the government of Australia. It also highlights the pros and cons of the earlier
evaluator program done on the Medicare Australia and gives an insight of the present
situation of such initiatives.
The discussion also focuses on designing a model of evaluation for the existing public
health program of Medicare Australia. It elaborates the points under focus of the project and
the points, which have to be taken into consideration to improve the existing program.

4EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Discussion:
Part 1:
The realist evaluation studies of Pawson and Tilley:
The above mentioned Researchers define the realistic evaluation as a type of
evaluation, done based on certain available theories on the subject or program taken into
consideration (Pawson, 2013). It is a distinctive account of the nature of different health
programs and the way in which they work. The study done by the Researchers emphasizes on
the importance of evaluating programs, based on the scenario of the place, that is the
evaluation should focus on the lifestyle of the people of the region and the environmental
aspects of the place. The study should never be generalized for all people around the world as
the cultures, climate and behavior of the habitants vastly differ from region to region. The
model made by the Researchers, also highlights on the importance of personalized approach
of the health programs that is different people need different kind of care giving. Programs
should also have an approach to consider every individual’s needs.
The study also designs a methodology, which to an extent depends on the hypothesis
about the program under consideration. The first stage of the evaluation begins with
researching in various sources. The sources for evaluation can be library searches, interviews
and documentary analysis. The second stage is to edit the data that are collected from the
sources, the third step is to subject the chosen program under the hypothetical scenario. The
fourth and the final step, needs an evaluator to assess and interpret the analysis done on the
program.

5EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Similarities and Differences between the evaluation model of Pawson and Tilley with
that of Michelle Issel:
Similarities:
Both the approaches of the evaluation of health programs had the aim of improving
the system of health programs available, to deal with the health of the public. Both the studies
in contrast to the other existing evaluations have emphasized on the importance of health
programs highlighting the health of people as individuals. Both the research projects put an
abstract of the importance of the interaction between the stakeholders and the evaluators of
the program. They also give an importance to remodel the programs in accordance to the
needs of the public or customers with time. Both the studies highlight the need of examining
the social and ecological ranges of different locations their program is spread. They focus on
the different levels of population because the determinants of health problems vary in
different levels. Both the research works also examine the efficiency of the social workers
associated with the health program, this is a chief step because without the presence of an
efficient social worker, the surveys conducted by the program do not have accuracy. Surveys
are the primary projects of any program to design the procedure of their work, so, their
conductance should be appropriate.
Differences:
The research done by Pawson and Tilley as described in the above paragraph, deals
with realistic evaluation of a program, whereas, the model prepared by the Researcher
Michele Issel direct practical approach of the Researcher to evaluate the procedures the
programs apply for the sake of the public or their customers. Michelle Iselle’s evaluation is
based on the quality management and improvement of the tools applied in the program. The
study also involves the presence of many health professionals who are engaged in the

6EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
operation of several health related programs. On the other hand, Pawson and Tilley’s
approach is theory based and it does not require a number of health personnel for the
theoretical evaluation. Michelle’s work requires the presence of the public and the personnel
from the health organization as sources, it gives a clearer knowledge of the position of the
program. The study of Pawson and Tilley lacks the practical approach, which Michelle’s
study includes, it takes only the documentary films, library searching and other theoretical
approaches as sources. The Pawson and Tilley’s research work is purely hypothetical lacking
the accurate scenario study unlike the work done by Michelle Issle. The study by Issel has
considered a unique comparison of theory and practical examination of the programs, it also
builds a relation between these two aspects of research works and gives an insight of the
importance of relating the two types of studies. Pawson and Tilley’s study does not approach
to the practicality of the programs at all. The study by Michelle Issle, basically is done to help
the students of evaluation studies to understand the process better, Pawson Tilley addressed
their work for the public as a whole. From the comparison of the two studies, it can be
inferred that the study done by Michelle Issle considers many more criteria for judgment of
the health programs than the study done by Pawson and Tilley.
Part 2:
The Medicare program of Australia:
The Medicare Australia program is an initiative taken by the government of Australia,
Department of Human health service (DHS). The program started on first of October in the
year 2005. This program was previously known as the Health Insurance Commission (HIC).
It is interlinked with the Department of Human Service. The Head Quarters of the
organization is in Canberra (Health.gov.au, 2017). This program is one of the most popular
in Australia because it covers a numerous health related issues under its policies (Rashid,

7EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Hoque and Sattar, 2014). The program was made to reduce the cost of medical expenses, and
to minimize the time taken for admission in hospitals during emergencies and to govern the
process of health promotion in a well- managed way. The organization also administers
different programs in association with the Department of Health and Ageing. The program is
nominally funded, that is the surcharge of income tax is minimally Some of the programs
under the vast program of Medicare Australia are Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme, Special
Assistance scheme, Medical indemnity, Doctor connect, Aged care and Indigenious Health.
Evaluation of the Medicare Australia program by the Practitioners review program:
According to the evaluation done by the Practitioner review programs of Australia,
the program Medicare Australia has a proper framework that delivers a health system to the
citizens. Studies done by Practitioner review programs also highlighted that the program
helps millions of people of Australia with minimum wastage of resources (Mason, 2013). It
also maintains the records of the people they served. The organization also has an online
portal to serve the people and communities, registered under their program. The website also
keeps a record of the identifications of their customers. The identification column also
comprises of the reviews of the practitioners they are under treatment of, this feature reduces
the risk of misplacing hard copies of the records and keeps the inappropriate costing of
treatments in check. The examiners also sent their officials to the field -work sessions
organized by the Medicare team to ensure the health of the rural people. The examination
shows that the Medicare personnel do a thorough examination of the population by
monitoring the health status of each individual of the village. The program does not
emphasize on the different policies of cost cutting related to different diseases, it briefly
discusses about the lineage of cost cutting in totality.

8EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Review of the evaluation done on Medicare Australia by the Practitioner’s Review
program:
The evaluation study of the Practitioners review programs gives importance mostly to
the positive outcomes of the Medicare program of Australia (Panter-Brick et al, 2014). It
minimally gives an account of the drawbacks of the program. An evaluation should be
structured in such a way that the program can be worked upon and improved. The insight
given by the Practitioner’s review programs, does not suggest points that can be improved.
The vast program of Medicare Australia is examined but the sub- programs within the
Medicare Australia are not discussed in the evaluation elaborately, this makes the study
fragile because the process in which the sub-programs work, majorly impact the vast program
as a whole (Cater et al, 2012). The environmental factors of the premises should also be
under examination, but the Practitioner’s program omitted this factor. The positive points of
the evaluation are that the program thoroughly investigated on the official activities of the
Program. It examined the online availability of the customer care services they include to
make certain that their care is par excellence, it also investigated the archives they have
preserved of their customers and its genuineness. Field works are crucial to such health care
programs as the people of remote areas are devoid of much communications from the city
(Edward, 2012). The main aim of the field -work is to promote their program and assist the
rural people with getting their policies done for economic as well as health benefits. The
program also incorporated their officials during the health program’s field works to remote
places, in order to check the process the people of such places are handled by the officials of
the program.

9EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
An evaluation process to improve the Medicare Australia program by the
Practitioner’s review program:
Evaluation of the health care programs is important as the programs at present have a
complex way of doing their tasks (Eldredge et al, 2016). The programs work immensely well
at one place but fail to show such impressive results in the other because of the
socioeconomic, fiscal, demographic, inter- organizational and interpersonal settings in which
they are set up (Runciman et al, 2012).
The evaluation of health programs should be done systematically (Drummond et al,
2015). The examination should be for the particular region the program is made to cover. The
objectives should primarily consists of the following steps: firstly the operation as whole of
the organization should be under evaluation, secondly the activities that are considered by the
program should be checked, thirdly the operation in-charge should be noted and finally the
number of people that is approached reached by the organization should be tracked (Luce and
Elixhauser, 2012).
The Medicare Australia program is a large program, which has sub- programs
associated with it (Australia, 2015). This program hence needs evaluation of the sub-
programs as well. The evaluation should be done primarily as mentioned in the above
paragraph. The evaluation should be both realistic based as well as practical based. The study
of previously available documents on the program, gives an idea of the ways in which it used
to work, so that the degree of improvement can be accessed during the evaluation (Street,
Gold and Manning, 2013). The theoretical analysis also establishes an understanding of the
ways the organization operates in general (Pyrczak, 2016). Physical evaluation of a program,
requires the presence of the evaluator in the site at which the program operates. Such

10EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
evaluation gives a clearer insight of the scenario of the steps that the programs practices
(Diamond, Horn and Uttal, 2016).
The Medicare Australia program operation is appreciable as a whole, but certain areas
need improvement. The program has a good online appearance but theoretical evaluation
shows that it lacks the discussion of the sub-programs it conducts on the website. The
management should upload information about the areas, which are taken care by the program,
so that the customers have a clear idea about them. Medicare covers health cost for many
diseases and surgeries (Harrison et al, 2015). In the present day occurrence of some of the
diseases and ailments are increasing like the degenerative disorder of eyes named
keratoconus. These disorders are not covered under the program as most of the patients need
implantation (Britt et al, 2013). Such ailments should be taken under coverage policies so that
the expenditure of the patients due to those diseases, reduce to some extent. The
environmental factors of the premises in, which the program generally work needs proper
assessment on a regular basis (Kim, 2014). The cleanliness of the work place, a healthy
surrounding atmosphere, a properly managed working system altogether makes an ideal
program (Thakur et al, 2012). The evaluation needs to judge these factors too, for carrying a
proper evaluation process.
Conclusion:
Therefore, it can be concluded that evaluation of public programs help in the
improvement process. Health programs should be evaluated in first hand because health is the
primary necessity for the growth of any nation. The two evaluation strategies discussed gives
an insight of the ways the programs can be evaluated. The differences between the two
strategic models designed by the respective Researchers, the theoretical model and the
practical model, show how the two have their own pros and cons. The study done by

11EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Michelle Issle, covers a wide range of aspects unlike the study done by Pawson and Tilley
program. Evaluation is going to be clearer according to the Michelle Issle model. The
evaluation of the review done on the Medicare Australia by the Practitioner’s review program
provides us with a gist of the process. Through such review studies, the others evaluators can
get an insight of the process of examination. The program that was evaluated in the
discussion, that is the Medicare Australia program, is one of the most popular health
programs of the country of Australia, the discussion about the improvements that can be
done, helps to get an overview of the evaluation process of the health care programs. The
discussion also sums up about the points that are to be considered for enhancement of the
Practitoner’s review program on a regular basis. Evaluation of the health programs should be
frequently done for the reasons mentioned in the discussion. Higher the rate of conduction of
evaluation, better the quality of the health care programs.

12EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
References:
Australia, M., 2015. Medicare statistics. Canberra: Medicare Australia.
Britt, H., Miller, G.C., Henderson, J., Bayram, C., Valenti, L., Harrison, C., Charles, J., Pan,
Y., Zhang, C., Pollack, A.J. and O'Halloran, J., 2013. General Practice Activity in Australia
2012-13: BEACH: Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (No. 33). Sydney University
Press.
Carter, S.R., Moles, R., White, L. and Chen, T.F., 2012. Exploring patients’ motivation to
participate in Australia’s Home Medicines Review program. International journal of clinical
pharmacy, 34(4), pp.658-666.
Diamond, J., Horn, M. and Uttal, D.H., 2016. Practical evaluation guide: Tools for museums
and other informal educational settings. Rowman & Littlefield.
Drummond, M.F., Sculpher, M.J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G.L. and Torrance, G.W.,
2015. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford university
press.
Edwards, B., 2012. Growing up in Australia: The longitudinal study of Australian children:
The first decade of life. Family Matters, (91), p.7.
Eldredge, L.K.B., Markham, C.M., Ruiter, R.A., Kok, G. and Parcel, G.S., 2016. Planning
health promotion programs: an intervention mapping approach. John Wiley & Sons.
Harrison, C., Bayram, C., Miller, G.C. and Britt, H.C., 2015. The cost of freezing general
practice. The Medical Journal of Australia, 202(6), pp.313-316.

13EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Humanservices.gov.au. (2017). Search - Australian Government Department of Human
Services. [online] Available at: https://www.humanservices.gov.au/search/dental
%20program?f%5B0%5D=field_dhs_audience_groups%3A36 [Accessed 20 Sep. 2017].
Issel, L.M. and Wells, R., 2017. Health program planning and evaluation. Jones & Bartlett
Learning.
Kim, J., 2014. Impact of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) factors on occupant evaluation
of workspaces.
Luce, B.R. and Elixhauser, A., 2012. Standards for the socioeconomic evaluation of health
care services. Springer Science & Business Media.
Mason, J., 2013. Review of Australian government health workforce programs.
Panter‐Brick, C., Burgess, A., Eggerman, M., McAllister, F., Pruett, K. and Leckman, J.F.,
2014. Practitioner review: engaging fathers–recommendations for a game change in parenting
interventions based on a systematic review of the global evidence. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(11), pp.1187-1212.
Pawson, R., 2013. The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto. Sage.
Rashid, M.A., Hoque, M.T. and Sattar, A., 2014. Association rules mining based clinical
observations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1401.2571.
Runciman, W.B., Hunt, T.D., Hannaford, N.A., Hibbert, P.D., Westbrook, J.I., Coiera, E.W.,
Day, R.O., Hindmarsh, D.M., McGlynn, E.A. and Braithwaite, J., 2012. CareTrack: assessing
the appropriateness of health care delivery in Australia. The Medical Journal of
Australia, 197(2), pp.100-105.

14EVALUATION OF A REVIEW ON MEDICARE AUSTRALIA
Sonfield, A., Hasstedt, K. and Gold, R.B., 2014. Moving forward: Family planning in the era
of health reform.
Street, R.L., Gold, W.R. and Manning, T.R. eds., 2013. Health promotion and interactive
technology: Theoretical applications and future directions. Routledge.
Thakur, J.S., Bains, P., Kar, S.S., Wadhwa, S., Moirangthem, P., Kumar, R., Wadwalker, S.
and Sharma, Y., 2012. Integrated healthy workplace model: An experience from North Indian
industry. Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 16(3), p.108.