Importance of Evaluation Plan (Doc)

Running head: Evaluation plan 1
Program planning and evaluation in public health
Evaluation plan for breast cancer screening programme

Evaluation plan 2
Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................3
Summary of the Evaluation Plan of Breast Cancer screening program.......................................................5
Rational of evaluation plan..........................................................................................................................9
Methods...................................................................................................................................................9
Scope.....................................................................................................................................................10
Design...................................................................................................................................................10
Stakeholders..........................................................................................................................................11
Ethical issues.........................................................................................................................................11
Timings.................................................................................................................................................11
Political issues.......................................................................................................................................12
Disseminate and Utilise.............................................................................................................................13
Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................15
References.................................................................................................................................................16

Evaluation plan 3
Introduction
There are so many programs related to health and care of public in the nation but the
awareness of the programs in the view of public is not that much as should be. The main aim of
public health program is to control disability, disease, injury and diseases. This task has become
more complex to run in perfect manner. Evaluation motivates to examine the program in
sophisticated manner; including which activities takes place, who involved in the activities and
who is attain result. It is the report which will focus on the health care program and analyze will
be done over the program in sophisticated manner. There is a lot of importance of evaluation
plan because it determines the required information by stakeholders and the owner of the health
care program (Grembowski, 2015). Along with that the valuation plan aids to gather the data by
recognizing the effective possible methods and strategies. The Breast Cancer Screening program
has been chosen for this assignment. The main purpose of choosing this program is to make
aware ladies about the breast cancer earlier so that they can have the best chance to being cured.
It has been analyzed that more than 2 billion women has breast cancer in UK. It is the program
which is open for the ladies whose age between 50 to 70 years but for this the patient should be
registered first with a GP to receive the invitations. There are various kind of stakeholders
involve in the evaluation plan of breast cancer screening program (NCBI, 2016). The rational of
evaluation plan will be discussed in this report. The major factors will be analyzed in an
appropriate manner which can influence the successful dissemination and utilization of the
evaluations finding. The main purpose of the evaluation plan is to attain the effective knowledge
about the activities of the program (Kajiho, et. al., 2016). It will be facilitated to decide the
outcomes of a health program by providing the evidence considering the contributions of
program.

Evaluation plan 4
Summary of the Evaluation Plan of Breast Cancer screening program
Goal: the main objective of the breast cancer screening program to provide services all women
aged 50 to 70 for screening every 3 years. The major goal of this program to facilitate discovers
breast cancer as early as possible in term to enhance the chance of recovery (Cancer Research
UK, 2017).
Objectives Strategies Process
Indicator
Data
Collection
Methods of
Process
Indicators
Impact/
Outcome
Indicators
Data
Collection
Methods of
2 Effect
Indicators
1. To provide
breast
screening
called
mammogra
phy test to
all women
whose age
between 50
and 70
years.
Collect
information from
the data of census
and offer them to
get secured from
breast cancer.
Quality of
the relevant
information
and quantity
of the
population.
Survey
conducted to
get aware
about the
women who
are suffering
from breast
cancer so
that other
women can
get aware
about the
potential
The
screened
women
will be
more
aware
about
whether
they have
an issue
regarding
breast and
the
Analyze the
data of
collected
information
to see the
possibility
of check up
of breast
cancer in
among
women.

Evaluation plan 5
health issues
and get
checkup
earlier.
services to
get cured
from this
disease
would be
available
for them.
To provide
knowledge about
the pros and cons
of breast cancer to
those ladies who
come with
patients.
Health care,
health risk
and
behaviors,
economics
and health
status are
major
process
indicators.
Survey
conducted to
get aware
about the
population.
2. To enhance
the
awareness
and
knowledge
about this
program so
that
women get
Advertisement of
the program in the
social media, news
channel and news
paper.
Various kind
of
advertisemen
t material
made and
circulated.
Documentati
on and ask
the people if
they use
social media.
Women
will get
aware
about the
program
and focus
on to have
test of it
for once. It
Survey
people
exposed to
the program
activities.
Conduct a program
for making aware
The people
who have
Survey

Evaluation plan 6
chance of
being
cured.
people about the
program.
age more
than 65
years.
Several ways
of
promotions.
will be
liable to
reduce the
risk of
breast
cancer and
increase
the
satisfactio
n for
health.
3. To
improve
the quality
of life of
women by
protecting
them from
breast
cancer.
Conducting
program and
activities for
improving the rate
of protection of
breast cancer and
it would make
easier for the
nurses to reach at
risk
Number of
aged people
who involve
in the
activities.
Satisfaction
level of
program and
activities.
Interview
with women
to get know
about the
concern
related to
breast issues
with them so
that the
advice can be
given to
them to get
Activities
will be
implement
ed for the
purpose of
increasing
the
awareness
of the
program
for
women.
Survey local
and
nationally
of women
whose age
is above 50
and less
than 80.

Evaluation plan 7
tested in
every 3
years.
4. To reduce
the reason
of death in
the world
due to
breast
cancer.
To focus on
various factors
such as health
risks and
behaviors, health
status and the
death rate of
women by breast
cancer.
Vital
elements
such as
specificity of
diagnostic
procedures,
availability
of nurse
counseling
and perform
appropriate
follow up.
Review the
sample of
forms to
checks the
health
concerns and
other issues
with women.
After
screening
and test
many
women are
readmitted
with breast
cancer.
Activities of
document
and survey
people who
are
screened.

Evaluation plan 8
Rational of evaluation plan
The evaluation plan is vital for improving the quality of health system involvement
against Breast cancer and to understand whether these involvements have attained the measured
goals. Monitoring is able to keep active manager to track progress of program or policies of the
planned goals. Especially when new approaches are being used for instance innovative early
detection programs (Eldredge, Markham, Ruiter, Kok and Parcel, 2016). It is essential to monitor
closely both results whether they have nature of intended or unintended along with that the
assumptions should be revised appropriately on which the involvement is based. Participatory
evaluation is an approach that includes the stakeholders of a policy in the process of evaluation.
The description about the methods, scope, design, stakeholders, ethical concerns, timing and
political issues will be mentioned below in the context of Breast Cancer Program.
Methods
The methods are being taken to analyze the evaluation plan is qualitative data and
quantitative data. The survey will be helpful to analyze the concern of women regarding breast
cancer and other issues related to breast (Kim, et. al., 2014). Interview with women can be
arranged who had experience of breast screen. The questionnaire is made to analyze and evaluate
the effect of breast screening test. With the help of questionnaire the response of different people
regarding test and the Breast Screening Program will be gathered which would be facilitated to
know about the impact of this program. The information regarding program can be collected
from the data of the program and use to inform policy development, enable strategic research and
review the indicators of program (Hambly, et. al., 2009). It has been evaluated that The
Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council (AHMAC) are agreed to an evaluation of the

Evaluation plan 9
Breast Screen Australia Program in October 2005. By taking help of that report the evaluation
plan of this program can be initiated. It comes under the quantitative data which will be helpful
to check the concern of women regarding breast cancer.
Scope
The evaluation plan indicates that there are various challenges in the program of breast
screening program but it can be resolved easily by making aware women about its pros so that
they can get aware about the possible chances of being patient of breast cancer and cured herself
prior. To make the evaluation plan for breast screening program, financial help is taken from
government, NGOs and from those who are ready to donation for improving the condition of
health of public. The main scope of the evaluation plan is to keep focus on false positives and
false negative results. It cannot be found by screening that cancer is there that is why some pope
with breast cancer will be missed. It refers as a false negative result. When the test picks up
something in some women even they are not victim of breast cancer called as false positive
result.
Design
The main focus of evaluation plan is to enhance he rate of the target age group to increase
mortality reduction through a range of social marketing and communication. Along with those
service delivery strategies is applied in the evaluation plan, while making sure there is enough
capacity to meet the demand. The cross sectional design is taken to approach women from target
population. It involves the women from linguistically and culturally background, women living
in various major cities and women who surviving in very low remote areas.

Evaluation plan 10
Stakeholders
There are various stakeholders are contributed to implement the evaluation program. It
includes doctors, women, nurses, and operators of program, agencies, governments, NGOs and
consumers. These plans are improved due to contribution of them in the evaluation plan. The
goal of evaluation plan is fulfilled due to support of stakeholders because they are the key themes
of success of it (Posavac, 2015). The doctor is supportive in the term of treatment of breast
cancer while the agencies, government and NGOs are supportive to provide financial support to
conduct research over the people of breast cancer.
Ethical issues
Ethical consideration is vital process while researching something confidential. There are some
ethical issues is arisen such as approval from committee, informed consent and conflicts between
evaluation team. To prevent from ethical concern there are some policies are applicable which is
liable to take action against those who disclose the confidential information while researching
and evaluating (Andersen and Christensen, 2005). The property standards is involved in the
evaluation plan while conducting that is service orientation, right of human subjects, human
interactions, complete and fair assignments, fiscal responsibility and disclosure of findings.
Timings
It has been evaluated that the timing is required for evaluation plan is maximum 6 months
because it involves the data of death due to breast cancer which is taken 1 or 1.5 months to
evaluate in an adequate manner. Summative evaluation is considered to evaluate the data because
it contains outcome evaluation and impact evaluation. These outcomes are brought the changes
that have nature of short term and long term that outcome directly from the program like attitude
change, social norms and knowledge and awareness (Skaane and Skjennald, 2004).

Evaluation plan 11
Political issues
Political issues can be the major issue for evaluating the plan regarding breast cancer.
Internal pressure can be the reason of creating ethical issues. Policies are compulsory for making
evaluation plan and it can also be the reason of issues as well (Lewin, et. al., 2002). The
evaluation should b maintained and proper planned with anticipation of the various interest of
several group. Political viability helps to obtain the cooperation so that the misuse of the
outcomes can be avoided.

Evaluation plan 12
Disseminate and Utilise
Dissemination is considered as the process of communicating process and learning from
the plan of evaluation to relevant audiences on time and it should be unbiased. There are so many
elements of the evaluation which may be forceful to prevent the communication in proper
manner that is why the reporting strategy should be discussed in prior with intended users and
other specifics stakeholders (Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening, 2012). There is
also requirement of planning effective communications to consider the timing the, message
source and format of information products. This evaluation plan has been made on the Breast
Cancer Screening Programme and it is important for the evaluation plan to attain entire
disclosure and unbiased reporting in spite of how communications are made. It has been found
that there are issues to implement the evaluation plan in an appropriate manner. These issues can
be decreased by taking help of dissemination (Lyman, et. al., 2014). Evaluation is also punctual
staff to simplify their understanding about the goals of the program. There is involvement of
many stakeholders in the evaluation plan and the issue can be come in the form of denying
providing services on required time (Sewdass and Du Toit, 2014).
The findings of evaluation should be utilized; there is also utilization that drive from the
evaluating process. In the breast cancer program these “process uses” should be motivated to
enhance the awareness of the women towards the test of breast cancer so that they can get cured
before becoming the victim of it. The stakeholders who take part in an evaluation can experience
reflective changes in beliefs and behaviour (Lauby-Secretan, et. al., 2015). For example, the
challenges in the evaluation plan of breast cancer can force the other related member of
evaluation plan to act differently in what they are pursuing and to positive or negative

Evaluation plan 13
assumptions of people that interlinked program activities with intended effects. The promptness
of clarity of goals and objectives of the evaluation plan is able to turn member of the evaluation
plan to better function as team focused on a common end. In brief, interest in the logic, values
and reasoning of evaluation can have effective but positive possessions like firming decisions on
systematic judgments instead of on unfounded assumptions. There are additional process is also
considered for evaluation that involve the clear definition of indicators which should be clear in
the perspective of stakeholders (Gnant, et. al., 2011). It facilitates to make results matter by
amending the corroboration linked with attaining the positive results. For instance, a funder can
provide “grant bonus” or “outcome dividends” to a program that has reflected a major amount of
community change and improvement. It has been learned from the evaluation plan of breast
cancer to target those ladies whose age is more than 50 but lesser than 70.

Evaluation plan 14
Conclusion
It has been calculated that the role of evaluation plan is major in the health program for
public because it helps to determine the impact of the program over the public. The possible
changes can be accomplished by making evaluation plan for specific health program. It is the
report which has been made on the breast cancer screening program. Program evaluation is able
to recognize the location of the program in perfect manner and along with that it can recognize
the lack of transportation as a barrier to attendance. The evaluation plan has been made on breast
cancer screening program in which various objectives and strategies has been mentioned. Each
strategy has process indicators which is having the source of data collection. Data is collected
regarding women whose checkup or test of breast is done or remained from the survey and the
report of census to get the data of women living in particular area. It has been evaluated that
more than 15,000 breast cancers are diagnosed by screening in England. It has been
recommended by the UK guidelines that women with a high risk of breast cancer if this issue is
exist in the history of her family that is why it is important to have screening mammograms
every year (Kalager, Zelen, Langmark and Adami, 2010).

Evaluation plan 15
References
Andersen, P.H. and Christensen, P.R., 2005, From localized to corporate excellence: How do
MNCs extract, combine and disseminate sticky knowledge from regional innovation systems(No.
05-16). DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and
Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
Cancer Research UK, 2017, Breast screening, Retrived on 30th October 2017 from:
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/breast-cancer/screening/breast-screening.
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.
Gnant, M., Mlineritsch, B., Stoeger, H., Luschin-Ebengreuth, G., Heck, D., Menzel, C., Jakesz,
R., Seifert, M., Hubalek, M., Pristauz, G. and Bauernhofer, T., 2011, Adjuvant endocrine therapy
plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: 62-month follow-
up from the ABCSG-12 randomised trial. The lancet oncology, 12(7), pp.631-641.
Grembowski, D., 2015, The practice of health program evaluation, Sage Publications.
Hambly, N.M., McNicholas, M.M., Phelan, N., Hargaden, G.C., O'Doherty, A. and Flanagan,
F.L., 2009, Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast
cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program. American Journal of
Roentgenology, 193(4), pp.1010-1018.
Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening, 2012, The benefits and harms of breast
cancer screening: an independent review, The Lancet, 380(9855), pp.1778-1786.

Evaluation plan 16
Kajiho, H., Kajiho, Y., Frittoli, E., Confalonieri, S., Bertalot, G., Viale, G., Di Fiore, P.P.,
Oldani, A., Garre, M., Beznoussenko, G.V. and Palamidessi, A., 2016, RAB2A controls MT1‐
MMP endocytic and E‐cadherin polarized Golgi trafficking to promote invasive breast cancer
programs. EMBO reports, 17(7), pp.1061-1080.
Kalager, M., Zelen, M., Langmark, F. and Adami, H.O., 2010, Effect of screening
mammography on breast-cancer mortality in Norway. New England Journal of
Medicine, 363(13), pp.1203-1210.
Kim, J.H., Sharma, A., Dhar, S.S., Lee, S.H., Gu, B., Chan, C.H., Lin, H.K. and Lee, M.G.,
2014, UTX and MLL4 coordinately regulate transcriptional programs for cell proliferation and
invasiveness in breast cancer cells, Cancer research, 74(6), pp.1705-1717.
Lauby-Secretan, B., Scoccianti, C., Loomis, D., Benbrahim-Tallaa, L., Bouvard, V., Bianchini,
F. and Straif, K., 2015, Breast-cancer screening—viewpoint of the IARC Working Group, New
England Journal of Medicine, 372(24), pp.2353-2358.
Lewin, J.M., D'Orsi, C.J., Hendrick, R.E., Moss, L.J., Isaacs, P.K., Karellas, A. and Cutter, G.R.,
2002, Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for
detection of breast cancer. American Journal of Roentgenology, 179(3), pp.671-677.
Lyman, G.H., Temin, S., Edge, S.B., Newman, L.A., Turner, R.R., Weaver, D.L., Benson III,
A.B., Bosserman, L.D., Burstein, H.J., Cody III, H. and Hayman, J., 2014, Sentinel lymph node
biopsy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology
clinical practice guideline update.,Journal of Clinical Oncology, 32(13), pp.1365-1383.

Evaluation plan 17
NCBI, 2016, The breast cancer screening program in Germany, Retrived on 30th October 2017
from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK361021/.
Posavac, E., 2015, Program evaluation: Methods and case studies, Routledge.
Sewdass, N. and Du Toit, A., 2014, Current state of competitive intelligence in South
Africa, International Journal of Information Management, 34(2), pp.185-190.
Skaane, P. and Skjennald, A., 2004, Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital
mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening
program—the Oslo II study. Radiology, 232(1), pp.197-204.
van Luijt, P., Heijnsdijk, E. and de Koning, H., 2014, breast cancer screening
program. Overdiagnosis in the Dutch and Norwegian breast cancer screening program, p.115.

Evaluation plan 18