Program Planning Assignment PDF

Added on - 10 Sep 2021

  • 7

    Pages

  • 1574

    Words

  • 14

    Views

  • 0

    Downloads

Trusted by +2 million users,
1000+ happy students everyday
Showing pages 1 to 3 of 7 pages
Running head: Program Planning1
Program Planning and evaluation in Public Health
By:
Student ID:
Course No:
Tutor:
Date:
Program Planning2
Introduction and Background
Palermo, Gardiner, Gee, Charaktis, and Blake (2017) conducted a study “A mixed-methods
impact evaluation of the feasibility of an initiative in small rural stores to improve access to
fruit and vegetables” with an aim of ascertaining whether a health promotion initiative that is
focused on small rural stores can improve access to fruit and vegetables in rural communities.
The objective of the study is clearly outlined in the research and meets the specific elements
of the SMART acronym.
Navarro (2009) note that the health of individuals is determined by access to affordable and
healthy food more so fruits and vegetables. Multiple studies have examined several strategies
to improve access to nutritious food in retail stores (Adams et al., 2012). More specifically,
there exists an increasing body of evidence that the small store approach is much more
effective in increasing access to nutritious food in rural settings (Brimblecombe et al., 2013).
However, there is limited literature on the effectiveness of the use of small-store strategies to
increase food supply in the rural communities in Australia (Gardiner et al., 2013). There are
no supermarkets in most of the rural towns, and thus the accessibility and affordability of
healthy foods such as vegetables and fruits are limited and thus affecting the quality of health
of the community. There is, therefore, the need to assess the function of store initiatives in
increasing access to healthy food in Australia. Furthermore, the study by Palermo et al.
(2017) should be evaluated since it was based on an initial evaluation process that assessed
the quality and access of the initiative, whereas the present study focuses on the impact of the
evaluation.
Evaluation
The aim of the study is clearly outlined in the research and meets the specific elements of the
SMART acronym. The goal is to measure the effectiveness of the health promotion initiative
Program Planning3
in small rural stores in increasing access to fruits and vegetables. Thus it’s specific. The
objective is measurable and uses the range and prices of an identified number of fruits and
vegetables, and thus also attainable and realistic. The study included pre-evaluation and post-
evaluation of 2.5 years, thus making it time bound. The evaluation is both an impact and
process type of evaluation. Process evaluation is utilized when measuring the initiative
activities, its quality and the subjects aimed at (Moore et al., 2015). An impact evaluation is
used to measure the immediate impact of the initiative and is associated with the objectives of
the initiative (Khandker, Koolwal, & Samad, 2009). These definitions correctly define the
aims and purpose of the current study as outlined in the introduction part thus making it both
an impact and process type of evaluation.
The study used a mixed-method approach. This approach was the most appropriate for the
study for various reasons. A mixed-method approach combines both qualitative and
quantitative research methods and thus enabling the researcher to acquire in-depth insight and
corroboration of a study while offsetting the drawbacks that are inherent in each method
when used independently. Furthermore, the mixed method design allows the use of
triangulation which increases the reliability and validity of the findings. However, the mixed
method approach is complex thus posing challenges in the planning and implementation of a
study (Abowitz & Toole, 2009).
Most of the data that the researchers expected to collect were not collected. For instance, data
on sales to measure demand was not collected due to the unwillingness of the traders to
provide such data. This led to incomplete data thus increasing the possibility of sampling
bias. Sampling bias may distort the findings thus compromising the external and internal
validity of the study because the sample upon which the inferences are made is not
adequately representative (Noble & Smith, 2015). The study used semi-structured interviews
desklib-logo
You’re reading a preview
Preview Documents

To View Complete Document

Click the button to download
Subscribe to our plans

Download This Document