Public Health Planning Program Report

Running head: PUBLIC HEALTH
PLANNING AND EVALUATION OF PROGRAM
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1
PUBLIC HEALTH
Answer 1
In my opinion the best way to set priorities are to determine the procedures needed for
choosing issues that are related to work. The next step would be to analyse the approaches,
which are more effective in addressing the issue (Naidoo et al., 2009). The most important part
to analyse the initiative and interventions required for making decisions processes, which allows
better planning thereby providing opportunities to approach wisely and rationally. Priority needs
decision is to be made depending on the patient’s condition (Stevens, 1998). The priority is
influenced depending on the prospective of precautionary services to medicate health problems.
The capability of advantage is not static, however depends on present knowledge and research
agenda, as well as ethical and cultural elements of existing society.
If the expert gets more priority, then the choice of needs would be different. The decision
would be made more on the norms that depends on the standard of fitness of the patient based on
some criteria. However, the choices are made by expert choices (Wadsworth, 2011). However, in
community member the needs are prioritised without expert’s knowledge therefore the choices
are not always perfect. There are chances that something might happen wrong as it lacks basic
scrutiny.
Answer 2
Risks of failing to specify a program theory mainly apprehended about resources and
time based on the usefulness of the solutions outcomes. Some particular risks that accompanies
failure of the program theory are-

2
PUBLIC HEALTH
Health care staffs, funders and other health care people do not agree on the outcome and
right services that includes involvement in the tasks by reviewing materials or helping people
with issues and stickier questions.
Sometimes it is observed that health members are less interested for logic theory and
model. The decision is made depends on the scepticism thereby lacking interest over the valuable
process (Calautti et al., 2016). People do not spend much time in designing the program theory
hence proper implementation of the program becomes difficult.
The main target of this theory is to enhance the entire community not only small
community. Hence, participation is necessary however, there is lack of participation and hence
creating difficulty in decision-making. The events and issues varies from small community to
whole community hence promotion and implementation varies, as there is variation in the
process of monitoring the service.
Answer 3
The possible objectives and strategies of evaluation plan and program for reducing the
childhood obesity in a disadvantaged community are making a strategic evaluation map, which
would guide the health care members for sorting out the information and decide a necessary
information requirement. The main objective is to gather information, which are not necessary
and decide a best possible way to fulfil the requirement needed for information. This main
purpose is to enhance the initiative taken by the evaluation plan committee (Halpern, Gauthier &
McDavid, 2015). The strategies of evaluation map uses reflection duty towards evaluation and
learning performance and thereby giving feedback from the community partner for providing
service experience.

3
PUBLIC HEALTH
The potential challenges faced are space; as it becomes difficult to integrate space for
carrying out programme plan. Program planner a proper place to meet and decide the plans that
is to be implanted, priority difference occurs as the staff members are from different race and
ethnicity hence the priority implementation varies from rural to urban community, confidentiality
and liability states that promise to have a secluded space to discuss with advocates for
maintaining discretion. On other hand, liability assures identification of staff needs and safety in
the program plan.

4
PUBLIC HEALTH
References
Naidoo, K., Willis, C., Bohra, M., & Bhat, H. (2009). P01-11 The development of an adult
ADHD transitional service. European Psychiatry, 24, S399. doi: 10.1016/s0924-
9338(09)70632-7
Stevens, J. (1998). Discussion by Julia L. Stevens, MD. Ophthalmology, 105(7), 1309-1310. doi:
10.1016/s0161-6420(98)97039-7
Wadsworth, B. (2011). Antonia M. Villarruel, PhD, FAAN. Nurse Leader, 9(5), 12-14. doi:
10.1016/j.mnl.2011.07.009
Calautti, m., Greco, s., Molinaro, c., & Trubitsyna, i. (2016). Using linear constraints for logic
program termination analysis. Theory And Practice Of Logic Programming, 16(3), 353-
377. doi: 10.1017/s1471068416000077
Halpern, G., Gauthier, B., & McDavid, J. (2015). Professional Standards for Evaluators: The
Development of an Action Plan for the Canadian Evaluation Society. The Canadian
Journal Of Program Evaluation, 29(3). doi: 10.3138/cjpe.29.3.21