Please see my submitted assignment and the feedback from the professor. Please fix the assignment according to the professor’s comments below:
â€¢ Inputs: You should clearly differentiate or categorize inputs â€“ the difference between providers, staff are not clear. Maybe better to say â€œhuman resourcesâ€ and then list out types. Also, location is not really an input â€“ it is a context.
â€¢ Activities: Would be good to add more detail or specific to be able to differentiate activities by actors. This can be done through the addition of subheadings.
â€¢ Outputs: these should be immediate outputs from activities. The activities will not create employment opportunities â€“ that is an outcome. Outputs need to link to activities (eg. motivational interviewing â€“ clients counseled). Some of the outputs not clearly linked to activities (eg. staff interviewed).
â€¢ Outcomes: Important to pick a few that are the critical outcomes. For example â€“ training was intended to increase employment skills â€“ it was an activity of the program. There is some confusion between outputs and outcome (eg. increase in number of people who referred treatment â€“ in fact â€“ the aim was to increase referrals â€“ but treatment was out of the remit. These should be higher level than outputs.
â€¢ Impacts: The aim of this program is integration which may or may not decrease mental health problems. It may increase identification of problems within a certain population. Decreasing hospitalization or was not an objective per se. Hospitalization could increase as result of better knowledge and diagnosis, for example. Also, do we know the baseline? Process Evaluation If the does delivered is training, then does received is probably better measured by competencies of staff than satisfaction of participants (or quality information transmitted to participants). Similarly, fidelity is about the extent to the program components (activities) are delivered â€“ not about whether services are provided. Not that the aim of the program is about identification, referral, barriers to access and knowledge by health workers â€“ it is not about service provision. Also, definition of reach maybe missing word? What does â€œpercentage of anticipated individuals who will anticipate in the mental health service interventionâ€ mean? For a process evaluation, the evaluation questions should be specific to program design and about design and implementation not impact (eg. number of cases detected would be outcome). Indicators need to measure question (eg. number of stakeholders is not a measure of importance). Data source should be specified (eg. what data/where will you get the data). Timeline is about when the program cycle â€“ (e.g. pre intervention/post intervention). Assumptions: Not clear what is meant by â€œenergyâ€ or â€œeconomic conditionsâ€ and why it is important that personal costs are constant. This is covered in the bullet â€“ program funds available. Also not clear what is meant by participants or audience â€“ trainers? CBOs? MPHs?