Assessment 1 Instructions: Health Promotion Plan
Assessment 1 Instructions: Health Promotion Plan
- Develop a hypothetical health promotion plan, 2–3 pages in length, addressing a specific health concern for an individual or a group living in the community that you identified from the topic list provided. A hypothetical nonprofit group is highly recommended.
Bullying.
Home safety.
Fall prevention.
Immunizations.
Tobacco use (vaping, e-cigarettes, hookah, chewing tobacco, or smoking) cessation.
All assignments in the course are based upon hypothetical individuals or groups.
For this assignment, you will plan for and enlist the participation of a hypothetical individual or group in a clinical learning activity based on a health promotion plan, addressing a particular health concern affecting these members of your community.
Professional Context
The first step in any effective project or clinical patient encounter is planning. This assessment provides an opportunity for you to plan a clinical learning experience focused on health promotion associated with a specific community health concern. Such a plan defines the critical elements of who, what, when, where, and why that establish the foundation for an effective clinical learning experience for the participants. Completing this assessment will strengthen your understanding of how to plan and negotiate individual or group participation.
Demonstration of Proficiency
By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and assessment criteria:
Competency 1: Analyze health risks and health care needs among distinct populations.Analyze a community health concern that is the focus of a health promotion plan.
Competency 2: Propose health promotion strategies to improve the health of populations.
Explain why a health concern is important for health promotion within a specific population.
Establish agreed-upon health goals in collaboration with participants.Competency 5: Apply professional, scholarly communication strategies to lead health promotion and improve population health.
Write clearly and concisely in a logically coherent and appropriate form and style.
Note: Assessment 1 must be completed first before you are able to submit Assessment 4.
Preparation
The first step in any effective project or clinical patient encounter is planning. This assessment provides an opportunity for you to plan a hypothetical clinical learning experience focused on health promotion associated with a specific community health concern. Such a plan defines the critical elements of who, what, when, where, and why that establish the foundation for an effective clinical learning experience for the participants. Completing this assessment will strengthen your understanding of how to plan and negotiate individual or group participation.
You will need to satisfactorily pass Assessment 1 (Health Promotion Plan) before working on your last assignment (Assessment 4).
To prepare for the assessment, consider various health concerns that you would like to be the focus of your plan from the topic list provided, the populations potentially affected by that concern, and hypothetical individuals or groups living in the community. Then, investigate your chosen concern and best practices for health improvement, based on supporting evidence.
As you begin to prepare this assessment, you are encouraged to complete the Vila Health: Effective Interpersonal Communications activity. The information gained from completing this activity will help you succeed with the assessment. Completing activities is also a way to demonstrate engagement.
Please choose one of the topics below:
Bullying.
Home safety.
Fall prevention.
Immunizations.
Tobacco use (vaping, e-cigarettes, hookah, chewing tobacco, or smoking) cessation.
In addition, you are encouraged to:
Complete the Vila Health: Effective Interpersonal Communications simulation.
Review the health promotion plan assessment and scoring guide to ensure that you understand the work you will be asked to complete.
Review the MacLeod article, “Making SMART Goals Smarter.”
Note: Remember that you can submit all, or a portion of, your draft assessment to Smarthinking Tutoring for feedback before you submit the final version for this assessment. If you plan on using this free service, be mindful of the turnaround time of 24–48 hours for receiving feedback.
Instructions
Health Promotion Plan
Choose a one of these specific health concern as the focus of your health promotion plan.Bullying.
Home safety.
Fall prevention.
Immunizations.
Tobacco use (vaping, e-cigarettes, hookah, chewing tobacco, or smoking) cessation.Then, investigate your chosen concern and best practices for health improvement, based on supporting evidence.
Identify populations potentially affected by this health concern. Determine what their related concerns may be and explain why addressing this health concern is important for health promotion.
Identify a hypothetical individual or community group among the affected population who would benefit from an educational session about your chosen health concern and associated health improvement strategies.
Identify expectations for an educational session, determining goals, and suggestions on how the individual or group needs can be met. The hypothetical audience needs to be described and the educational plan should be outlined. Health goals need to be clear, measurable, and appropriate for this activity.
Then, research and document their potential learning needs and health promotion goals.
Document Format and Length
Your health promotion plan should be 2–3 pages in length.
Supporting Evidence
Support your health promotion plan with peer-reviewed articles, course study resources, and Healthy People 2020 resources. Cite at least three credible sources published within the past five years, using APA format.
Graded Requirements
The requirements outlined below correspond to the grading criteria in the scoring guide, so be sure to address each point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each criterion to see how your work will be assessed.
Analyze the health concern that is the focus of your health promotion plan.Consider underlying assumptions and points of uncertainty in your analysis.
Explain why a health concern is important for health promotion within a specific population.
Examine current population health data.
Consider the factors that contribute to health, health disparities, and access to services.Explain the importance of establishing agreed-upon health goals in collaboration with hypothetical participants.
Write clearly and concisely in a logically coherent and appropriate form and style.Write with a specific purpose and audience in mind.
Adhere to scholarly and disciplinary writing standards and APA formatting requirements.Before submitting your assessment for grading, proofread it to minimize errors that could distract readers and make it difficult for them to focus on the substance of your plan.
Portfolio Prompt: Remember to save the assessment to your ePortfolio so that you may refer to it as you complete the final capstone course.
68 PEJ MARCH•APRIL/2012
By Les MacLeod, EdD, MPH, LFACHE
Making SMART Goals Smarter
Goal-setting
In this article…
Study the differences between goals and objectives
and get some valuable insights on how to use SMART
goals in a health care organization.
A critical role of leadership is goal setting.1 As our
health care system continues to evolve, physician execu-
tives will be called upon to play increasingly proactive roles
in formulating appropriate goals for their respective health
care organizations (HCOs).
With what looks like a major perspective shift from
provider-driven volume to consumer-driven value,2-4
physician leaders will be entrusted with the responsibility
of ensuring high standards of care throughout the extended
process of resource realignment.
How well they are able to formulate effective goals will
have, no doubt, a major influence on the future success of
their respective HCOs. In times of system turbulence, goal
initiation is usually a far better alternative than goal response.
It should be noted initially that, as popular as the con-
cept of SMART goals has become in recent years, it is also
somewhat of a misnomer. The terms goals, sub-goals, and
objectives are often used interchangeably, which has often
been the source of unnecessary confusion, and as goal-set-
ting theory continues to develop as a useful body of knowl-
edge, related application benefits can be markedly improved
when their differences are more clearly understood.
Together with an HCO’s mission, vision, strategies
and tactics, goals and objectives serve as the foundation
elements for most major programmatic initiatives.
An organization’s mission is basically its reason for
being. Its vision describes where it wants to be in the
future, and its values are a statement of the principles that
form its moral foundation.5 Collectively, they are the basis
for devising the supporting goals and objectives that assists
the organization in fulfilling its mission and realizing its
vision.
Goals
Goals are the somewhat general ends toward which
much more specific sub-goals or objectives are directed.
This is where much of the confusion usually occurs. Goals
and objectives are very different concepts, whereas sub-
goals and objectives are basically the same things.
The popularized term, SMART goals, actually refers more
to sub-goals and objectives than it does to the much broader
term, goals. In the outline that follows, the term objectives
is used because of its close association with Peter Drucker’s
well-known practice of management by objectives (MBO),6
and because of its more practical use as a basic management
skill. Some of the commonly recognized distinctions between
goals and objectives include the following:
An HCO’s mission, vision, goals and objectives are
inextricably related. They comprise the fundamental “what”
Difference Between Goals & Objectives
Goals Objectives
Broad in scope Narrower in scope
General Specific
Intangible Tangible
Qualitative Quantitative
Abstract Concrete
End result Required steps
Hard to validate Easy to validate
Longer-term Shorter-term
Features_MarchApril.indd 68 3/16/12 8:37 AM
ACPE.ORG 69
a host of performance improvement
consultants.
Unfortunately, a successful goal
setting process is not quite as simple
as these examples might at first
indicate. In the earlier development
of goal theory, the terms goals and
objectives were not always clearly
distinguished and, as mentioned ear-
lier, they are still used synonymously,
which often presents problems.
As for the results of the Yale
and Harvard studies, it has become
increasingly clear that they are
more likely the products of urban
myth than of validated research.8
Nonetheless, there now exists a sub-
stantial body of research that sup-
ports a strong positive relationship
between setting specific goals and
achieving better outcomes.9
General vs. specific
Goals tend to be somewhat
general, whereas objectives are much
challenging goals consistently out-
performed those who were given
vague, less challenging goals.
The Yale Goal Study surveyed
1953 Yale graduates, asking how many
of them had specific written goals for
their future. It was determined that
three percent of them had such goals.
A 20-year follow-up survey indicated
that the three percent of students
with specific written goals had accu-
mulated more personal financial
wealth than the other 97 percent of
the class combined.
The Harvard study followed
the 1979 Business School graduates
and similarly found that only three
percent of the graduates had specific
written financial goals, but ended up
making 10 times as much income as
did the other 97 percent of the gradu-
ating MBAs. The results of both the
Yale and Harvard studies have been
frequently referenced in management
texts as well as in presentations by
of present and future organizational
pursuits. Coupled with the “how” of
strategies and tactics, they form the
blueprint for the allocation of scarce
economic resources.
Each element is important; how-
ever objectives are the principal means
through which they ultimately become
operationalized. The careful design and
strategic use of operational objectives
are important leadership skills.
Goal theory
SMART goals have become a
widely used management tool in
many of today’s HCOs. Part of this
popularity stems from the develop-
ment of goal-setting theory during
the latter part of the last century,
part of it from the increasingly com-
petitive need for greater intentional-
ity, and part of it, no doubt, stems
from the often cited findings of the
1953 Yale Goal Study as well as the
1979 Harvard Written Goal Study.
Earlier goal theory research
by Latham and Locke7 involved
extensive laboratory and field studies
that clearly indicated that partici-
pants who were given specific,
In order to reach a single goal, several enabling or supporting objectives usually
have to be met. In health care settings, this involves the time and talents of trained
professionals who function more on a collegial basis than in the superior-subordinate
relationships.
Features_MarchApril.indd 69 3/16/12 8:37 AM
70 PEJ MARCH•APRIL/2012
in terms of overall priorities. Lower
priority objectives are pursued at the
expense of addressing the higher,
more important ones. The most
straightforward way to ensure that
objectives are relevant is through
prior validation of the relationship of
expected outcomes with the intended
goals and then to list each objective
in writing in their order of priority.
Time bound: Some versions of SMART
goals list “timely” as the attribute
represented by the letter T. In the out-
line presented here, T indicates “time
bound” which is considered to be more
appropriate than “timely” in as much as
timeliness is implied in the preceding
“relevant” attribute (if an objective is
truly relevant it is sine qua non, timely),
and “time bound,” further makes
it clear that the objectives are to be
accomplished by an agreed-upon point
in time. As soon as possible is simply
not an acceptable timeframe. Without
a predetermined deadline, there is only
a general notion about due dates, which
in turn generates a less than rigorous
pursuit of closure. Where there is only
a loose expectation of closure, priori-
tizations and associated time manage-
ment requirements are more apt to lack
needed discipline.
Engaging: Adding engagement to
the SMARTER objectives criteria is
particularly relevant for the physician
executive. Few things are more valu-
able to busy clinicians than their time.
Waste it once and second chances will
be much harder to come by. Merely
laying out a pre-established objective
is not about to excite busy clinicians,
nor will it promote a sense of partici-
pation. Change theorists would be
quick to point out that where there is
disagreements. Also implicit in the
measurement criteria is the important
concept of accountability. It is much
more difficult to avoid accountability
when measurement criteria are clear
and not subject to interpretation.
Achievable: If the established objec-
tives are not reasonably achievable
with respect to available time, talent
and resources, frustration is sure to
follow. It is up to the physician execu-
tive to set objectives that are realistic.
This can be best accomplished through
a process of negotiation and consensus.
Comparative benchmarks from other
similar organizations can also be help-
ful. The use of “reach” objectives, which
are a bit more ambitious, can be used as
well, with the understanding that they
exceed normal expectations and will
require exceptional levels of effort and
commitment.
Relevant: Few things are more frus-
trating to organizational leadership
than to observe busy professionals
using up scarce resources without a
clear direction. Too much time is spent
“doing the wrong things right” or
“being in the thick of some very thin
issues.” It is natural for staff to focus
on those things that they find interest-
ing and enjoyable. Unfortunately those
things might make only marginal con-
tributions toward the more important,
overarching goals. This can easily occur
when goal relevance has not been made
explicit. There is rationalized justifica-
tion based mostly on the exertion of
effort without sufficient validation that
what is being done is, in fact, relevant.
A similar problem occurs when
there is an absence of prioritization.
When this occurs, efforts get focused
on objectives that, although reason-
ably relevant, are decidedly lower
more specific. Goal statements are
typically formulated at higher, more
strategic organizational levels, while
objectives are geared more toward
tangible, operational targets.
In order to reach a single goal,
several enabling or supporting objec-
tives usually have to be met. In
health care settings, this involves the
time and talents of trained profes-
sionals who function more on a col-
legial basis than in the superior-sub-
ordinate relationships around which
the MBO and SMART goal processes
were originally developed.
The following SMARTER objec-
tives criteria take this important dif-
ference into account along with the
substitution of the term objectives,
which more accurately reflects the
operational level of focus.
The first step in making SMART
goals SMARTER is to refer to them
as SMARTER objectives. Subsequent
steps include the following:
Specific: Making objectives specific is
an essential first step. It brings a much
needed practical reality to distin-
guishing effort from results. Effort,
while indeed admirable, only amounts
to a wheel spinning exercise if
intended results do not follow. In the
process, valuable time and resources
are wasted. Committing objectives
to writing in plain language leaves no
doubt about exactly what needs to be
accomplished.
Measurable: There is a long-standing
saying in management circles that,
“You can’t manage what you don’t
measure.” Objectives should be quan-
tified so that the degree of accom-
plishment can be accurately mea-
sured. Specific measurement criteria
will eliminate the possibility of future
Motivational studies have demonstrated that rewards are
essential factors in bringing about desired behavior.
What do great physician
leaders know?
American College of Physician Executives • The Home for Physician Leaders
Marketing
Communication
Finance
Quality
Negotiation
Infl uence
Physician
Leaders Know:
American College of Physician Executives • The Home for Physician Leaders
“The Physician in Management course was the most enjoyable educational event I have ever attended. The
networking was phenomenal! I am already using a great deal of what I have learned. Pretty remarkable.”
Karen L. Kamachi, MD
Paci� c Coast Pediatrics, Salinas, California
Learn More
acpe.org/PIM
Get it all at the
Physician in Management Seminar
ACPE’s Physician in Management Seminar
PIM – Winter Conference Ad2.indd 1 3/2/12 11:10 AMFeatures_MarchApril.indd 70 3/16/12 8:37 AM
72 PEJ MARCH•APRIL/2012
References:
1. Burns LR, Bradley EH, Weiner BJ. Health
Care Management Organization Design &
Behavior 6th ed. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar
Learning; 2012.
2. Lee TH. Putting the Value Framework to
Work. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:2481-2483.
3. Porter ME. What Is Value in health Care?
N Engl J Med 2010; 363:2477-2482.
4. Bohmer MJ, Lee TH. The Shifting Mission
of Health Care Delivery Organizations. N
Engl J Med 2009; 361:551-553.
5. Griffith JR. White KR. The Well-Managed
Healthcare Organization 6th ed. Chicago,
IL: Health Administration Press; 2007.
6. Drucker PF. The Practice of Management.
New York: Harper & Rowe, Publishers;
1954.
7. Latham GP, Locke EA. Goal setting – a
motivational technique that works in
Hackman JR, Lawler EE, Porter LW (Eds)
Perspectives on behavior in organizations
1983 New York: McGraw Hill; 1983, pp.
296-304.
8. Fast Company Magazine. If Your Goal
Is Success, Don’t Consult These
Gurus. http://www.fastcompany.com/
magazine/06/cdu.html. Accessed August
8, 2011.
9. Borkowski N. Organizational Behavior,
Theory, and Design in Health Care.
Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett
Publishers; 2009
10. Kotter JP. Leading Change. Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School Press; 1996.
11. Borkowski, N Organizational Behavior in
Health Care 2nd ed Sudbury, MA: Jones
and Bartlett publishers; 2011.
12. Lepnurum R. Cornerstones of Career
Satisfaction in Medicine. Can J Psychol
2008; 51:40-45.
13. Ratanawongsa N, Howell EE, Wright SM.
What motivates physicians throughout
their careers in medicine? Compr Ther
2006; 32:210-217.
unlikely to work very well with medi-
cal colleagues. Instead, SMARTER
objectives rely on collegial relation-
ships through which objectives are
negotiated as a means of promoting
“ownership” along with a sense of
intellectual challenge and meaning-
ful purpose. This approach takes
more time and requires greater inter-
personal skills; however it affords a
much higher probability of success.
Pursuing well-defined objectives
has not been without its critics. One
major objection centers around prob-
lems that result from focusing exclu-
sively on fixed objectives in the midst
of an uncertain and changing envi-
ronment. The presence of conflict-
ing objectives also poses potential
problems, as does a failure to provide
appropriate feedback.
To avoid these issues, physician
executives should make sure that suf-
ficient flexibility, intra-organization-
al alignment, and real-time feedback
are built into the design process. It
is also important to ensure that all
necessary support elements are in
place. Without them, the objectives
run the risk of being seen as unreal-
istic, which will diminish chances for
future staff engagement.
On the other hand, the careful
design and implementation of well-
constructed objectives will provide
exceptionally valuable tools for
improving say-do ratios and getting
important things done on time.
Les MacLeod, EdD,
MPH, FACHE, is a profes-
sor of health management
& policy at the University
of New Hampshire in
Durham, NH.
macleod7@metrocast.net
no “ownership” of an objective, mean-
ingful stakeholder engagement will be
difficult at best. In its absence, efforts
to meet the intended objective more
likely will be met with only tacit levels
of acceptance or possibly some degree
of resistance.10
A lack of involvement will almost
certainly lead to a lack of engage-
ment. A more effective approach is to
involve clinicians in formulating the
objectives from the very beginning.
Describe the circumstances behind
the intended objective and solicit cre-
ative input. This will help to provide
a much needed sense of “ownership”
in both the objective and its achieve-
ment. Ample evidence exists that
confirms that individuals are much
more likely to support those things
they help to create. The proverb,
“Tell me and I’ll forget; show me
and I may remember; involve me and
I’ll understand,” has proven to be
remarkably compatible with current
change theory findings.
Rewarding: Motivational studies
have demonstrated that rewards are
essential factors in bringing about
desired behavior. Motivation can be
described as “the process through
which unsatisfied needs and wants
lead to drives that are aimed at
goals or incentives.”11 Satisfaction
of goals or wants is typically sought
through various kinds of rewards
that are either internal, external, or
some combination of both. Current
research suggests that physicians
are motivated far more by internal
rewards such as an intellectual chal-
lenge, a meaningful purpose, and a
sense of accomplishment.12,13
While much of what is used in
an MBO process has been incor-
porated into the SMARTER objec-
tives approach, there are crucial
differences that directly apply when
working with physicians. The MBO
process was designed for a superior-
subordinate relationship that is
Features_MarchApril.indd 72 3/16/12 8:37 AM
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.