I am doing a huge paper on the opening of a smoking cessation program in Tucson called Freedom Smoke Arizona. I need to do this paper on evaluations to show the CEO of the company why this program is working and how it will work in the future. Most of my evaluations are qualitative through surveys. I am not asking to do the paper, just some insights on the parts. Attached is the mentor's notes for the guidelines of the paper. Please include any references you use.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 10, 2019, 6:30 am ad1c9bdddf
Sounds like an interesting program.
Ok, so your audience is the CEO of the company. He/she is probably going to make better sense of dollars and cents than health outcomes. This is a common barrier between the financial world and public health. So, whatever evaluations you decide to use, you need to find a way to equate them to dollars.
Ok, you might want to incorporate into your paper the costs involved with smoking. The CDC has a fact sheet that estimates what is spent in the US each year (http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/). The introduction to the problem would be a good place for this in your paper. You could also use the County Rankings & Roadmaps website to determine how Arizona ranks with regard to smoking.
This is how you might approach it:
What is the health problem?
Why is it significant? (use scholarly papers on the health risks of smoking plus cost analysis)
What is being done about it? (talk about Freedom Smoke)
Then you can discuss evaluations.
If you are using a survey that has already been tested, you would want to talk about how it was determined to be effective. If you are creating a survey, you could either do a field test (send the survey to several experts for feedback) or a pilot test (test the survey to see ...
This solution provides detailed information on program evaluations; how to determine and evaluate. The question specifically asks about evaluating a smoking cessation program, but the principles listed within are transferable to other topics. It discusses research bias and different evaluations (program, impact, outcome).