Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
Program/policy evaluation is a valuable tool that can help strengthen the quality of programs/policies and improve outcomes for the populations they serve.
Program/policy evaluation answers basic questions about program/policy effectiveness. It involves collecting and analyzing information about program/policy activities, characteristics, and outcomes. This information can be used to ultimately improve program services or policy initiatives.
Nurses can play a very important role assessing program/policy evaluation for the same reasons that they can be so important to program/policy design.
Nurses bring expertise and patient advocacy that can add significant insight and impact. In this Assignment, you will practice applying this expertise and insight by selecting an existing healthcare program or policy evaluation and reflecting on the criteria used to measure the effectiveness of the program/policy.
To Prepare:
- Review the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template provided in the Resources.
- Select an existing healthcare program or policy evaluation or choose one of interest to you.
- Review community, state, or federal policy evaluation and reflect on the criteria used to measure the effectiveness of the program or policy described.
Are you looking for answers to a similar assignment? Premium Academic Affiliates has the top and most qualified writers to help with any of your assignments. All you need to do is place an order with us.
The Assignment: (2-3 pages)
Based on the program or policy evaluation you selected, complete the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template. Be sure to address the following:
- Describe the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
- How was the success of the program or policy measured?
- How many people were reached by the program or policy selected?
- How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
- At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?
- What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
- What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?
- What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
- Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
- Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
- Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after 1 year of implementation.
Sample Solution
Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
In healthcare, policy/program evaluation is a research-based measure of the effects of the policy or program considering its criteria, goals, or outcomes. Significantly, nurses play a crucial role in assessing existing programs or policy evaluation. Thus, they are important to the program or policy design. This assignment reflects the criteria used to measure the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).
| Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation | State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) |
| Description | The SCHIP was created in 1997 as a joint federal-state program to provide healthcare coverage to poor children and those without insurance through age 18. The program targeted children whose family income was under 200% of the nation’s poverty index. However, other states included children whose family incomes were 300% below the national poverty index.
Moreover, the program operates as a block grant, and different states can establish the program as an extension of Medicaid services or as separate programs. Therefore, the program has been implemented across the different states, with most states establishing arranged care for children whose families earn higher incomes to qualify for the program. The SCHIP program covers doctor appointments, hospitalizations, immunizations/vaccinations, and emergency room visits. |
| How was the success of the program or policy measured? | In 2007, the Centre for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rolled out a national evaluation of the SCHIP success. First, the CMS reviewed the statewide development of SCHIP related outreach activities using qualitative information from the district of Colombia and other 50 states (Rosenbach et al., 2007). The CMS then documented state modification of SCHIP target population, program emphases, partnerships messages, and methods.
This analysis was based on statewide SCHIP information reported between 2000 and 2003 (Rosenbach et al., 2007). This information was supplemented with data from yearly focus groups’ perspective reports in eight states. The CMS evaluation examined five SCHIP perspectives, i.e., the program’s population targets, methodologies, organizational strategies, and program emphases. These facets formed the main component of SCHIP evolution initiatives. Notably, the target population facet was evaluated among eligible children from minority communities, rural residents, immigrants, and employed families (Rosenbach et al., 2007). In terms of messages, the evaluation emphasized awareness that builds the program recognition. Therefore, the evaluation depended on feedback from the target population as a source of data. Moreover, the CMS evaluation team determined the trends in program enrollment, the program effect on Medicaid enrollment. |
| How many people were reached by the program or policy selected?
How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected? |
The Rosenbach et al. (2007) report revealed that the multilevel outreach initiatives conducted to create awareness among eligible families led to a rapid enrollment in its formative years, followed by tapering later on. For example, about 4.6 million children were enrolled in the program by the fiscal year 2001. However, the enrollment rate leveled off at the beginning of 2003 when data revealed that only 6 million children as beneficiaries of the program.
Nevertheless, the program had a great impact among the targeted population considering the percentage of uninsured under children below 19 fell from 15.5% to 12.8% between 1997 and 2003. Equally, the population of insured children decreased from 9.9million to 11.7million. Significantly, the rate of uninsured children whose family earning was below the federal poverty level dropped from 25.2% to 20.1%. By 2016, the SCHIP renamed CHIP had reduced the rate of uninsured children, which stood at 8.9million (Adams et al., 2016), yet CHIP participation increased by 93.1% (Kenney, Haley, Pan, Lynch & Buettgens, 2017). In addition, a recent report by the CMS revealed that although there was a decline in SCHIP enrollment between 2017 and 2019, 9.6 million children were enrolled in the CHIP program in 2018 and 2019 (Medicaid.gov., 2021). |
| At what point in program implementation was the
program or policy evaluation conducted? |
The program was evaluated after its implementation. This was seven years beginning in 1997 when the program was officially launched. Therefore, the evaluation used the 1997 data as the baseline for determining the program changes and success. |
| What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation? | The program was evaluated based on state-provided data, i.e., SCHIP evaluation reports submitted as a requirement to the CMS in 2000. Besides, annual reports tracking CHIP implementation progress in different states. The data from these sources included focus group perspectives and enrollment/disenrollment/re-enrollment patterns as captured in the SCHIP Enrollment Data System (SEDS) and the Medicaid Statistical Information System (MSIS). |
| What was specific information on unintended consequences identified? | The early 2000 recession and its aftermath affected the low-income groups, leading to an increased number of families falling under the federal poverty index. Consequently, the uninsured rates increased between 1997 and 1998. In addition, a study by Adams et al. (2019) revealed that more than half of the eligible children population remained uninsured despite the evident program success. |
| What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples. | The stakeholders involved in the families living below the federal poverty index, stakeholders from the state and national levels, i.e., the state and federal government, focus groups, and healthcare providers – primarily the CMS.
Affected families have benefited most from the program. The report highlighted significant adjustment needs, which were adopted to improve the program initiatives further. Moreover, the CMS benefited from the program evaluation results, which were incorporated to reflect services and populations not included in the report’s evaluation measures. For instance, the CMS adopted the development of medical access and CHIP quality status, including vital performance measures and particular state-level performance strategies. Lastly, the state benefited from the evaluation as it provided frameworks for designing better outreach initiatives and allocating funds to cover more children. |
| Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not? | Yes. The states raise awareness of the program and its eligibility criteria, ease the application/enrollment process and improve enrollment retention among enrolled families. As a result, the states’ outreach intervention increased and sustained CHIP enrollment increasing healthcare coverage for families whose income was under the federal poverty index. |
| Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not? | Yes. The program provides effective and affordable health insurance for millions of families whose income levels fall under the poverty index. Moreover, states have arrangements that allow families with substantial income but do not have access to affordable coverage from their workplaces to enroll in the program through Medicaid. |
| Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation. | As a nurse, I can contribute to CHIP through policy research and awareness of the existence and nature of the program. First, nurses have credibility and command trust among patients. Thus, they can provide honest reviews of the CHIP program among patients and their families. Secondly, I can advocate against discrimination against patients under the program. Finally, through active voicing of existing concerns about discriminatory treatment in the CHIP program, nurses can contribute to eliminating discrimination to ensure program access by all Americans. |
| General Notes/Comments | SCHIP/CHIP is an important healthcare insurance program with wide coverage. Children from low-income families and those parents whose employer insurance cover is expensive can qualify for this program. Although there are reports of discrimination, CHIP offers all-American insurance that contributes to universally accessible healthcare. |
References
Adams, E. K., Johnston, E. M., Guy, G., Joski, P., & Ketsche, P. (2019). Children’s Health Insurance Program expansions: what works for families?. Global pediatric health, 6, 2333794X19840361. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333794X19840361
Adeyinka, A., Rewane, A., & Pierre, L. (2019). Children’s Health Insurance Program. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK539903/
Kenney, G. M., Haley, J. M., Pan, C., Lynch, V., & Buettgens, M. (2017). Medicaid/CHIP participation rates rose among children and parents in 2015. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Medicaid.gov. (2021). Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2019 Statistical Enrollment Data System (SEDS) Reporting. Retrieved 5 August 2021, from https://www.medicaid.gov/chip/downloads/fy-2019-childrens-enrollment-report.pdf
Rosenbach, M., Irvin, C., Merrill, A., Shulman, S., Czajka, J., Trenholm, C., … & Katz, A. (2007). National evaluation of the state children’s health insurance program: a decade of expanding coverage and improving access (No. 2931377a06f94d7e8b3b1672b7a45ba6). Mathematica Policy Research. https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/Reports/downloads/rosenbach9-19-07.pdf
A Page will cost you $12, however, this varies with your deadline.
We have a team of expert nursing writers ready to help with your nursing assignments. They will save you time, and improve your grades.
Whatever your goals are, expect plagiarism-free works, on-time delivery, and 24/7 support from us.
Here is your 15% off to get started.
Simply:
- Place your order (Place Order)
- Click on Enter Promo Code after adding your instructions
- Insert your code – Get20
All the Best,
Cathy, CS
