A process evaluation is concerned with the real development and implementation of those programs that have been identified to be having great potentiality in reducing the rate of new infections of HIV in Africa, Caribbean and the black communities of Canada (Hallfors, Mbai, Milimo & Itindi, 2012). Before this, programs have been identified as possible means to control the spread of the virus among recognized communities; therefore, this evaluation focuses on determining means that can be effectively applied to realize success. Most notable is that the assessment sees to it that the programs hit quantifiable targets and the implemented strategies as previously planned. The study identified community-based initiatives as one of the best means of decreasing new infection rates; it proposed that if any milestone was to be realized, the communities were required to participate in the eradication plan of the HIV virus (Claus, 2013).
As a matter of fact, HIV is a disease that needs proper education and sensitization. Research has clearly shown that the virus is majorly concentrated among illiterate communities; however, promiscuity also plays a significant role towards its spread. As it is known, the primary objective of a process evaluation is to confirm whether the project is viable; moreover, it looks at its details to ensure continuity of the program (James, John, & Sam, 2013). The control of new infections is perhaps one of the greatest concerns in the control of this virus, and based on this argument; a long-term evaluation is needed since the virus is here to stay; furthermore, evidence of getting an effective treatment is still at stake. The best solution will, therefore, lie among the affected communities; they must get to understand all the details about the disease to stay healthy.
Community participation was found to bear more fruits as far as the control of the spread of the disease is concerned. Programs such as early testing and counseling are deeply rooted among the community members (Nonprofit Management, 2016). A greater challenge towards the control of the disease solely lies on the fact that a bigger percentage if the infected population does not know that they are infected. When early tests are done, proper counseling would be undertaken; this marks a greater milestone to the control of new infections. Still, people suffering from the virus face acute stigmatization; both in Africa and America, when the community members are adequately enlightened, then the spread of this would stop. When effectively applied, this program will lead to a reduction in new rates of infection; help the infected live a more dignified life as community members would be more ethical to let them live a life free from stigmatization. The outcome of an evaluation tells the changes that have occurred as a result of implementing a program, and an impact assessment puts into a broader view how the program affects people’s lives in relations to new infections (Tamara, 2014).
The program is primarily aligned to the project because new infections cannot be controlled without proper knowledge dispensation to the community members. The virus majorly rotates around human sexuality; from this perspective it’s quite right to deduce that the disease is a communal in nature. Besides, for lasting solutions, the community must be actively engaged and thoroughly informed. About the doctrine of evaluation, the programs that are result oriented and likely to impact positively are more preferred. Nonetheless, they must be realistic and measurable, taking a critical look at community-based HIV control system; all these programs are in line with the stipulated objective centered on the eradication of the virus (Nonprofit Management, 2016).
References
Claus, V. (2013). On Living a Long, Healthy and Happy Life, Full of Love, and With No Regrets, Until Our Last Breath. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley and Sons Publishers.
Hallfors D., Mbai H., Milimo B., & Itindi J., (2012). Process and Outcome Evaluation of a Community Intervention for Ophan Adolescents in Western Kenya. Journal of Community Health.
James, S., John, N., & Sam, S. (2013). Definition of Terms and Concepts Applicable to Clinical Preventive Medicine . Journal of Community Health, 33-41.
Nonprofit Management, (2016, July 16). Nonprofit Answers Guide. Retrieved from Nonprofit Answers Guide: http://nonprofitanswerguide.org/faq/evaluation/difference-between-process-outcome-and-impact-evaluation
Tamara, M. (2014). Top Ten Reasons for Poor Health: A Review of HIV Infection in Africa. Pearson: Pearson Hall Publishers.
PUBH 6640: Applied Project in Public Health
Program Outcomes Mapping Form
For MSHEP Students
Walden Instructor: __________________________________________________
Preceptor Information (if applicable)
Organization/Agency: __________________________________
Applied Project
Project Purpose: To increase the number of HIV tests undertaken within healthcare settings by approximately 20 percent each year; hence increasing the prevalence of status awareness amongst HIV-infected individuals by over 10 percent.
Project Significance:
Reduction of new infection rates
Brief Description of Evaluation Methods:
A Community-based approach to the reduction of new infections of HIV needs a community-based approach where the number of individuals turning up to HIV testing is noted besides being given proper medication and necessary tips to stay healthy. The program also aims at providing proper guidance to the healthy population so that they can live a healthy life.
Through the Applied Project students must demonstrate some degree of proficiency in many the MSHEP Program learning outcomes. In the table, (next page) briefly describe the proposed project activities that will help you accomplish this goal.
Note: The project must provide in-depth exposure to at least 3 program learning outcomes and moderate exposure to at least 2 additional outcomes.
