Assessing public health needs: Types - Prioritization

Needs Assessment in Public Health: Types, Prioritization, Challenges, and SWOT Analysis

Answered

Option 1: Conducting Needs Assessment in a Specific Setting

This assignment is on Needs Assessment in public health, and you have 2 options (choose one) for submission (it is an individual assignment in report structure).

Choose a setting such as a community, health service (e.g. hospital, primary health care service) or neighbourhood you know well in Australia ( Examples (not limited to) are:

(1) A particular community (for example, indigenous population, women etc)

(2) A health service (such as hospital, primary health care service, GP practices etc)

(3) A neighbourhood that you know well (where you currently live in)

How to proceed with Option 1:

A discussion of how you would assess different types of needs (normative, expressed, comparative, felt, etc.) and how you would prioritise the findings, justifying your choices.

For this purpose, you would either know of/be in the situation in reality first. Then, you would have to undertake rigorous literature review to understand different types of needs assessment and consider alternative views to justify the choices for this context.

Any potential challenges for your needs assessment and how you would address them. This could be relating to policy, contextual issues or others.

A SWOT analysis, where you identify the Strengths, Weaknesses Opportunities and Threats of your organisation or program.

A determination of program priorities, based upon your needs assessment In your needs assessment, you may determine multiple programs priorities – justify why you would choose the priorities you have identified. Are there any population groups that would benefit best from your program? Mention these, justify.

Let us take a GP practice in a specific growing suburb in Melbourne as a context. The waiting list seem to be increasing as many patients are approaching the GP and there are no other practices close by. It could also be that much of the population is working, and they need after hours service. If you are part of this situation (working in the practice or living in the suburb) – you would have an idea as to what type of need had risen. From that point, think about what type of needs assessment is required (via comparing few types of needs assessment from literature review), and justify your choice. Then, we are looking at potential challenges to really confirm this need, through the needs assessment.

Subsequently, look at the SWOT analysis. There may be many GPs in the practice (Strength), but, the hours may not suit the working population in the suburb (weakness). The threat may be that due to non?suitable opening hours or waiting list, the population may begin to move to another closer suburb (where there are more GPs open late) which then (threatens) the practice. And the (opportunity) is there for this GP practice to open for more hours or have shift based GPs for different hours, keeping the practice open later. This is a simple SWOT and there may be many more.

In this situation, you would be looking at a program design that allows the GPs to open later hours or shifts, which cater to the mainly working population, young families in the new suburb/neighbourhood. You may prioritise working women, kids or mainly working men as population groups that would best benefit.

Please refer to the latest report on Australia's health (see https://www.aihw.gov.au/ reports/australias-health/australias-health-2018/contents/table-of-contents).

Then amongst all the causes mentioned for ill-health in the report for the latest year, choose any one cause for ill-health. Some of the causes mentioned for ill-health are like chronic conditions, cancer, chronic heart disease, diabetes and arthritis and musculoskeletal conditions. Please note that you need to choose any one cause of ill-health for your assessment.

Assessment Attributes	0?34 (Fail 1 – F1) Unacceptable	35?49 (Fail 2 – F2) Poor	50?64 (Pass ?P) Functional	65?74 (Credit ? CR) Proficient	75?84 (Distinction – DN) Advanced	85?100 (High Distinction – HD) Exceptional
Grade Description (Grading	Evidence of unsatisfactory		Evidence of satisfactory	Evidence of a good level of	Evidence of a high	Evidence of an
Scheme)	achievement of one or more of the		achievement of course	understanding, knowledge	level of	exceptional level
	learning objectives of the course,		learning objectives, the	and skill development in	achievement of	of achievement of
	insufficient understanding of the		development of relevant	relation to the content of	the learning	learning objectives
	course content and/or unsatisfactory		skills to a competent level,	the course or work of a	objectives of the	across the entire
	level of skill development.		and adequate interpretation	superior quality on the	course	content of the
			and critical analysis skills.	majority of the learning	demonstrated in	course
				objectives of the course.	such areas as	demonstrated in
				Demonstration of a high	interpretation and	such areas as
				level of interpretation and	critical analysis,	interpretation and
				critical analysis skills.	logical argument,	critical analysis,
					use of	logical argument,
					methodology and	creativity,
					communication	originality, use of
					skills.	methodology and
						communication
						skills.

Demonstrates knowledge and understanding of different types of need, the process of conducting a needs analysis and SWOT analysis and the steps required (25%)	Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge Key components of the assignment are not addressed.	Knowledge/understanding of the field or discipline. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.	Thorough knowledge/understanding of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.	Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s.	A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Demonstrates understanding of different approaches and methods for needs analysis and ability to choose the most appropriate for their selected area (25%)		Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence	Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.	Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the	Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by
		from the research/course		research/course	robust evidence
		materials.		materials and	from the
				extended reading.	research/course
					materials and
					extended reading.
				Well
				demonstrated
				capacity to	Mastery of
				explain and apply	concepts and
				relevant concepts.	application to new
					situations/further
					learning.


	Limited synthesis and analysis.	Demonstrated analysis and	Well?developed analysis and	Thoroughly	Highly
Demonstrates ability to synthesise information for a review of relevant literature and to form a coherent rationale for the needs prioritised (20%)	Limited application/recommendations based upon analysis.	synthesis of new knowledge with application. Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature.	synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. Shows a good ability to interpret relevant information and literature.	developed and creative analysis and synthesis. Justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis.	sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge. Recommendations are clearly justified
					based on the
					analysis/synthesis.
				Shows a	Applying
				sophisticated	knowledge to new
				ability to interpret	situations/other
				relevant	cases.
				information and
				literature.	Shows a highly
					sophisticated
					ability to interpret
					relevant
					information and
					literature.
Critically analyses the methods and population group chosen and potential challenges to	Specific position (perspective or argument) fails to take into account	Specific position (perspective or argument) begins to take into account	Specific position (perspective or argument) takes into account the complexities of the issue(s)	Specific position (perspective or argument) is expertly	Specific position (perspective or argument) is presented

the needs assessment. (20%)	the complexities of the issue(s) or scope of the assignment.	the issue(s) or scope of the assignment.	or scope of the assignment. Others’ points of view are	presented and accurately takes	expertly, authoritatively and
			acknowledged.	into account the	imaginatively,
				complexities of	accurately taking
				the issue(s) and	into account the
				scope of the	complexities of the
	Makes assertions that are not	Justifies any conclusions		assignment.	issue(s) and scope
	justified.	reached with arguments not	Justifies any conclusions		of the assignment.
		merely assertion.	reached with well?formed		Limits of position
			arguments not merely		are acknowledged.
			assertion.
				Justifies any
				conclusions
				reached with well?
				developed	Justifies any
				arguments.	conclusions
					reached with
					sophisticated
					arguments.
General Assessment Criteria (10%)	Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar.	Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with	Is well?written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g.	Is very well? written and	Expertly written and adheres to the
		introduction, conclusion or	with introduction,	adheres to the	academic genre.
	Difficult to understand for audience,	summary) and has accurate	conclusion or summary).	academic genre.
	no logical/clear structure, poor flow	spelling, grammar, sentence			Expertly
	of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence.	and paragraph construction.	Information, arguments and evidence are well	Information, arguments and	presented; the presentation is
		Information, arguments and	presented, mostly clear flow	evidence are very	logical, persuasive,
	Demonstrates inconsistent use of	evidence are presented in a	of ideas and arguments.	well presented,	and well supported
	good quality, credible and relevant	way that is not always clear		the presentation	by evidence,
	research sources to support and	and logical.		is logical, clear	demonstrating a
	develop ideas.			and well