| Course | IHP 670 Program Design, Planning and Evaluation |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 9 |
| Paper type | graduate final health program proposal |
| Length | About 1,010 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | MPH |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for IHP 670 Module 9
Steady Steps: A Three-Year Proposal to Prevent Falls Among Older Adults in Alder County
[Student Name]
Southern New Hampshire University
IHP 670: Program Design, Planning and Evaluation
Module Nine Final Project
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.
Steady Steps: A Three-Year Proposal to Prevent Falls Among Older Adults in Alder County
The Alder County Public Health Department requests $1.2 million over three years from the state's older adult injury prevention fund to launch Steady Steps, a falls prevention program for county residents aged 65 and older. This proposal describes the need, the program and its evidence, how it will be delivered and evaluated, what it will cost and how it will continue.
Summary
Each year, falls send about 2,900 of the county's older residents to emergency departments, put 610 in the hospital and kill 38, yet only one small evidence-based class operates locally. Steady Steps will offer tai chi for balance and a seven-session group program at all nine senior centers and the YMCA, link primary care screening to classes and provide transportation. Over three years it aims to enroll 1,800 older adults, reduce participants' falls by 20% and reduce county emergency visits for falls by 10%.
Statement of Need
About 30% of county adults 65 and older report falling each year, slightly above the national rate. Fall death rates exceed the state average, and rural townships have admission rates 40% higher than the county seat. Nearly half of older adults surveyed worry about falling, and many limit their activities as a result. Only one small evidence-based program operates countywide, and primary care clinics that screen for fall risk have nowhere to refer patients.
Program Design and Evidence
Sherrington et al. (2019), in a Cochrane review of more than one hundred trials, found that exercise reduced falls among older adults living at home, with balance-focused and combined programs and tai chi showing benefit. Steady Steps therefore centers on structured group exercise. Tai chi classes meet twice a week for 24 weeks; the seven-session program combines exercise with education about hazards and home safety. Primary care practices screen patients, review medications and refer at-risk patients electronically, and the coordinator follows up within a week. Volunteer drivers and a bring-a-friend policy address access and motivation.
Priority Population
The program serves all county adults 65 and older but prioritizes rural residents, people living alone, anyone with a recent fall and anyone afraid of falling. At least 40% of participants will come from these groups, and rural townships receive classes first.
Logic Model and Theory
Inputs of staff, instructors, space and clinic capacity support classes, screening, transportation and outreach. These produce class series, enrollment and referrals, leading in the short term to better balance, strength and confidence, in the intermediate term to continued exercise and fewer falls and in the long term to fewer injuries and emergency visits. Social cognitive theory explains the central link: progressive practice, peer role models and encouragement build the confidence that sustains exercise after classes end.
Objectives
Objectives cover delivery and results. By month six, twelve instructors will be certified. By the end of year one, classes will operate at all nine senior centers. By year three, 1,800 adults will enroll, at least 80% of clinics in both hospital systems will refer, participants attending two-thirds of sessions will report 20% fewer falls in the six months after classes than before and emergency visits after falls among residents over 65 will be 10% lower than at baseline.
Implementation
Durlak and DuPre (2008) found, across hundreds of studies, that programs delivered with higher quality produced substantially better outcomes. Steady Steps will move from four months of preparation to a three-site pilot, then to countywide delivery and finally to site ownership. Core elements, such as session frequency and movement progression, are fixed; class times and settings can be adapted. Two sessions in each series will be observed for fidelity, and a monthly dashboard will flag sites with attendance below 60%.
Evaluation
The RE-AIM framework of Glasgow et al. (1999) asks about five things: who is reached, what changes, which settings adopt the program, how well it is delivered and whether it lasts. The evaluation measures each: enrollment by priority group, balance tests and fall calendars compared with a wait-list group, the share of sites and clinics participating, fidelity and attendance and whether classes continue after year three. County emergency visit trends will be compared with two neighboring counties.
Budget
The three-year budget of $1.2 million covers a full-time coordinator, a half-time analyst, instructor pay and training, transportation, the referral build, outreach, evaluation supplies, equipment, indirect costs and a year-three transition reserve. Partners contribute space and volunteer time valued at about $86,000. The cost is about $667 per participant.
Table 1. Budget Summary
| Category | Three-year cost |
|---|---|
| Personnel (coordinator and analyst) | $455,000 |
| Instructors (pay and certification) | $290,000 |
| Transportation, outreach and equipment | $132,000 |
| Referral build and evaluation supplies | $87,000 |
| Indirect costs | $109,000 |
| Transition reserve | $127,000 |
| Total | $1,200,000 |
Note. Composite budget; in-kind support of about $86,000 not included.
Value
Carande-Kulis et al. (2015) found that three community programs for preventing falls, tai chi among them, returned more in avoided medical costs than they cost to deliver. A local estimate suggests Steady Steps could avoid roughly $180,000 a year in medical costs among participants alone, with savings accruing mainly to Medicare, Medicaid and health plans.
Sustainability
By year three, senior centers will schedule classes, local staff will train new instructors and referral will be routine in clinics. Continued funding will be sought from Older Americans Act health promotion funds, Medicare Advantage plans, hospital community benefit budgets and the county general fund, with agreements targeted by mid-year three and the reserve covering any gap.
Organizational Capacity
The health department has managed state and federal grants for two decades, operates an injury prevention unit and has an epidemiologist experienced with hospital discharge data. Letters of commitment from the Area Agency on Aging, YMCA, nine senior centers and both hospital systems accompany this proposal.
Conclusion
Steady Steps responds to a documented, costly and unequal problem with programs proven to reduce falls, delivered through trusted local settings and linked to primary care. With careful implementation, rigorous evaluation and a realistic sustainability plan, it offers the state a strong return on its investment and Alder County's older adults more years of safe, independent living. The department is ready to begin within thirty days of award.
References
Carande-Kulis, V., Stevens, J. A., Florence, C. S., Beattie, B. L., & Arias, I. (2015). A cost-benefit analysis of three older adult fall prevention interventions. Journal of Safety Research, 52, 65-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2014.12.007
Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3-4), 327-350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0
Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999). Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1322-1327. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.89.9.1322
Sherrington, C., Fairhall, N. J., Wallbank, G. K., Tiedemann, A., Michaleff, Z. A., Howard, K., Clemson, L., Hopewell, S., & Lamb, S. E. (2019). Exercise for preventing falls in older people living in the community. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (1), Article CD012424. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012424.pub2
What the IHP 670 Module 9 instructions ask for
The IHP 670 Final Project usually asks for a complete program proposal combining your milestones: need, program design and evidence, population, logic model and theory, objectives, implementation, evaluation, budget and sustainability. Most submissions run eight to twelve APA 7 pages. Write it for a real funder, lead with a summary, condense each section and keep figures consistent across the document. Include a budget table and make sure every objective has a matching evaluation measure. IHP 670 graders notice clean headings in IHP 670 papers. IHP 670 names and dates need checking before IHP 670 submission. IHP 670 prompts vary by term, so recheck IHP 670 directions. Attach partner letters of commitment if you can.
How this IHP 670 Module 9 final project example is built
This proposal requests $1.2 million for a composite county's falls prevention program, Steady Steps. It summarizes need, grounds design in Sherrington and colleagues' Cochrane review, condenses the logic model and objectives and plans implementation with Durlak and DuPre's findings on quality in mind. Evaluation follows Glasgow, Vogt and Boles's RE-AIM dimensions, a budget table and Carande-Kulis and colleagues' value case follow and sustainability and organizational capacity close the proposal. IHP 670 students can reuse this structure for IHP 670 work. IHP 670 claims here trace to cited IHP 670 sources. IHP 670 readers can adapt each section to IHP 670 data. Letters of commitment demonstrate partner support.
Where the IHP 670 Module 9 rubric puts the points
Final program proposals in IHP 670 are generally evaluated on a compelling statement of need, an evidence-based design, a clear logic model, measurable objectives, a realistic implementation plan, an evaluation matched to objectives, a justified budget, a believable plan for continuing, evidence that milestone comments were used, sound citations and APA 7. The strongest proposals read as one coherent argument a funder could approve. Credit falls when sections contradict one another, when objectives lack measures or when sustainability is left vague. IHP 670 marks favor careful formatting across IHP 670 sections. IHP 670 citations keep every IHP 670 argument credible. IHP 670 instructors weigh evidence heavily in IHP 670 grading. A budget table that matches the narrative is expected.
IHP 670 Module 9 help: the mistakes that cost points
Program proposals in this course often fall short when milestones are pasted together without editing, when objectives and evaluation indicators do not match and when the budget does not reflect the activities described. Another frequent gap is no evidence of organizational capacity. Write for a named funder, open with a summary, align objectives with evaluation, check the budget against the plan and show partner commitments. Send your milestones, grader feedback and the IHP 670 rubric so the proposal reflects your own work. IHP 670 drafts start well from a IHP 670 outline. IHP 670 feedback already received guides IHP 670 revisions. IHP 670 rubrics posted in Brightspace clarify IHP 670 expectations. Read the proposal once as the funder would, looking for gaps.
Get IHP 670 Module 9 written to your instructions
Send the IHP 670 capstone instructions with your milestones and grader feedback. The proposal will open with a summary, align need, design, objectives, evaluation and budget and present a credible sustainability plan, within 24 to 48 hours, free the first time. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More IHP 670 papers and related MPH samples
- IHP 670 Module 1 Discussion: Choosing a Program Because the Evidence Supports It
- IHP 670 Module 2 Needs Assessment Paper: Documenting the Burden of Falls Among Older Adults in One County
- IHP 670 Module 3 Milestone One: Framing the Program's Purpose, Population and Evidence Base
- IHP 670 Module 4 Logic Model Paper: Connecting Resources, Activities and Outcomes With Theory
- IHP 670 Module 5 Discussion: Writing Objectives a Funder Can Check
- IHP 670 Module 6 Milestone Two: An Implementation Plan Built for Real Settings
- IHP 670 Module 7 Evaluation Design Paper: Choosing and Applying an Evaluation Framework
- IHP 670 Module 8 Milestone Three: A Budget and Sustainability Plan
- IHP 645 Module 9 Final Project: The Compliance and Patient Safety Report for a Regional Hospital
- IHP 640 Module 2 Metrics Definition Paper: Defining On-Time Starts, Turnover and Utilization Precisely
- IHP 525 Module 7 Milestone Three: Regression Results Adjusted for Age, Sex and Baseline Pressure
- IHP 620 Module 1 Discussion: Why Medical Care Is Not an Ordinary Market
IHP 670 Module 9 questions, answered
Where can I find a free IHP 670 Module 9 Final Project sample?
The full IHP 670 Module 9 proposal appears on this page, covering need, evidence, logic model, objectives, implementation, evaluation, budget and sustainability.
What sections belong in a program proposal?
Need, program design and evidence, population, logic model, objectives, implementation, evaluation, budget, sustainability and organizational capacity.
How long is the IHP 670 final proposal?
Expect roughly the length of a short grant application, commonly eight to twelve APA 7 pages before tables and references.
Should objectives match the evaluation plan?
Yes; every objective should have at least one indicator and data source in the evaluation.
Why include organizational capacity?
Funders want evidence that the applicant can manage the grant, deliver the program and collect data.