Paper Example on Comparison of the Precede-Proceed Model, Patch Model, Apexph Model, Mapp Model, Etc.

Description of the Models

Precede-Proceed Model

This is a structured assessment model used to evaluate the mechanisms for designing, implementing, and assessing health awareness programs and other health and safety promotion parameters to meet individual and societal needs. The PRECEDE phase of the model establishes a platform for establishing a targeted and focused public health initiative, while the PROCEED phase creates a structure for assessing and instituting the public health program (Barr, 2017). In other words, PRECEDE stands for Predisposing, Reinforcing, and Enabling Constructs in Educational Diagnosis and Evaluation. The PRECEDE-PROCEED as health promotion or disease prevention model is ideal for both one-time interventions as well as for long-term strategy design of health promotion dialogues. The following are some of the community concerns monitored and addressed by the PRECEDE Phase:

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

• Social assessment: Assists in establishing the social problems and immediate needs of a given environment and recommends the ideal remedial actions to mitigate the challenges.
• Epidemiological assessment: The critical determinants of health problems identified are established to assist in setting priorities and objectives for creating a safe society.
• Ecological assessment: This phase has a significant role in analyzing the behavioral and environmental conditions that predispose and reinforce the lifestyles of the citizens hence exposing them to the health problems identified.
• Legal-political environmental analysis: The factors that influence the implementation of the interventions put in place by the law enforcers are evaluated, and remedial action is taken.
• PROCEED is an acronym that stands for Policy, Regulatory, and Organizational Constructs in Educational and Environmental Development (OKTAVIA, 2019). This phase is concerned with the search for desired outcomes and programs aimed at mitigating the societal health problems as shown below:
• Implementation: Possible intervention measures are designed against available know-how and resources. The stakeholders are motivated to formulate goals that can be assimilated into the action plan for the effective execution of the project. It is prudent that all members of the organization fully participate in this process since it requires resources that must be put into proper use.
• Process evaluation: The phase entails an assessment of the scope of the programs to ascertain whether they reach the targeted audience. In accordance with this model, the most crucial parameter for ascertaining success is a healthy community and improved quality of life (SAHRIANA, 2018). The project managers assess the degree of accessibility of public health services and the predictability of imaging issues health and safety requirements in an organization.
• Planned Approach to Community Health: (Patch Model)This is a model that was designed with the primary goal of facilitating proper health education programs to address the local-level health concerns and a secondary goal to provide real-life, skill-based technical support to enable state health education leaders to work together with local-level practitioners to create an all-time comprehensive health program (Issel, & Wells, 2017). The community is the most significant pillar in this model. It recognizes the role of government in formulating policies, providing leadership and funding disease prevention programs to create a healthy society.

Scope of the PATCH Model

The model was envisioned to operate within the confines of the local level, but due to its design to operate interdependently with the other systems, it has spread its tentacles to cover the state as well as the federal public health practitioners. As a matter of fact, it addresses the issues fronted by the public health leaders as a matter of priority, that is, the call to enhance the efficiency of the infrastructure and performance of the public health systems (Prech, Ruzhin, Dokukin, Nemecek, & Safrankova, 2018). Additionally, it has won the favor of the state health agencies, private and voluntary sector agents by incorporating the locals in the program to ensure that the resources are not only put into good use but also to guarantee that the interests, desires, and expectations of the community are represented throughout the project. Finally, the desire to take an active role in educating the masses cannot be underscored. The model emphasizes on providing technical assistance to the locals to ensure that they can practice preventive measures without the intervention of health personnel.

APEXPH (APex-ph model)This is a model that was designed for the local health practitioners as a measure to strengthen their organizational capacity and boost the leadership capability for the ultimate improvement of the sector's performance. The desire for a local-borne initiative was to answer the actual requirements of society through public participation. This model has two facets, namely: monitoring and development of the organizational capacity of the sector and involving the local community in the assessment and improvement of the health status of the locals.

Components of the APex-ph model

Phase I: Organizational Capacity Assessment: Charged with the responsibility of assisting the health director and internal assessment committee in fostering improved organizational performance.

Phase II: The Community Process: Emphasizes on the strengthening the partnership between the local and national health department to achieve the objectives of improved community health.

Phase III: Completing the Cycle: This phase describes all the activities designed to ensure that the plans made in the first two phases above are implemented.

MOBILIZING FOR ACTION THROUGH PLANNING AND PARTNERSHIP (Mapp model)A MAPP is a community-wide strategic planning structure implemented with the aim of improving public health. The model provides a platform for integrating several bodies, groups, and individuals who constitute the public health system to adopt and execute a community health improvement plan. In the opinion of Crizzle et al. (2019), the model focuses on effective, transparent, and accountable allocation of resources to bring efficiency in community-run health programs. Moreover, the model empowers the locals to be in the front line in searching for well-coordinated solutions to local problems. That is, the best way to make locals own the projects is by letting them be involved in the policy formulation process. Additionally, the theory postulates that one of the sure ways to guarantee the credibility and sustainability of the health improvement strategies is community ownership created through voluntary and open participation.

The model finds its relevance in the ability to emphasize the use of multilevel interrelationships, performance improvement, and fostering strategic planning in the public health sector. The model has been instrumental in many societies, as evident in a number of measurable improvements in public health sectors, enhanced conspicuousness of the public health sector, and increased dialogues on public health topics.

Logic Models

This is a graphical or narrative depiction of progress used by project managers as a road map to indicate the shared relationships among outcomes, resources, operations, and the net effect of the program. It presents a chronological arrangement of programs in a project with clear cause-and-effect relationships within the system until the desired result is obtained (Rohwer et al., 2017). The ability of the logic model to link situations to the remedial measures and the net effects of the actions makes it ideal for establishing long-term and complex outcomes on the phenomenon over which researchers have limited influence. In addition, the model is vital in circumstances under which the practitioners intend to identify key performance indicators.

The use of the logic model as a planning tool facilitates communication between the project stakeholders by showing an accurate sequence of activities from conception to execution (Newbill, Wickman, Brown, & Helitzer, 2017). This model, therefore, is an ideal framework for informing the community/implementers about the purpose of the project, the project components, and the sequence of activities to be carried out to accomplish the plans. In other words, it enables the project management committee to explain the purpose and needs of the project to external stakeholders from an insider point of view.

Components of the Logic Model

Mission statement:

The model must present a clear statement of actions that motivate change in society. The motivations can either be problems or opportunities that the project intends to address to enhance the lives of citizens.

Context and the net effect:

The model addresses the conditions under which change is expected to take place. This involves postulation of how the expected policies are bound to change the lifestyles and how they can be adopted to blend with the existing practices in the society. The project team must also specify the direct and indirect impact of the actions taken to solve environmental issues.

Input vs. outputs:

The models emphasize the need to allocate enough resources and design appropriate infrastructure to facilitate the process of project execution. The resources must also be allocated properly, and materials use coordinated well to ensure that optimum returns are generated with minimal wastage. The outputs are evidence that the implements were actually used in accordance with the strategic plans (Pincharoen, 2016).

CDCynergy Model (CDC-Center for Disease Control and Prevention)CDCenergy is an innovative tool used public health professionals to strategize, manage, and monitor public health interrelation programs. That is, it is an interactive model used by the public health personnel to systematically plan communication programs intended to address health and safety issues in the society. The model enables individuals and groups to use research to unearth the predisposing factors threatening the lives of locals and empower them to tailor a solution based on the target audience (Hansen, 2018). Likewise, the system exposes individuals to a wide range of strategic alternatives from which to choose how to address public health concerns.

Comparison of the models

Models are compared based on the policy measures that are postulated to address the critical challenges affecting society. Additionally, the scope of response and degree of independence of the models can bring out distinctive features by ascertaining the manner in which the organization responds to the existing conditions. All the models had a central goal of establishing an effective community-based health intervention program with the central theme of empowering the masses. As noted by the study conducted by Haggerty, Smith, Mastel, Lapan, and Lachapelle (2018), the health promotion and intervention models had a strong appeal for local support and community participation to diagnose the actual problems on the ground.

The models discussed above adopted multiple intervention strategies to solve social problems and design strategic interventions using behavioral parameters as key determinants of progress. Mobilization of the public took place via community awareness programs, mass media, and continuous interaction between the health practitioners nationally or within the target community. The concept of empowerment...