Literature Review and Rationale for Action       

The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate that the recommendations for the prevention strategy are based upon a clear definition of the problem and an understanding of the factors that support and block the target population’s readiness to change.  Through a review of the scholarly literature and a thorough understanding of the problem, you have selected two potential prevention intervention strategies/programs that address different causal effects of the problem you have clearly defined.  The two potential prevention strategies will address different levels of intervention (primary, secondary, and tertiary).  In this paper you will share your analysis of each of the two options with regard to their potential for successfully impacting the identified problem.  You will then share your rationale for the selection of the intervention approach that you are recommending and explain how this approach aligns with your understanding of the problem and the key contribuiting factors.   Your final program recommendation may include the selection of an evidence-based program, a program that has been modified or includes combined components from multiple approaches or is a new and innovated approach.  Be sure to provide the theoretical support and rationale for your program recommendation.

Directions

In 4 – 5 pages, Times New Roman 12 font, and using scholarly grammar and adhering to APA 6^th requirements and references (paper should include at least 6 citations and references), complete the following:

Step 1: Identify two potential prevention intervention strategies or program approaches that have proven to be effective in reducing or elmininating the problem you have identified and defined.  The two options should focus on at least two different determinants and two different levels of prevention interventions (primary, secondary, tertiary). Analyze each of the programs or intervention strategies in relation to the following:

1. How will the prevention services be accepted by the various stakeholders, especially the community and consumers?
2. Is the recommended level of prevention the most efficient way of addressing the problem?
3. Does the selected level of prevention intervention respond to the potential barriers for client change?

Step 2: Select one of the interventions and provide the rationale for the recommendation. 

This is your case statement and compelling argument that the intervention plan is both effective and efficient.  The nature and format of the case statement will be based upon the problem definition you have selected. You might argue that the problem needs at a primary prevention level that educates the public about the frequency and serious impact of the problem.You might choose to make the case that it will be more cost-effective to implement this program/services as a prevention of later, more costly interventions.   Or you may agruge the case in terms of an investment in human capital, enabling consumers to more fully participate as productive members of the community. Include the following in this section:

1. The precipitating motivation for initiating this needs assessment and program proposal, e.g. response to a Request for Proposals or Notice of Funds Available, result of an internal strategic planning process, Continuing Quality Improvement (CQI) findings, awareness of existing program outcome disparities, or addressing an indentified service gap.
2. Who is addressing the problem nationally, regionally, locally.  Identify possible collaborators.
3. Evidence of the intervention efficacy with the identified consumer population.  Use at least five (5) imperical articles from professional journals or registries that support the theoretical approach.

Rubric: 

Criteria	Ratings              Exemplary                   Good              Unacceptable	Points
Potential Interventions	5.0 Points Identified at least 2 potential interventions at two levels of intervention: macro, mezzo, micro. Discussed fit with agency, community, and target population.	3.0 Points Identified less than 2 options; less than two levels of intervention;limited discussion or fit.	0 Points Did not address multiple potential interventions or levelss of care or fit.	5 Points
Selection & Rationale for Program Implementation	5.0 Points Identified selected program or program revision; provided justification for selection; provided basis for selection.	3.0 Points Identified program recommendation, but inadequate support for recommendation.	0 Points No program identified or no justification for selection.	5 Points
Rationale Completeness	10.0 Points Support includes: explanation of motivation addressing need; identification of key collaborators/constituencies; discussed fit with agency mission, philosophies, tenets, expertise, resources, evidence that program may be effecctive with identified population.	5.0 Points 1 or 2 key components missing.	0 Points More than two key components missing.	10 Points
Total Points: 20