1. There are four parts to the Direct Care Project.
2. There will be graded Project Check-ins that correlate to each part.
3. The topic selected in Part 1 will be the same one used in Parts 2 through 4.
4. Review the table below for overview and due dates with each topic.
5. Contact your instructor with questions.

This direct care project enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

• CO2 Assess the health of populations, aggregates, and communities (PO4)
• CO3 Apply the nursing process to vulnerable populations with professional clinical judgment and evidence-based practice (PO4 & 8)
• CO5 Utilize a collaborative approach to address factors that influence population health (PO2)
• CO6 Examine collaborative trends in community health nursing (PO2)

Part 4 enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

• CO3 Apply the nursing process to vulnerable populations with professional clinical judgment and evidence-based practice (PO4 & 8)
• CO5 Utilize a collaborative approach to address factors that influence population health (PO2)
• CO6 Examine collaborative trends in community health nursing (PO2)

Due Date for Part 4

Sunday 11:59 PM MT at the end of Week 6

Points Possible for Part 4

140 Points

Late Assignment Policy

If the assignment is not submitted by due date, a late deduction will be applied. See rubric below.

Directions for Part 4

1. View the Direct Care Project Part 4 Tutorial (Links to an external site.)
2. Download the Evaluating the Project template below
3. Gather the information from the surveys and attendance form.
4. Complete the Part 4 template with the following:
   1. Title of presentation
      1. Include community name in the title
   2. Tables of results
      1. PRE-Survey and POST-Survey results in numerical form
   3. Comprehensive interpretation of results
      1. Comprehensive summary of pre and post survey data in tables
         1. Minimum of one paragraph
      2. Include any positive or negative changes in pre and post-survey data
         1. Minimum of one paragraph
   4. Comprehensive reflection
      1. Overall experience
         1. Minimum of one paragraph
      2. Summary of outcomes from the pre and post surveys i.e. does pre/post-survey data indicate participants may be more willing to implement SBIRT or Flag Program following the presentation? Did your presentation lead to further discussion about the topic with your audience?)
         1. Minimum of one paragraph
      3. Barriers to the project (i.e. participant interest, time, limited resources, willingness for change, etc.)
         1. Minimum of one paragraph
      4. Implications for future practice
         1. How could this project impact your personal and professional practice?
            1. Minimum of one paragraph
5. Submit the Direct Care Part 4 Evaluating the Project template and the attendance form. *Please note, your assignment will not be graded until the attendance form is submitted. As part of accreditation requirements, an email address is required for any audience member.
   

Template

Click on the link below to download your template.

Evaluating the Project Template (Links to an external site.)

Best Practices

• Please use your browser’s File setting to save or print this page.
• Use the template provided. If the template is not used, a deduction will be applied. See rubric below.
• Download and save the template (with your name) to your computer.
• Type directly on the template
• Spell check for spelling and grammar errors prior to final submission.
• Use the rubric as a final check prior to submission to ensure all content is clearly addressed.

SOLUTION

1. Interpretation of results:

Members of the vulnerable community were surveyed before starting the project and after participating in the SBIRT screening project. The survey results have revealed a number of specific features of working with individuals with substance use disorder (SUD). Vendetti et al. (2017) identify major challenges in the implementation of SBIRT, including “negative provider attitudes and perceptions of role incompatibility” (p. 24). The results of a survey of project participants revealed that this problem is most relevant for a vulnerable community since the responses identify low interest in the project, as well as distrust in healthcare providers.

At the same time, the results obtained allow us to conclude that participation in the project has a positive effect not only on attitude but also on the awareness of individuals with SUD. This assumption is consistent with findings from researchers who associate SBIRT “with changes in patient outcomes” (Aldridge et al., 2017, p. 50). This project has increased the level of interest of members of the vulnerable community in the healthcare opportunities available to them. At the same time, surveys have identified the difficulties associated with the successful implementation of the program.

The greatest challenge is the revealed reluctance of people to deal with their problem or be aware of it and, consequently, to seek help. Babor et al. (2017) note that “services should be integrated …, so that patients are assigned to the least intensive level of care that suits their needs” (p. 115). Healthcare providers need to approach community education with the goal of offering the least stressful health care experience for them.

Please click the purchase button to access the entire copy at $5