GPH-GU 2349-002 PROGRAM PLANNING AND EVALUATION
Instructor: Yesim Tozan, PhD
NYU Steinhardt School
411 Lafayette Street, 5th floor
Email: tozan@nyu.edu
Course schedule: Wed 6:45PM - 8:25PM
Course location: Class Location: Building GODD; Room B06
Office hours: By appointment
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This course will introduce the major principles, concepts and methods used to plan, monitor and
evaluate public health interventions and programs. Emphasis is placed on helping students
develop the essential skills required in developing program plans, monitoring program
implementation, and conducting evaluations for public health practice.
COURSE OBJECTIVES:
By the end of this course, students will be able to:
1. Describe the basic elements and principles of program planning in public health
2. Identify the principal barriers to successful implementation of public health programs
3. Identify the principal methods for overcoming barriers to program implementation
4. Describe the major concepts and principal methods in program evaluation
5. Demonstrate the ability to plan, monitor, and constructively evaluate public health
programs
PRE-REQUISITES: Epidemiology (PUHE-GE 2306 or GPH-GU 2106) and Research Methods
(PUHE-GE 2361 or NUTR-GE 2190)
COMPETENCIES COVERED IN THE COURSE:
Objective #
1
2
3
4
5
Competency*
Comp #3, Comp #15, Comp #16
Comp #4
Comp #5
Comp #12, Comp #18
Comp #9, Comp #12, Comp #16
*Competencies may be viewed at http://giph.nyu.edu/academic-programs/mph/academics/core-competencies.html.
1
COURSE FORMAT:
Lectures by the instructor and guest lecturers, readings, in-class quizzes, in-class discussions,
short assignments, group project and presentations
Through lectures, readings, discussions, quizzes, assignments, group projects and
presentations, students will gain the skills needed to engage in the processes of public health
planning and evaluation. Using these skills, students will work in teams to develop a public
health program plan and a plan to evaluate the program.
COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS:
Short assignments (20% of course grade): There will be 4 (four) short assignments to be
completed by each student individually, which are aimed towards building a skillset in program
planning, monitoring and evaluation in pace with the materials presented in lectures. Students
will be given a case study to draw upon for gaining practical experience in developing and/or
critiquing SMART objectives; logic models, evaluation questions and indicators. The individual
assignment with worksheet template will be posted a week before the date they are due. Each
individual assignment carries a maximum of 5% of grade. (see Grading of Assignment section
below).
Quizzes (30% of course grade): There will be 2 (two) quizzes testing your knowledge of the
assigned readings and your understanding of the materials presented and discussed at lectures.
If you miss a quiz without notifying the instructor, you will be not allowed to make up for it and
will receive 0 points. The quiz may comprise a combination of multiple choice, fill-in-the-blank,
matching, short answer and true or false questions.
Group project (40% of course grade): For the group project, students will work in teams (4-5
students per team; students will be randomly assigned to teams by the instructor) and develop
an evaluation plan for a global health intervention/program. Overall, there will be a total of 4
sections in the evaluation plan. Teams will identify their top three interventions/programs
during the first session from a list of interventions provided by the instructor, and the instructor
will assign the projects to the teams taking into account these choices.
Throughout the semester, teams will turn in the different sections of their plans to the
instructor for feedback (see below). Submissions will be made via the course website by 12 pm
on the due date (see course schedule). Each section can be revised based on the instructor’s
feedback. These sections will culminate into a final plan and will be submitted via the course
website as a report due on the last day of classes (see course schedule) by 12 pm. Each team
will present their final plans during the last two sessions of the semester (see course schedule).

Section 1 (5% of course grade): Describe the global health program: the public health
challenge the program is trying to alleviate or resolve, the goal and outcomes the
program aims to achieve, the target population and the number of target beneficiaries
of the program, the time frame for the program, the setting in which the program is
2




being implemented, the primary interventions and principal activities of the program,
and the funding and the implementing agency and implementation partners of the
program (free write-up, max 4 pages, excluding references and figures / tables, 1.5 line
spacing, font size 12).
Section 2 (5% of course grade): Present a stakeholder analysis for your program, using
the template introduced in class and posted on the course website.
Section 3 (5% of course grade): Develop a logic model (inputs, activities, outputs and
outcomes) using the template introduced in class and posted on the course website and
provide process and impact evaluation questions for your program.
Section 4 (5% of course grade): Develop a list of indicators and propose and justify an
evaluation design for our program, using the guidelines introduced in class and posted
on the course website. Also develop an evaluation timeline, using the template
introduced in class and posted on the course website.
Final report and presentation (20% of course grade): Compile all sections into one final
report. Each section can be revised throughout the semester based on the instructor’s
feedback. Each group will present their project. The presentation should be addressed
to a relevant ‘stakeholder’ (such as, the Ministry of Health of a resource poor country,
international development organization [as such, USAID], implementing organizations
[such as, BRAC]).
Class attendance and participation (10% of course grade): Class meeting time is limited;
students are expected to attend all sessions, be on time, and be in class for the entire
duration of the lecture. If you must miss a class, please let the instructor know in advance.
Please note that more than 1 unexcused absence or more than 2 absences (excused and
unexcused; regardless of reason) throughout the semester will result in 5 full-point reduction
from the overall grade.
Grading of class participation will be based on instructor’s assessment of student’s
preparedness for and involvement in classroom discussions throughout the semester.
Comments should be inquisitive and insightful and should contribute to the overall learning
experience. If you have concerns about class participation, please see the instructors in person
early in the semester. Inactive presence in class will result in full five-point reduction from the
overall grade, whereas students who make significant contributions in class showing mastery of
concepts and methods will receive full five-points for participation. As a class, we will stay away
from comments that are vague, repetitive, unrelated to the current topic, disrespectful of
others, or without sufficient foundation.
Students are expected to have read all required reading materials prior to each lecture and be
prepared to pose 1-2 questions related to these materials for class discussion at each lecture.
Instructor will call randomly on students to ensure lively and participatory discussions each
lecture.
0
Inactive presence (no participation in class exercises and discussions), no evidence of
preparation for lectures (no questions/comments on readings)
3
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
Inactive presence (no participation in class exercises and discussions) but some evidence of
preparation for lectures through questions and comments on readings
Some active presence through participation in class exercises but no contribution to class
discussions, some evidence of preparation for lectures through questions and comments on
readings
Active presence through participation in class exercises and contribution to class discussions,
and evidence of preparation for lectures through questions and comments on readings, raising
thoughtful issues or questions in class
Exceptional and consistent contribution to class exercises and discussions throughout the
semester, leading to interaction among students and/or with the instructor, and
demonstration of good preparation for lectures through inquisitive questions and insightful
comments on readings, showing mastery of concepts and methods
Peer evaluation (as part of class participation grade): In the professional world, project
assignments, job recommendations and other opportunities come to those who work well with
others, offer fresh ideas, and get things done. We will ask students to provide constructive
references for their classmates.
GRADING RUBRIC:
Item
Percentage
Assignments (4 in total, 5% each)
Quizzes (2 in total, 15% each)
Group project (4 sections in total, 5%
each; final report and ppt, 20%)
Class attendance and participation
Total
GRADING SCALE:
A:
93-100
A-:
90-92
B+:
87-89
B:
83-86
B-:
C+:
C:
C-:
20
30
40
10
100
80-82
77-79
73-76
70-72
D+:
D:
F:
67-69
60-66
<60
NYU CLASSES:
NYU Classes will be used extensively throughout the semester for assignments, announcements
and communication. NYU Classes is accessible through at https://home.nyu.edu/academics.
TECHNOLOGY POLICY:
If you need a laptop, tablet, or any other device for taking notes or otherwise participating in
class, that’s fine. However, please do not use a personal device for any purpose unrelated to
our class. Cell phone use for the purposes of texting, email or other social media is not
permitted. All devices should be silenced.
4
COURSE OUTLINE:
Topics
 Course introduction:
overview and
expectations
 Introduction to program
planning and evaluation:
key concepts and
importance
Week Sep 9  Program planning:
2
Guest
Adapting evidence
lecture
based programs
Week Sep 16  Program planning:
3
Stakeholder analysis
Week
1
Date
Sep 2
Week
4
Sept 23 
Week
5
Sept 30 
Week
6
Oct 7
Week
7
Oct 14 
Week
8
Week
9
Week
10


Oct 21 
Oct 28 
Nov 4

Program Planning:
program theory and
interventions, key
considerations and
conditions for success
Program
implementation: setting
SMART program
objectives and targets
Program
implementation:
developing a program
logic model
Program evaluation:
Developing evaluation
questions
Quiz 1
Process evaluation:
measuring program
implementation
Impact evaluation:
indicators and
measurement
considerations
Impact evaluation:
evaluation designs and
considerations in
choosing a design
Readings
Issel textbook Ch 1
Citation list: [1, 2]
Due Dates
Group project - Section 0:
Meet and greet your group
members and identify your
global health program
Issel textbook Ch 2
Citation list: [3]
Issel textbook Ch 1 &
Ch 2
Citation list: [4, 5]
Group project - Section 1:
Describe the global health
program of your choice
Issel textbook Ch 5
[pp 141-164] & Ch 6
&
Issel textbook: Ch 7
[pp 215-226] & Ch 8
Citation list: [6]
Group project - Section 2:
Present a stakeholder
analysis for your program
Issel textbook Ch 8 &
10
Assignment 1: SMART
objectives
Issel textbook Ch 10
Citation list: [7, 8]
Quiz 1
Issel textbook Ch 12
Citation list: [9]
Assignment 3: Evaluation
questions
Issel textbook Ch 12
Group project - Section 3:
Develop a logic model and
formulate evaluation
questions for your program
Assignment 4: Indicator
development
Citation list: [10, 11]
Issel textbook Ch 13
Assignment 2: Logic model
Citation list: [12]
5
Week
11
Nov 11 
Guest
lecture
Week
12
Nov 18 
Guest
lecture
Week
13
Week
14
Nov 25
Dec 2 
Dec 9



Impact evaluation:
Sampling designs and
data sources for effect
evaluations and issues
with quantification of
program effect
Impact evaluation:
Practical constraints and
ethical issues in
evaluation and
presenting and
communicating results
Group project ppts
(3 teams – see ppt
schedule @NYU Classes)
Quiz 2
Group project ppts
(3 teams – see ppt
schedule @NYU Classes)
Course wrap-up
Issel textbook Ch 14
& 15
Issel textbook Ch 17
Citation list: [13-15]
No class
-
Group project - Section 4:
Propose a list of indicators
and develop an evaluation
design for your program
and justify the design
chosen; Develop a timeline
for the evaluation plan
Quiz 2
Group project PPT file
-
Group project - Final
report
Group project PPT file
TEXTBOOK AND ASSIGNED READINGS:
Required textbook: Issel, L. Michele. (2014) Health program planning and evaluation: a
practical and systematic approach for community health. Sudbury, Mass.: Jones and Bartlett
Publishers. Please get your copy!
Additional required readings are listed in the course schedule, and full citations of the journal
articles are provided below. All journal articles are available through NYU Library's
subscription databases, E-Journals and E-Books, including when you are off-campus. You need
to log in using your NYU NetID and password to conduct a search. Book chapters will be posted
on the course website – pls note that this does not apply to the Issel textbook. Pls get your
own copy! In the event that there is a change in weekly reading assignments, an announcement
will be made at least a week in advance of the lecture.
Required readings:
1.
Hossain SM, Duffield A, Taylor A. An evaluation of the impact of a US$60 million
nutrition programme in Bangladesh. Health policy and planning. 2005;20(1):35-40. Epub
2005/02/04. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czi004. PubMed PMID: 15689428.
2.
White H. Comment on contributions regarding the impact of the Bangladesh Integrated
Nutrition Project. Health policy and planning. 2005;20(6):408-11; author reply 11. doi:
10.1093/heapol/czi061. PubMed PMID: 16249209.
6
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Brownson RC, Fielding JE, Maylahn CM. Evidence-based public health: a fundamental
concept for public health practice. Annual review of public health. 2009;30:175-201.
Epub 2009/03/20. doi: 10.1146/annusrev.publhealth.031308.100134
Ancker S, Rechel B. HIV/AIDS policy-making in Kyrgyzstan: a stakeholder analysis. Health
Policy and Planning. 2013. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czt092.
World Bank. Stakeholder Analysis from
http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/anticorrupt/PoliticalEconomy/stakeholderana
lysis.htm Washington, D.C.: The World Bank (WB); 2001.
W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Logic Model Development Guide from
http://www.wkkf.org/resource-directory/resource/2006/02/wk-kellogg-foundationlogic-model-development-guide 2004. Available from: http://www.wkkf.org/resourcedirectory/resource/2006/02/wk-kellogg-foundation-logic-model-development-guide.
Saunders RP, Evans MH, Joshi P. Developing a process-evaluation plan for assessing
health promotion program implementation: a how-to guide. Health promotion practice.
2005;6(2):134-47. doi: 10.1177/1524839904273387. PubMed PMID: 15855283.
Olapade M. [Internet]. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation2013.
Glennester and Takavarasha. Running Randomized Evaluations. Chapter 3 [pages. 66—
73; 81—96]. 2013.
Glennester and Takavarasha. Running Randomized Evaluations. Chapter 5 [pages 180—
212]. 2013.
Zwane AP, Zinman J, Van Dusen E, Pariente W, Null C, Miguel E, et al. Being surveyed
can change later behavior and related parameter estimates. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences. 2011;108(5):1821-6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1000776108.
Glennester and Takavarasha. Running Randomized Evaluations. Chapter 7 [pages 298—
323]. 2013.
Bamberger M, Rugh J, L M. Overview: Real World Evaluation and the contexts in which
they are used. Real World Evaluation: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2012. p. Chapter 1[pages
2-16].
Glennester and Takavarasha. Running Randomized Evaluations. Chapter 9 [pages 410—
419]. 2013.
Poverty Action Lab. Showing up is the First Step from
http://www.povertyactionlab.org/publication/absenteeism-showing-first-step 2009.
Optional Readings
1.
Zimmerman, M.A., & Holden, D.J. (2009). A Practical Guide to Program Evaluation
Planning: Theory and Case Examples. Thousand Oaks, CA Sage Publications, Inc.
Chapter 4.
2.
Ribeiro, I. C., A. Torres, D. C. Parra, R. Reis, C. Hoehner, T. L. Schmid, M. Pratt, L. R.
Ramos, E. J. Simoes and R. C. Brownson (2010). "Using logic models as iterative tools for
planning and evaluating physical activity promotion programs in Curitiba, Brazil." J Phys
Act Health 7 Suppl 2: S155-162.
3.
Hargreaves, J., A. Hatcher, V. Strange, G. Phetla, J. Busza, J. Kim, C. Watts, L. Morison, J.
Porter, P. Pronyk and C. Bonell (2010). "Process evaluation of the Intervention with
7
4.
Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE) in rural South Africa." Health Educ
Res 25(1): 27-40.
Fernandez, M. E., A. Gonzales, G. Tortolero-Luna, J. Williams, M. Saavedra-Embesi, W.
Chan and S. W. Vernon (2009). "Effectiveness of Cultivando la Salud: a breast and
cervical cancer screening promotion program for low-income Hispanic women." Am J
Public Health 99(5): 936-943.
Online resources
 Logic model development guide: http://www.wkkf.org/resourcedirectory/resource/2006/02/wk-kellogg-foundation-logic-model-development-guide
 Evaluation handbook_1:
http://www.ncela.us/files/rcd/BE020502/Evaluation_Handbook.pdf
 Evaluation handbook_2: http://www.wkkf.org/resource-directory/resource/2010/w-kkellogg-foundation-evaluation-handbook
 Evaluation glossary: http://www.oecd.org/development/peer-reviews/2754804.pdf
 Designing and conducting health systems research project – part 1:
http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Publications/Pages/IDRCBookDetails.aspx?PublicationID
=210
 Designing and conducting health systems research project – part 2:
http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Publications/Pages/IDRCBookDetails.aspx?PublicationID
=208
 International initiative for impact evaluation: http://www.3ieimpact.org/
 Sample size calculations:
https://www.dssresearch.com/KnowledgeCenter/toolkitcalculators.aspx
 Monitoring and evaluation news and listservs: http://mande.co.uk/
 Evaluation portal link connection: http://www.evaluation.lars-balzer.name/links/
 American Evaluation Association: http://www.eval.org
 Community Solutions Planning and Evaluation: http://communitysolutions.ca/web/
Researchers: http://www.theresearch assistant.com/tutorial/4-threat.asp
STATEMENT OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
The NYU College of Global Public Health values both open inquiry and academic integrity.
Students in the program are expected to follow standards of excellence set forth by New York
University. Such standards include respect, honesty and responsibility. The CGPH does not
tolerate violations to academic integrity including:



Plagiarism
Cheating on an exam
Submitting your own work toward requirements in more than one course without prior
approval from the instructor
8



Collaborating with other students for work expected to be completed individually
Giving your work to another student to submit as his/her own
Purchasing or using papers or work online or from a commercial firm and presenting it as
your own work
Students are expected to familiarize themselves with the CGPH and University’s policy on
academic integrity as they will be expected to adhere to such policies at all times – as a student
and an alumni of New York University.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism, whether intended or not, is not tolerated in the CGPH. Plagiarism involves
presenting ideas and/or words without acknowledging the source and includes any of the
following acts:

Using a phrase, sentence, or passage from another writer's work without using quotation
marks

Paraphrasing a passage from another writer's work without attribution

Presenting facts, ideas, or written text gathered or downloaded from the Internet as your
own

Submitting another student's work with your name on it

Submitting your own work toward requirements in more than one course without prior
approval from the instructor

Purchasing a paper or "research" from a term paper mill.
Students in the CGPH and CGPH courses are responsible for understanding what constitutes
plagiarism. Students are encouraged to discuss specific questions with faculty instructors and to
utilize the many resources available at New York University.
Disciplinary Sanctions
When a professor suspects cheating, plagiarism, and/or other forms of academic dishonesty,
appropriate disciplinary action is as follows:
 The Professor will meet with the student to discuss, and present evidence for the
particular violation, giving the student opportunity to refute or deny the charge(s).
 If the Professor confirms that violation(s), he/she, in consultation with the Program
Director may take any of the following actions:
o Allow the student to redo the assignment
o Lower the grade for the work in question
o Assign a grade of F for the work in question
o Assign a grade of F for the course
o Recommend dismissal
9
Once an action(s) is taken, the Professor will inform the Program Director and inform the
student in writing, instructing the student to schedule an appointment with the Associate Dean
for Academic Affairs, as a final step. The student has the right to appeal the action taken in
accordance with the CGPH Student Complaint Procedure.
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES:
Students with disabilities should contact the Moses Center for Students with Disabilities
regarding the resources available to them, and to determine what classroom accommodations
should be made available. More information about the Moses Center can be found here:
https://www.nyu.edu/life/safety-health-wellness/students-with-disabilities.html.
Students
requesting accommodation must obtain a letter from the Moses Center to provide to me as
early in the semester as possible.
10