COMMUNITY-ORIENTED PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE PROGRAM CAPSTONE HANDBOOK REVISED AUGUST 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS CAPSTONE PROJECT-­‐ IMPORTANT DATES AN OVERVIEW OF THE COPHP CAPSTONE PROJECT WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CAPSTONE AND A THESIS? THE CAPSTONE EXPERIENCE COPHP CAPSTONE REQUIREMENTS THE CAPSTONE SITE RESPONSIBILITIES OF STUDENTS, FACULTY ADVISORS, AND ON-­‐SITE MENTORS STUDENTS FACULTY ADVISORS ON-­‐SITE MENTORS PROCESS PLANNING: FIND A SITE AND SITE SUPERVISOR PLANNING: FIND A FACULTY ADVISOR PLANNING: THE CAPSTONE PROPOSAL AND CONTRACT PLANNING: HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL DOING EVALUATION AND REFLECTION SUMMARIZING AND PRESENTING DELIVERABLES FOR COMPLETION OF COPHP CAPSTONE WORK DETAILED TIMELINE OF PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND DUE DATES ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR TURNING MATERIALS IN CAPSTONE REPORT FORMAT OUTLINES JOURNAL SUBMISSION ORGANIZATIONAL REPORT COVER DESCRIPTION FOR A PRODUCT IMPORTANT FORMS APPENDIX A-­‐ CAPSTONE PROPOSAL TEMPLATE APPENDIX B-­‐ CAPSTONE CONTRACT APPENDIX C, D, E, F-­‐ EVALUATIONS OF STUDENT WORK APPENDIX C-­‐ ON-­‐SITE MENTOR EVALUATION OF STUDENT WORK APPENDIX D-­‐ FACULTY ADVISOR EVALUATION OF STUDENT WORK APPENDIX E – STUDENT EVALUATION OF CAPSTONE EXPERIENCE APPENDIX F-­‐ STUDENT DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION APPENDIX G – STUDENT EVALUATION OF CAPSTONE SITE APPENDIX CAPSTONE PRESENTATION REQUIREMENTS EXERCISE TO DEVELOP CAPSTONE IDEAS ASPECTS OF A SUCCESSFUL CAPSTONE COPHP CAPSTONES PAST CAPSTONE PROJECT-­‐ IMPORTANT DATES FIRST YEAR
Read capstone handbook.
Research potential capstone opportunities.
Find faculty advisor.
Determine if human subjects approval is needed.
SUMBIT HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL APPLICATION AT LEAST 4 MONTHS
PRIOR TO THE START OF DATA COLLECTION OR REVIEW.
SUMMER
Labor Day- Capstone proposal including organizational profile due to
faculty advisor and program director.
SECOND YEAR
October 1st- Signed capstone contract due to COPHP program office
staff and program director.
November 10th- Literature review due to faculty advisor and site
supervisor.
April 1st- Capstone report draft due to faculty advisor and site
supervisor.
May 15th- COPHP Appendices A-G due to program office.
COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 1 AN OVERVIEW OF THE COPHP CAPSTONE PROJECT What’s the difference between a capstone and a thesis? The 2nd Year COPHP capstone project is a scholarly effort of high quality that demonstrates the students’ ability to produce independent professional-­‐quality work for a client. A thesis is a research effort explicitly for the purpose of creating new knowledge and contributing to the scientific literature. Students may conduct research for their capstone for the purpose of contributing to the scientific literature but they must have a client who has requested the research and be working on behalf of the client agency to conduct and analyze the research. The capstone experience The capstone is a yearlong, individualized, supervised component of the COPHP curriculum that you can customize to meet your own learning and experiential goals. It should be viewed as an opportunity for students to: • Work in a community setting or health-­‐related agency of their choice • Immerse themselves in solving a public health problem • Develop, expand and hone their public health skills • Gain specialized, sophisticated experience in an area of particular interest In conducting the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project, you will work closely with a supervisory committee composed of a UW/COPHP faculty adviser and an on-­‐site mentor. Both will assist in planning the project, monitoring your progress, reviewing project-­‐related documents and products, and participating in project evaluation and grading. The COPHP capstone reflects the program’s emphasis on problem solving, effective change, and community involvement. Its broad goals are as follows: Experiential Goals: To contribute to solving a community health problem in a meaningful, effective, and culturally sensitive fashion; specifically, • To work to solve a public health problem in a community setting. • To find and apply evidence-­‐based solutions to a defined community problem. • To work productively with other people and to develop successful community partnerships and solutions. • To explore problem-­‐solving methods in the contexts of specific communities and populations. • To understand the organizational, political, economic, and social contexts that can promote or constrain public health interventions. Academic Goals: Both the COPHP class work and the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project are structured to assure that students achieve core public health competencies in such skill areas as assessment, communication, policy development, and cultural awareness. Following are general academic goals for the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project: COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 2 •
•
•
•
To develop advanced public health assessment and problem-­‐solving skills. To develop comprehensive knowledge in an area or areas of special interest. To evaluate the successes and weaknesses of the project though either formal evaluation and analysis or reflection. To hone communication skills and use them to summarize findings in professional-­‐quality written and oral presentations. COPHP CAPSTONE REQUIREMENTS The Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project is a year-­‐long activity in which you work with a community organization or public health agency to identify and contribute to the solution of a public health problem, and summarize, present, and evaluate this effort. A minimum of 9 credit hours are required for you to conduct the project from conception and planning stages to the final oral and written presentations. All COPHP capstone projects should: • Address a need and/or have direct, practical value to a community organization or public health-­‐
related agency. • Involve an identifiable activity (or set of activities) with a clear endpoint and produce a specific “product” that can be described in detail and evaluated formally or through reflection. Examples of products include: o An implementation plan for a public health program o A public health intervention o A curriculum o An evaluation (report) o A needs assessment (report) o A communications campaign (advertisements, video, etc.) o A training program o A policy analysis o Policy development o Proposed legislation o A community mobilization effort • Apply and extend specific public health skills, knowledge, and experience in an area of special interest to the student. • Be relevant to improving the health of a community, advancing social justice, eliminating health disparities, or improving public health practice. • Be evidence-­‐based. It is NOT sufficient just to DO something for the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project. You must build on—or place in the context of—what is known (i.e., “evidence”). • Include an evaluation or self-­‐evaluation component (see appendix F). • Be summarized in a written report and orally in a rigorous, thoughtful, and professional manner. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 3 THE CAPSTONE SITE The organization or agency in which you conduct your Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project can be anywhere—domestic or international. It should meet the following criteria: • Have an identified need that can be addressed with the problem-­‐solving skills attained during COPHP cases and other academic work. • Provide an on-­‐site mentor who can meet with you regularly and who is willing to provide substantive guidance and assistance. • Provide necessary resources (desk, data, access to clients, etc.) to enable you to carry out the project. • Enable you to apply skills and competencies learned in the academic program. • Have an organizational mission and values consistent with the program’s emphasis on social justice and equity. • Provide an opportunity to interact with diverse populations in community settings and with public health practitioners. Capstone sites may be domestic or international. Examples of appropriate sites include: • Health departments • Local, state, federal, and international governmental human service agencies • Non-­‐governmental human service agencies • Community-­‐based organizations (CBOs) • Advocacy organizations • Government policy-­‐making bodies • Community clinics • Community centers • Community coalitions • Hospitals, nursing homes, and other long-­‐term care facilities • Schools • Child care and day care centers • International non-­‐governmental organizations (NGOs) RESPONSIBILITIES OF STUDENTS, FACULTY ADVISORS, AND ON-­‐SITE MENTORS Students • Initiate the COPHP Capstone Project by researching prospective sites, making community contacts, and presenting options to their faculty advisers. • Familiarize themselves with potential sites by contacting staff and identifying potential mentors. • Schedule regular meetings with their faculty-­‐advisors and on-­‐site mentors. (Students are also encouraged to seek assistance from other faculty members who can offer expertise and guidance for the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project.) COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 4 •
•
Perform all of the tasks outlined in their Project Proposal and work plan, collecting and completing all forms, and producing all deliverables on schedule, including: o Project Proposal o Project Contract o Work plan o Literature review o Human subjects approval application o Draft report o Final report o Oral presentation o Community presentation Formally evaluate the quality of their Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project experience and makes recommendation for improving the experience. Faculty Advisors • Assist students in choosing their Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project sites • Advise students to assure that their projects have reasonable and appropriate aims and both is rigorous and feasible; • Collaborate with students and on-­‐site mentors, develop a schedule of regular meetings to monitor progress, problem-­‐solve around issues the come up, and provide advice on background development, literature search, methods, and presentations. • Assist students in preparing, if necessary, Human Subjects applications. • Assume principal responsibility for project oversight, ensuring scientific quality, and integrating project tasks with academic work, learning objectives, and students’ career objectives. • Review and critique all project deliverables, including proposals, work plans, progress reports, drafts, and final reports • Evaluate student work for the purpose of grading and assure that grades are submitted to the registrar at project completion (Usually, a grade of “N” will be given for all but the final quarter. These “N” grades will be replaced automatically when a final grade for the project is submitted.)1 • Assure consensus of the committee for assigning a final grade for the project. On-­‐site Mentors • Assist students in identifying community/agency needs and in formulating an appropriate, feasible, and edifying project. • Share expertise, experience, and organizational values. • Assist students in completing the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project Contract. • Meet with students and faculty advisers at the onset and regularly during the project. • Orient students to their sites, serves as an advocate for the student, introducing them to staff and familiarizing them with organizational procedures. 1
See detailed timeline of project deliverables and due dates.
COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 5 •
•
•
•
•
•
Mentor the project, providing expertise on community and organizational ethos and on appropriate public health approaches and practice skills. Help students to find appropriate working space and equipment. Assist students to obtain access to necessary data. Review and comment on written products. Attend the final oral presentation. Contribute to project evaluation and grading. PROCESS The Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project consists of four phases: Planning, Doing, Evaluating and Reflecting, and Summarizing and Presenting. Planning: find a site and site supervisor This is a process that can take weeks or months. You will need to start looking for a capstone project during the winter of your first year. During fall quarter we recommend you become clear about what kinds of projects, populations, or problems you are of interest you.2 • Are you interested in certain population groups, e.g., immigrants? • Are your interested in a specific problem are area, e.g., reproductive health? • Do you want to work with a specific organization or type of organization (e.g., a rural health department)? • Do you want experience in a specific public health challenge, e.g., developing a media campaign, conducting a program evaluation, or performing epidemiologic analysis? Then, aggressively, search for opportunities in your areas of interest. Use all of the resources that you have available to identify individuals, agencies, and opportunities related to your interests: personal contacts (faculty, contacts, colleagues, etc.), the web, print resources. Be active. Ask around. Call people. Arrange to meet with people to let them know your interests and your needs (i.e., doing a 2nd year project), and also your skills and ability to help. Often, a person with whom you meet will give you names of other people to contact. Follow-­‐up on these leads. Do not be shy and do not avoid. If you cannot arrange a meeting, try to talk with them on the phone, or worst of all, via email. PRO TIP: Do not wait too long for the perfect project to come along. Use your faculty advisor and other COPHP faculty to help you choose a project if you are having trouble deciding between multiple options. 2
See appendix I for an exercise to brainstorm capstone ideas.
COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 6 Planning: find a faculty advisor While you are selecting your Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project, you should also be identifying a faculty member to be your primary faculty adviser for the project. This person should be someone with whom you feel comfortable and who has expertise in the area where you’ll be working. Although we prefer that you select a faculty member from the COPHP faculty, you can choose someone from outside the program, provided that they are on the UW faculty within the School of Public Health, and are willing to supervise the project according to the expectations described in this document and the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project Contract (Appendix B). Planning: the capstone proposal and contract When you have chosen your project and project site, and you have received provisional approval from someone at the site, you must prepare and submit a 4-­‐5 page proposal to your faculty advisor and on-­‐site supervisor following the outline in appendix A. Once you have approval for your project from your faculty advisor and on-­‐site mentor, submit your proposal to the COPHP Program Director for review by Labor Day. You need to fill out and obtain signatures on the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project Service Learning Contract (Appendix B) by October 1st. Copies of the signed agreements should be given to the faculty adviser, site mentor, and the program office, and you should keep a copy. Planning: human subjects approval For some projects, it may be necessary to submit a University of Washington Human Subjects application. Usually this is necessary only if you are conducting a research study. Your adviser and the program faculty should be able to tell you whether a Human Subjects application is necessary for your project. PRO-­‐TIP: You should submit IRB proposals at least 4 months before the start of data collection. Doing This phase involves the actual conduct of your project. The details will vary; these may involve curriculum development, community mobilization, political action, data analysis, evaluation, program planning, program implementation—it depends on the purpose of your particular project. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 7 As a general guide, the work involved should amount to about 180-­‐240 hours, or 9-­‐12 hours per week during Autumn and Winter quarters, i.e., 3 credits per quarter. This represents simply the program’s minimal requirement. You are free to spend more time on this project. During this time, you should meet with your faculty adviser at least twice per quarter and your on-­‐site mentor at least every two weeks. It is important that the whole committee (faculty adviser, on-­‐site mentor, and student) meet all together at least once a quarter and more if helpful or needed. Evaluation and Reflection A critical aspect of the COPHP Capstone Project is a thoughtful evaluation of the project itself. We expect each student to reflect and comment on the experience. It may be helpful to keep a journal or log to record and monitor your progress, difficulties, victories, and impressions using the self-­‐reflection and evaluation in appendix F. Summarizing and Presenting Although the COPHP Capstone Project should be an activity (informed by scholarly background research), an essential part of the process is to summarize (in written, oral, and poster media) what you accomplished. All second year students will present their capstone project findings and work to the COPHP community including faculty, on-­‐site mentors, COPHP students, and families the Friday the last week of spring quarter. Deliverables for completion of COPHP Capstone work 1. Written report: a formal, professional, detailed, and comprehensive written report on what you did and what you learned. Generally, this report will be between 20 and 40 pages, but it is the quality and content of the report, and not its length, that will be evaluated. 2. Agency presentation: a summary/presentation of your project for —and to—the agency in which you worked. The format of this presentation should be determined in discussions with your on-­‐site colleagues. It is possible that a summary of the report above or the program presentation (described below) will be satisfactory. It is more likely, however, that the agency will want a more focused or, perhaps more Community-­‐Oriented, report, such as a town meeting, or a presentation at a staff meeting, etc. 3. Oral presentation: During the last week of Spring Quarter, we will hold special program for the presentation of your Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project. Each student will have about 13 minutes (10 minutes for the presentation and 3 minutes for questions) for a formal oral presentation. An outline for the presentation is found in appendix H. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 8 DETAILED TIMELINE OF PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND DUE DATES Document/ Milestone Responsibility of: Due Date (date does not change year to year) Project proposal
Project contract
Student
Student
Labor Day
October 1st
Human Subjects
application
Student, faculty
advisor
Literature Review
Draft project written
product
Student
Student
Four months before
you need to contact
subjects or access
identifiable data.
November 10th
April 1st
Appendices A + D
Final Project Report
Student, faculty
advisor
Student
Project presentations
Student
On-site mentor
evaluation of student
project (Appendix B)
Faculty evaluation of
student work
(Appendix C)
Registrar notified of
student eligibility to
graduate
Final Grade
On-site mentor
Faculty advisor
May 15th
Last week of Spring
Quarter
Last week of Spring
Quarter
After final capstone
presentation is
delivered.
When grade is
submitted
Faculty advisor
Finals week
Faculty advisor,
on-site mentor
Week after Spring
quarter finals week
Submitted to Faculty advisor and program director
Faculty advisor, site mentor, and
program director
Human Subjects Office (need signature
of faculty mentor)
http://depts.washington.edu/
hsd/
Faculty advisor, and on-site mentor
Faculty advisor, site mentor
Faculty adviser, site mentor, program
office
Faculty advisor, site mentor, program
office
Faculty, classmates, invited guests
To faculty advisor
To student
Faculty advisor to EMAIL program
registrar and let them know student is
eligible to graduate.
Faculty advisor to submit grade in
online grading system.
Roles and Responsibilities For Turning Materials In Student-­‐ Have all materials turned in on the dates specified above to the correct person. Student is responsible for making sure their site supervisors get an evaluation form and letting their site supervisors know when the evaluation is due to the faculty advisor. Faculty Advisor-­‐ Will use the student reflection and on-­‐site mentor evaluation to grade student work. The faculty advisor is responsible for getting the evaluation from the on-­‐site mentor on time for grading. COPHP faculty will notify the department registrar that the student has completed the capstone work and is eligible to graduate, submit the student capstone final grade and send their evaluation of the student work to the student for their reference. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 9 Site Supervisor-­‐ The site supervisor is responsible for completing the evaluation form of the student’s work and getting it to the faculty supervisor at a time the faculty supervisor deems appropriate for grading. CAPSTONE REPORT FORMAT OUTLINES All final Capstone products must include the following: • A header or footer with the author name, project title, and date completed. • A title page with the project title, author, date, agency, site supervisor name and faculty advisor name. • An acknowledgements section to recognize the community members, agency staff, and UW faculty who assisted in the capstone project. You may submit your capstone in one of the three formats below: Journal Submission-­‐ ideal for original research, policy briefs, systematic reviews etc. Students should work with their faculty advisor and on-­‐site mentor to choose a respected peer-­‐reviewed journal to draft their manuscript for. Each journal has varying criteria that the student must follow and may vary from the outline provided below. In general you will follow this format adapted from the American Journal of Public Health Guide for Authors: I.
COVER LETTER This varies journal to journal but generally includes: a short statement about whether or not you have abided by the code of ethics set forth by the journal (If you have departed from the code of ethics you must provide a brief explanation as to why), a disclosure of all possible conflicts of interest, disclosure of previous publications based upon the same material, and a brief indication of the importance of the manuscript to the field of public health. II.
ABSTRACT Structured abstracts should not exceed 250 words and employ 4 headings: Purpose (or Objectives), Methods, Results, and Conclusions. You may use an unstructured abstract for a policy brief or if your journal requires it. III.
BACKGROUND Clearly state the purpose of the research and summarize the rationale for the study by providing a brief literature review. IV.
METHODS The methods section should be very thorough and clear enough that someone uninvolved in the research may replicate the study exactly. The section should include: Description of all study subjects, the protocol for how informed consent was obtained, any established methods with references, and detailed description of any new method. V.
RESULTS Results should be presented in a clear and logical format and include any statistical tests of significance with the corresponding P value. Text, tables and illustrations may be used to present results. VI.
DISCUSSION This section should focus on the new and important findings from the research. This section should include limitations and implications of the study. Don’t repeat data from the results section. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 10 VII.
CONCLUSIONS The conclusion section is generally short and should be CAREFULLY stated so as not to over or under value the implications of the study findings. VIII.
REFERENCES Make sure to follow the style preference outlined by the journal of your choosing. IX.
COPHP APPENDICES A-­‐G (see Important Forms) Organizational Report-­‐ ideal for program evaluations, needs assessments, policy analysis I.
TITLE PAGE II.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS III.
TABLE OF CONTENTS IV.
LIST OF FIGURES V.
ABSTRACT OR EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Should not exceed one page, ideally 250 words for an abstract. Should highlight the key findings and lessons learned from the project. The on-­‐site mentor should be able to glean the most important findings from your report from this single page. VI.
INTRODUCTION Includes a detailed problem statement including references as well as a justification for why this project was commissioned to address the problem. VII.
BACKGROUND (LITERATURE REVIEW) A literature review to provide background on the public health problem, solutions that have been tried in the past, and describe any current evidence-­‐based practices. This section should also include background on your agency, their history, and how this project aligns with their work and mission. This section may also include any relevant local background including policies and area history. VIII.
METHODS/PROCEDURES A detailed and clear explanation of how you set about solving the problem. Should include how subjects were selected if any, how data was collected, how variables were chosen and measured, and how the data was analyzed. IX.
RESULTS A clear and logical explanation of accomplishments and learning, including any significant results from data analysis. X.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS What are the implications of the findings? What are the limitations of the findings? What are the implications for public health? The community served? XI.
RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations to the community agency based on your findings. XII.
REFERENCES XIII.
APPENDICES XIV.
COPHP APPENDICES A-­‐G (see Important Forms) Cover Description for A Product-­‐ ideal for curriculum or training development, physical product or process development and piloting. I.
TITLE PAGE II.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 11 III.
TABLE OF CONTENTS IV.
LIST OF FIGURES V.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY-­‐ PRODUCT DESCRIPTION Should not exceed one page, and should describe the product that was developed, why it was developed, and a brief methods section to describe how it was developed. VI.
INTRODUCTION Should include a problem statement based on the literature with references. VII.
BACKGROUND (LITERATURE REVIEW) A literature review to provide background on the public health problem, solutions that have been tried in the past, and describe any current evidence-­‐based practices. This section should also include background on your agency, their history, and how this project aligns with their work and mission. This section may also include any relevant local background including policies and area history. VIII.
METHODS/PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT A detailed and clear explanation about how the product was developed so that someone else could replicate the product development. Should include mention of how subjects were recruited if any, how data was collected, how the product was evaluated for performance, and how any previously existing methods and measures were used to develop or test the product. IX.
RESULTS (PRODUCT) May be a copy of the product itself, a detailed description of the product, or results of product testing with target population. X.
CONCLUSIONS Should discuss findings, implications, limitations, and areas for future development. XI.
RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations to the agency regarding the use or continued development of the product. XII.
REFERENCES XIII.
APPENDICES XIV.
COPHP APPENDICES A-­‐G (see Important Forms) COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 12 IMPORTANT FORMS APPENDIX A-­‐ Capstone Proposal Template Capstone Proposal (due Labor Day) HEADER-­‐ Including name, date, faculty advisor, and on-­‐site mentor names I.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. Objectives b. Deliverables, products c. Benefit to the community d. Learning objectives e. Plan to present or communicate project findings II.
ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE a. History and development. b. Organization’s mission, goals, services, and values. c. Population served (client demographics, eligibility criteria, service area) d. Type of organization (non-­‐profit, for-­‐profit, membership, etc.) and funding (major sources, operating budget). e. Governance (board composition, partners, affiliations with external agencies, etc.). f. Staff composition (number, disciplines represented, training, organizational structure). g. Relationship to community and other agencies (partners, collaborators, affiliations). h. Current challenges, visions, and organization’s priority needs (list three). III.
PROBLEM STATEMENT a. What is the public health problem? b. How does this project fit with the needs and mission of the organization? c. Why have you chosen this specific approach to the problem? d. Brief literature review to justify approach IV.
METHODS/TIMELINE a. General overview of methods that will be used to solve problem b. What resources will you need to conduct your project? c. Give a timeline and work plan for your project including major meetings, data collection timeframe, service deliverables and all other time sensitive components and how you plan to complete them in the given timeframe. V.
IRB APPLICATION a. A statement describing why you do or do not need human subjects approval for this project. Should be well reasoned and indicate that you have read the UW human subjects approval criteria for research and have spoken with your faculty advisor and on site supervisor. b. Which IRB review board you will be applying to, when, IRB points of contact, exempt or non exempt application status, and a timeline for data collection that includes the IRB review process. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 13 APPENDIX B-­‐ Capstone Contract Capstone Contract (due October 1st) The terms of the field experience and the obligation of all partners should be clearly understood and entered into by signature of agreement. The Service Learning Contract needs to provide fair measurement of the extent to which the interests of the three partners are served. •
•
•
The student is entitled to a meaningful practical learning experience that builds on experience and coursework. The host agency is entitled to a responsible adult learner with a serious commitment to the agency's goals and to delivering a service or product of value to the agency. The academic department is entitled to reasonable evidence that both sides of these commitments have been fulfilled before it gives the student a passing grade. Details of the signed contract include: • Statements of the student's project objectives, which should clearly express the activities to be performed, the services to be provided, and the end products expected • Statements of the student's learning objectives • Expectations include attendance, punctuality, and productivity • The student's responsibilities—projects, academic assignments, meetings, readings, presentations, post-­‐internship evaluations • The on-­‐site mentor’s responsibilities—host orientation, resources, training, projects, networking and career development activities, statement of successful completion and recommendation, post-­‐field experience evaluations • The faculty adviser’s responsibilities—curriculum, advise student, provide means for structured reflection upon and reporting of progress and results, sustain contact with site supervisor The Practicum Field Experience is based on an agreement between three parties, each of whom has specific responsibilities that are necessary to make Field Experience an effective service learning experience. Responsibilities are outlined below. The COPHP Program will: • Select students capable of providing service to the agency. • Provide students with classroom and assigned learning activities that will enable them to function in their field assignments. • Provide regular advising to student teams in collaboration with agency mentors. • Develop and conduct regular student/faculty and student/supervisor/advisor learning conferences. • Evaluate the student’s performance in collaboration with agency supervisors. • Evaluate the quality of the service-­‐learning associated with field experience in collaboration with the agency supervisors and the students. • Make modifications in future curricula to address educational problems identified in evaluations of fieldwork experiences. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 14 The on-­‐site mentor will: • Develop outcome objectives for the field experience assignment to guide the student team in their activities. • Provide regular supervision to students in collaboration with university advisers. • Provide adequate work space, support, and supplies to enable the student to function effectively as a field work student in the agency, • Participate in student/mentor/advisor conferences, • Evaluate the student’s performance in collaboration with university advisers. • Evaluate the quality of the service-­‐learning associated with field experience in collaboration with the university advisers and the students. • Make modifications in agency systems to address service-­‐learning problems identified in evaluations of field work experiences. The student will: • Actively participate in classroom seminars and assignment activities to develop knowledge and skills to enhance effective participation in field experience activities. • Carry out duties as outlined in the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project proposal and agreed to in this contract, including written and oral reports. • Evaluate the quality of the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project experience in collaboration with the university advisers and agency supervisors. • Make recommendations regarding opportunities for improvement of the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project experience. Name________________________________Student #________________ Phone/e-­‐mail___________________________________________________ Name of Agency/project _________________________________________ Address_______________________________________________________ Phone/e mail __________________________________________________ Your Primary Service Deliverables (use additional pages if necessary) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Your Primary Learning Objectives (use additional pages if necessary) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 15 Your Primary Responsibilities and Duties (use additional pages if necessary) 1. 2. 4. 4. 5. As a service learner, you are given the opportunity for a unique and valuable experience. To undertake in this assignment as a representative of the University of Washington School of Public Health and Community Medicine, your instructor and yourself, you must: 1 Fulfill your agreement as to your duties, hours, and responsibilities to the best of your ability. Be professional—punctual, polite, and respectful of agencies’ policies, rules and regulations. 2 Respect the confidentiality of clients of the agency. 3 Give notification in advance if you must miss or be late for an agency appointment. If advance notification is impossible, call as soon as possible thereafter. I have read and agree to the agreement and the guidelines as outlined above. ________________________________________ Student Signature ___________________ Date
I have read the agreement and agree to supervise or provide supervision for the student above. ______________________________________ Agency Supervisor ______________________ Date I have read the agreement and agree to provide consultation to the site supervisor and academic supervision to the student. ________________________________________ Faculty Adviser ______________________ Date COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 16 APPENDIX C, D, E, F-­‐ Evaluations of Student Work (due May 15th) Evaluations of Student Work A formal monitoring system to ensure satisfactory progress will be based on continuing dialogue between the faculty adviser, mentor at the agency where the project is undertaken, and the student. The faculty adviser and on-­‐site mentor provide guidance and final determination regarding acceptability of the quality of the final product. Informal meetings among the student, faculty mentor, and site-­‐mentor should occur at least twice a quarter to discuss progress and problems and to get informal feedback. The student may choose to meet with the on-­‐
site mentor and the faculty adviser separately or together, depending on topics, needs, and logistical considerations. The faculty adviser and the on-­‐site mentor should talk at least twice per quarter to assure that their expectations and perspectives are consonant, or at least, clarified. At the end of the Spring Quarter—during either the last week of the quarter or exam week—all three parties (student, faculty, and on-­‐site supervisor) should complete a Capstone Evaluation Form (Appendix E) that will be shared with the others, with a copy going to the program files. You will be evaluated on: • The quality of your project • The quality of your background research • The professionalism with which you conducted your project • The quality (in terms of both content and presentation) of your final written report and the final oral presentation • The degree to which your met your Individual Learning Objectives • The grade for the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project will be determined jointly by the faculty adviser and the on-­‐site supervisor. The Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project must be of sufficient quality to earn a grade of 3.0 to fulfill the program’s requirements for graduation. Both the faculty adviser and the on-­‐site mentor will fill out the forms on the following pages, according to the attached criteria. Ideally, the project will be completed and the evaluations done in sufficient time for this feedback to be shared and discussed in-­‐person with the student. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 17 CRITERIA FOR FACULTY ADVISORS AND ON-­‐SITE MENTORS TO EVALUATION STUDENT WORK Area Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Outstanding Did not meet project Met project objectives Exceeded project Project objectives Contribution of project to organization/ community needs Planning and organization Work habits Scholarship Working with colleagues Working with community Written product Content Organization and presentation Writing objectives Project had or will have little impact Did not adequately plan and organize work not communicate with Did supervisors; did not follow through on commitments Project had or will have some impact Appropriately planned and organized work; met project milestones Communicated satisfactorily with supervisors; followed through on commitments; shows initiative objectives Project had or will have considerable impact Exceptionally well organized Communicated frequently and effectively with supervisors; thoughtful, thorough, anticipatory work habits; shows exceptional initiative Did not adequately review Adequately reviewed literature; Exceptionally thorough literature; did not adequately adequately researched local review of literature and research local background and background and context; assessment of context; did not employ employed appropriate, evidence background and appropriate, evidence, or or theory-­‐based methods in context; use—or theory-­‐based methods in project advanced—state-­‐of-­‐
project the-­‐art methods Did not work well with Worked effectively with staff and Demonstrated effective colleagues co-­‐workers leadership and/or change-­‐agent behaviors not work effectively with Did Demonstrated ability to work Developed exemplary community with community members and sustained effectively and sensitively relationships with community Does not adequately address Adequately addresses all Demonstrates complete all sections as indicated on sections command of the subject outline matter; exceptional creativity or originality and/or new insights; publishable Poorly organized; sloppy; Clearly organized; adequate Professional visual tables and graphs not well tables and graphs impression; journal-­‐
constructed quality tables and graphs Not well written (unclear, with Clearly understandable, with Clear, concise, grammar, punctuation, and few, if any, technical writing professional writing COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 18 Oral presentation Content Organization and clarity Presentation style Presentation to sponsor/community Content Organization and clarity Presentation style Appropriateness and effectiveness spelling errors common) Minimal content Poorly organized; not clearly presented; visuals poorly constructed errors Interesting, useful content Well organized; clearly and concisely presented; good visuals Rambling, distracting, unprofessional Concise; projects voice Minimal content Poorly organized; not clearly presented, visuals poorly constructed Interesting, useful content Outstanding content Well organized, clearly and Well organized, clearly concisely presented, good visuals presented, visuals appropriately constructed to communicate with community audience Concise; projects voice Engaging, enthusiastic, confident Appropriate content and style Original or creative method of communication Rambling, distracting, unprofessional Talks down or without conviction to audience Outstanding content Well organized; clearly presented; professional-­‐quality visuals Engaging, enthusiastic, confident COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 19 APPENDIX C-­‐ ON-­‐SITE MENTOR EVALUATION OF STUDENT WORK Student: On-­‐site Mentor’s Evaluation of Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project Project Objectives Planning, conduct, and communication Contribution of project to organization or community needs Working with colleagues Working with community Final product Quality Helpfulness, appropriateness, impact Date: Evaluation (1=weak 5=strong) Comments COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 20 Originality, creativity Presentation to sponsor/community Content Organization and clarity Presentation style Appropriateness and effectiveness Strengths: Areas for improvement: Other General comments: COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 21 APPENDIX D-­‐ FACULTY ADVISOR EVALUATION OF STUDENT WORK Faculty Advisor Evaluation of Student Work Student: Date: Evaluation (1=weak 5=strong) Comments Project objectives Planning, conduct, and communication Scholarship Working with colleagues Working with community Written product Content Organization, presentation COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 22 Writing Presentation Content Organization, clarity Presentation style Strengths: Areas for improvement: Other General comments: COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 23 APPENDIX E – STUDENT EVALUATION OF CAPSTONE EXPERIENCE Please answer the following questions and submit them by the May 15th deadline to the program office. Student’s Evaluation of the Experience What I learned: Individual Learning Objectives: Objective Was objective met? Comment 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Use additional pages if necessary The positive aspects of this experience: COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 24 Your overall assessment of your learning, including what you learned above and beyond your original Individual Learning Objectives: How well-­‐ prepared were you for this experience, and what could be done in the future to improve preparation of the Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project? My recommendation regarding continued use of this placement is: Definitely continue _______ Do not continue _______ Continue under conditions (please specify) COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 25 _____________________________________________Date:______________________ Student Signature COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 26 APPENDIX F-­‐ STUDENT DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION Student Reflection on Capstone Experience Please answer the following questions and submit this to the program office by the May 15th deadline. I.
What impact or effect did this work have on the community? II.
What worked and why? III.
What didn’t work and why? IV.
How did the experience compare with your expectations and goals? V.
What would you have done differently knowing what you know now? VI.
How does your experience compare or contrast with the literature? VII.
What are the implications of this project for public health and the agency? VIII.
What are the next steps for this project? COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 27 APPENDIX G – STUDENT EVALUATION OF CAPSTONE SITE Student Evaluation Of Capstone Site Please turn this into the program office by May 15th. Student________________________________________________________ Agency_______________________________________________ On-­‐site Mentor___________________________________________________ Please read each statement below and select from within a scale range of 1 (disagree strongly) to 5 (agreed strongly) regarding your experience with your practicum site preceptor. 1. Introduced me to other staff and helped me to establish collegial relationships with them. _______ 2. Was usually available whenever I needed her/him. _______ 3. Met with me on a regular basis to provide supervision. _______ 4. Asked me to specify my learning goals. _______ 5. Treated me as an adult learner. _______ 6. Encouraged me to critically examine my performance. _______ 7. Provided ongoing specific and constructive feedback about my performance. _______ 8. Encouraged me to take initiative. _______ 9. Established comfortable personal/professional boundaries. _______ 10. Encouraged me to experiment with my own _______ ideas and approaches. 11. Was a positive professional role model for me. _______ 12. Assisted me in exploring problem-­‐solving options. _______ COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 28 13. 14. 15. Encouraged me to expand my public health knowledge. _______ Encouraged me to collaborate with and learn from other staff. _______ Was sensitive to the multiple demands of my graduate experience. _______ Please read each statement below and select from within a scale range of 1 (disagree strongly) to 5 (agree strongly) regarding your experience with your practicum agency. 1. Provided a desk and other resources for me to do my job. _______ 2. Provided me with access to the necessary data files. _______ 3. Allowed me to represent the agency by attending and participating in interagency functions. _______ 4. Was a supportive learning environment. _______ 5. Treated me with respect. _______ 6. I feel this experience prepared me for public health practice. _______ 7. I feel this experienced help me get ready for public health employment. _______ COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 29 APPENDIX CAPSTONE PRESENTATION REQUIREMENTS Capstone Presentation Requirements During the last week of Spring Quarter, we will hold a special program for the presentation of your Community-­‐Oriented Masters Project. Each student will have about 13 minutes (10 minutes for the presentation and 3 minutes for questions) for a formal presentation. All first-­‐ and second-­‐year students and faculty, as well as on-­‐site mentors and invited guests, will attend. A suggested outline for the presentation follows. The number in parentheses indicates an approximate number of slides for each section. Title slide—Title, student (1) Introduction Aims of the project (1) Local context and motivation for the project (1-­‐2) National context—scientific, evidence base, other experience, motivation (1-­‐2) Methods —What you did (2) Accomplishments—What you accomplished (2) Lessons learned, implications, next steps (1-­‐2) Acknowledgments (1) Presentation to agency or community Students should expect to prepare a “community product” for their host agency or organization, in a form (full report, summary paper, etc.) arranged with their on-­‐site mentors. Students should determine the format of this presentation in discussions with their on-­‐site colleagues. The program presentation (described below) may be satisfactory. It is more likely, however, that the agency will want a more focused, tailored, Community-­‐
Oriented report, such as a town meeting or presentation to staff meeting.
COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 30 EXERCISE TO DEVELOP CAPSTONE IDEAS Fill out this form early on in your first year to identify topic interests and skills you want to develop in a capstone experience. Use this form to target potential capstone sites, supervisors, and projects. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 31 ASPECTS OF A SUCCESSFUL CAPSTONE What makes for a great capstone and/or thesis?
Compiled from discussion at COPHP Faculty retreat June 14, 2007 and Health Services Faculty retreat on June 15, 2007. Synthesized by Amy Hagopian 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
Aspects of successful thesis and capstone projects The student has an ACTIVE role in the project, and is genuinely interested in the topic. Expectations of students and faculty are clear at the start—are there things for which any party can be “fired?” Committee that works well together, enjoys meetings with this student, and is on the same page; smaller is better Thesis and capstone projects start with an approved written proposal from the whole committee Students understand the incentive systems that faculty face—for example, that faculty aren’t credited for thesis advising
until students finish The site advisor is actively engaged Both the process and product associated with the capstone are valuable to the sponsoring organization There is an excellent research question, which is precise, clear, answerable, important, and publishable. Students meet with their WHOLE thesis committee several times; faculty on committees have complementary skills There is a realistic plan to do the project in the time allotted; There is a backup plan for potential problems Students read the thesis or capstone products of successful graduates as preparation to planning their own work A good literature review is completed BEFORE data tools are designed and as the research question is being developed
IRB requirements are well understood sufficiently in time to follow the processes
There is elegance to the methods, with a clear and concrete process When students write their proposals, they include blank “table shells,” to illustrate how their data will be presented and
analyzed in a way that answers research questions; this ensures data gathering tools will provide the information needed by
including required variables
The capstone requires both quantitative and qualitative skills There is creative and independent use of secondary or available data—not everyone needs to collect primary data When the student does his own data collection, it’s done well A good thesis has a conclusion
There is innovation involved—the student brings something new to the project Process deadlines are meaningful and motivational No laws or important rules are broken When the project is being done under stressful circumstances, or in an organization under stress, lots of faculty support is
required; likewise, students from stressed backgrounds (such as families with no academic tradition) will need extra support Evidence of a great capstone is that there are continuing activities after it’s done It’s a resume-stuffer, but not so burdensome as to be life-defining Sometimes the capstone is highly connected to the practicum Students pushed beyond their current comfort area The capstone turns into a job, or at least relationships are built that will lead to future projects There are policy implications from the findings of the project There is individual learning about the student’s own strengths and weaknesses Time should be scheduled for presenting works in progress COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 32 32.
33.
Aspects of successful thesis and capstone projects Sufficient time is allocated for final thesis and capstone presentations, with appropriate audiences Students are encouraged to write publishable theses, and then publish them Aspects of problematic thesis and capstone projects 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
When projects are done in foreign countries, projects aren’t always (or even often) well defined
in advance. There are unreliable partners, and it’s unclear when to call a halt, despite red flags The sponsoring organization isn’t eager to do the project Student is doing something the organization should be paying someone to do. There is conflict between members of committees about the balance of methods and approach to
methods Last minute drafts It’s too ambitious, can’t be finished on time IRB approval isn’t properly obtained or in a timely way Conflict on committees leads to graduation delays 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
What should we do differently about our approach to capstones? Faculty
should engage early on to ensure the agency has adequate capacity to support student and
has reasonable expectations Change
due dates to require proposal before work starts, not just an arbitrary date in October;
deadlines should be “no later than.” Clarify
IRB requirements—everyone should pursue IRB approval, whether exempt, minimal or full
review Schedule
meeting with faculty in advance of field work that carefully reviews all aspects and
requirements Clarify
the process for changing advisors Clarifications
requested by a single student should have answers broadcast to all Broadcast
date reminders to all students and faculty Feel free to finish early Students
need more structured explanation time on the capstone earlier on. Five seminar sessions
should be dedicated to discussion of the capstone that are organized by faculty; invite good model
students to present, based on our list of best capstones. The IRB talk should be in fall of first year
students; we should collect model IRB applications for other students to review. COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 33 COPHP CAPSTONES PAST UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2004 GRADS Student Daniel Aukerman Katayoun Bahramian Mary Brewer Nicole Burkette Elizabeth Dadko Jsani Henry Ellen Leuchtmann Amanda Marr Sara Teitelman* Denys Williams Nicole Willis Ellen Wolter* Title Infrastructure and health in a squatter community bordering Quito, Ecuador Is Seattle ready for San Francisco’s S.A.G.E. (Standing Against Global Exploitation)? Participatory program planning for survivors of prostitution, sexual exploitation, and addiction Needs assessment for the urban Indian homeless population in Seattle, Washington The accomplishments and struggles of a developing community network in the International District of Seattle Go smoke free—a strategy guide for bar owners LMASS (Listening to Men about Sex Study) needs assessment Immunization practices on Vashon Island, Washington: rates, influences, and what’s next A training manual for Tibetan community midwives Participatory community assessment in Rabuor Village, Western Kenya The future identity of teens: evaluating the spiritual, social, emotional and physical fitness decisions made today as they correlate to a healthy and successful future Worksite health promotion: promoting physical activity and healthy eating within schools Assessment of physical self-­‐perceptions in pre-­‐adolescent participants of Girls on the Run of Puget Sound Notes Ecuador, poverty, community development San Francisco Vulnerable population Seattle, urban Indians Vulnerable population Seattle Community network Seattle, tobacco Seattle (?) sex Seattle area vaccination Tibet Health worker training Community assessment Seattle? Adolescent physical fitness Seattle? Health promotion Seattle area Adolescent physical fitness? COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 34 UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2005 GRADS Student Title Notes Joe Balabis Asian Pacific Islander youth tobacco conference Asian youth in Seattle as an intervention for current API teen smokers Tobacco and high-­‐risk API teens Vulnerable population Adriane Pallat Berman Training guide for medical waste management No setting Environmental health Sharon Bogan * Monitoring and evaluation strategy for Straight Talk Foundation, Uganda Uganda Adolescent health Jessie Folkman Addressing the decline in Native patients at the American Indians Seattle Indian Health Board: a quality Health system improvement project Gary Gant Identifying key health indicators for the Healthiest State in the Nation Project Washington state Assessment Jaime Hamamura Community assessment project for International Community Health Services on the health care and well-­‐being needs of Native Hawaiians in Seattle-­‐King County Hawaiian population (Seattle) Assessment Jill Hodges Food safety challenges in the global economy: Guatemalan produce and cyclospora Environmental health Eunyoung Lim Profile of pedestrian fatalities in King County Seattle area Traffic safety Sara Miller 2005 HIV/AIDS care services comprehensive needs assessment Location? HIV assessment Kim Moore Program evaluation of Kids Get Care Seattle Evaluation Emma Moreno Media campaign to increase HIV screening in a Latino population Latinos in Seattle HIV, Vulnerable population Kristi Remkus Learning how to use broadcast media to tell complicated health stories Seattle media Simone Rivera Health education department standardization and quality improvement Quality improvement Laura Streichert A qualitative study of organizational readiness Seattle schools for change and the implementation of nutrition Nutrition policies in Seattle schools **Jessie Tobin Neighborhood engagement in local land use decisions: an approach to health community design Seattle Community development Andra Voght Teaching about the social determinants of health: a pilot project at Seattle Girl’s School Seattle COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 35 Social determinants UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2006 GRADS Student Capstone Title Setting Zeynep Angin Shorter* Working in Two Reproductive Health Programs, Istanbul, Turkey Turkey Reproductive health Traci Arnold Involving Parents at Roosevelt High School in 9th Grade Sex Education Seattle public schools Sex education Sara Barker Tres Historias de la Vida: Developing a Latino Community-­‐Based Participatory Play to Increase Diabetes Awareness Latino community, Seattle Diabetes, vulnerable population Andrew Bryant* Community Drama and Street Theater for Maternal and Newborn Health Promotion Stacy Delong East Timor MCH Built for Health: A Community Activity Assessment at Seattle High Point Vulnerable population **Jennifer Filion Developing Protocols for Non-­‐Medical Staff to Manage Medical Crisis in a Housing First Model Preparedness Vulnerable population Deb Hinchey Needs Assessment: Physical Activity Programs for Asian/Pacific Islander and African American Women Cancer Survivors Ethnic women, Seattle Assessment, Vulnerable Polly Jirkovsky A Tale of Two Cities: What Can Seattle Learn from Vancouver’s Drug Policies? Vancouver, CA Drug policy, Vulnerable Oma McLaughlin** Engaging Community around Early Childhood Development: Presenting School-­‐Readiness Indicators in Three School Districts Seattle suburbs Community development Anya Nartker Developing and Revising F.L.A.S.H. (Family Life & Sexual Health) Lesson Plans Seattle school district Sex education Carrie Norbeck “Live Outside the Box”: A Public Education Campaign King County to Reduce Television Viewing Parent education **Robin Read-­‐
Ochoa Health Insurance Outreach for Latino Immigrant Children in Washington’s Rural Areas Rural Washington Health ins, Vulnerable Sarah Ross-­‐Viles Healthy Air Survey of King County Housing Authority King County Environmental health **Camille Samujh Evaluation of Safe Storage of Firearms Training Module for Health Care Providers Seattle Gun safety Carrie Sopher Peer-­‐Based Sexuality Education: An Evaluation of Planned Parenthood’s Teen Council Seattle area Sex education Alejandro Health Education for Limited English Proficient Seattle community clinic COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 36 Varela Populations in a Health Care Setting Jann Vhugen* The Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, TB and Malaria: An Evaluation of Four Grants UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2007 GRADS Student Capstone Title Shelagh Baird Emily Bancroft Hillary Blecker Health education, Vulnerable Geneva, Switzerland International health policy Food Security and HIV/AIDS in Mozambique: A Program Evaluation Assessing Health Worker Job Satisfaction and Retention in Uganda Day Laborers at Risk: Developing Strategies for a Hazardous Workplace Paul Boutte HIV Prevention Program Recommendation for Rwanda Science Education Center Amy Dietz Barriers to Health Care as Identified by Male Sex Workers in Peru Stefanie Fox Homelessness Counts: Expanding the One Night Count to Rural and Suburban Communities through Service-­‐Based Interviews Shannon Ginn A Radio Soap Opera to Raise Awareness about Diabetes among Latinos: A Pilot Project Caren A Disaster Preparedness Training Module for Medical Goldenberg Interpreters Jessica Grignon Assessment of Data Collection and Management Systems for a Community Ophthalmology Program in Tanzania Hilary Heishman Public Health Employee Recruitment and Retention in Local Health Jurisdictions in Washington State Maggie Jones Acupuncture Quality Improvement Study at Harborview’s International Medicine Clinic Anna Kashner Taking Responsibility: Who Should Be Responsible for Sexual Education in Peru after the Global Fund? Carly Kaufman Youth Violence Prevention in Seattle Michael Kim Irene Kitzantides Amelia McGee Mackenzie Melton Brett Niessen Setting Mozambique Food security Uganda Health workforce Seattle Occupational health, Vulnerable Rwanda HIV Peru HIV/STDs Seattle Homeless,Vulnerable Breakfast in the Classroom: A Plan for Increasing Breakfast Consumption at Emerson Elementary Training HIV/AIDS Educators in Tunisia, North Africa Seattle Latinos Diabetes, Vulnerable Seattle Preparedness, Vulnerable pop Tanzania Health systems Washington state Health workforce Seattle QI, health systems Peru Sex education Seattle Youth violence Seattle schools Nutrition, Vulnerable Tunisia, HIV A Formative Health Literacy Evaluation of PlayBright Educational Materials for Parents Evaluating the Venue-­‐Specific Compliance to Washington State’s Clean Indoor Air Act: A Pilot Observational Study of Selected Work Places Report for Islander Middle School’s New Health and Fitness Curriculum on Mercer Island Seattle MCH, Vulnerable Washington State Environmental health Seattle area Physical fitness COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 37 Marc Philpart Maia Piccagli Prevalence and Risk Factors of Gender-­‐Based Violence Committed by Male College Students in Awassa, Engaging the Latino Community in Burien around Active Living: Community Development and “Burien en español” Map UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2008 GRADS Student Capstone Title Yasmin Barrios Casey China Peter Choi Emily deRiel Kalayaan Domingo Matthew French Jessie Gleckel Amelia Knopf Alison Moore Colleen Osterhaus Annie Phare Kelly Randels Cindy Sousa Ethiopia Violence Seattle area Physical fitness Setting Perceived neighborhood safety and leisure time physical activity in Lima, Peru Peru Neighborhood safety Enhancing the Washington Asian/Pacific Islander Families Against Substance Abuse (WAPIFASA) prevention program handbook Analysis of baseline survey data to evaluate the impact of the National Food Fortification Program in Ghana Evaluation of Washington State Take Charge program Providing culturally congruent support of patient self-­‐management: The role of community house calls in chronic disease care at Harborview Hospital No ordinary flu: A pandemic influenza preparedness graphic novel Considering the sexual and reproductive health needs of women in San Juan de Lurigancho: An evaluation of Flora Tristan’s SISMU (Integrated Women’s Center) A community assessment of King County backyard poultry Improving maternal and newborn health in Timor-­‐
Leste: An implementation evaluation of birth-­‐
friendly facilities Promoting birth-­‐friendly facilities in Timor-­‐Leste: A health communication video Timor-­‐Leste Washington State firearm safety legislation: Legislator ideologies and perceptions of constituent support Using HIV testing in TB patients as an entry point to integrated TB/HIV care Effects of the Israeli occupation in the West Bank, Seattle Substance abuse Ghana Food security, policy Washington Reproductive health Seattle Chronic disease Seattle area Pandemic flu San Juan de Lurigancho Reproductive health King County Timor-­‐Leste Reproductive health Timor-­‐Leste Reproductive health, health communication Washington Firearm safety Zambia HIV, TB Palestine COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 38 Palestine: Health, health care delivery and assessment plan for a community mental health program Mental Health UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2009 GRADS Student Capstone Title Carmen Washington Erin Barry Erika Strong A process evaluation of the community of potters health and development project Health census of the village of Bwiza, Rwanda Marshallese community tuberculosis education planning Rachel Schwartz Lisa Schafer The Train the Trainer model as an effective health promotion tool: A pilot project to increase cervical health awareness and action in the Latina Community Health capacity building for malaria prevention in Western Ghana Claire B. Cole Responding to the two-­‐child norm: Barriers and opportunities in the campaign to combat target-­‐oriented population policies in the post-­‐ICPD India Erin Vulnerable at transition: screening for depression in 6th McCormick grade students Molly Ryan Tobacco-­‐free pharmacies in Washington State: Assessing the attitudes, opinion, and practices of the pharmacy community Kyle Nagle Making waves: Developing Odessa Brown Children's Clinic's physical activity program Joshua Fogt Training to promote equity and social justice through public policy in King County Tara Increasing abortion access for low-­‐income women: An Melinkovich applied qualitative study of abortion terminology used in written referral materials Julie Loughran Cradleboards: ensuring infant and cultural survival Madeleine Frey Catherine Rizos Joe Campe Naseem Bazargan Because most women don't have sex by themselves: A qualitative study of young males' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors around Emergency Contraception Exploring issues of adolescent vision health: A pilot vision screening and optometric intervention at Garfield High School Workplace health and safety of Latino immigrant cedar block cutters Washington (west coast) Addressing the shortage of dental providers for low-­‐income and uninsured populations in Washington State: Dental licensing, internationally trained dentists, and policy Setting Bwiza, Rwanda Community development Bwiza,Rwanda Health census Greater Seattle area TB Seattle area Health awareness, training Ghana Malaria Indian Reproductive health Seattle area Mental health Washington Tobacco Seattle area Chronic disease King County Equity and Social justice Seattle area Reproductive health Seattle area Maternal infant health Seattle area Reproductive health Seattle area Children’s health Env./occupational health Washington Dental health COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 39 considerations UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2010 GRADS Student Capstone Title Andy Baker-­‐
White Megumu Brownstein Katie Burke Setting Gender violence Orissa, India CHSJ Breastfeeding education SKCPH, Susan Oatis Homelessness Seattle REACH homeless case mgmt program, & Evergreen Treatment Services Teagan Callahan Joy Hamilton Tobacco Erin Hurley cardi-­‐vascular epi social determinants? Evaluation Coby Jansen Pesticides Ruth Lindberg Beth Mizushima Tiffany Myers Anna Rosenbaum Jennie Schoeppe Alex Shirreffs Natalie Stahl Jewel Wright Two-­‐spirit health needs Jon Huang Maternal and child health PHSKC, Sara Ross-­‐Viles UW Cardivascular Health Research Unit Pop Health Forum Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia Isaac Alva Matt Kiefer, Helen Murphy, PNASH Indigenous Wellness project Nutrition Operation Front Line at Solid Ground; Erika Strong Training manual for immunizations VillageReach delayed; dual SW evaluation Sea Mar HIV-­‐AIDS Jesani Henry Housing Addiction Behavior Research Center @ UW Access to care among ethnic minority children Odessa Brown UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2011 GRADS Student Capstone Title Xeno Acharya Cate Clegg Setting Starting and staffing a TB clinic in Ethopia I-­‐TECH Health assessment in Kopanga, Kenya Partners for Progress (P4P) COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 40 Cassalyn David Katie Hess Assessment of the need for a rural clinic in AK Sunshine Community Health Center College Access Now evaluation CAN staff and SSD Toby Keys Childhood exposure to trauma experiences Snohoimish County Health District Elana Mainer Spokane community project Spokane Health Department Rebecca Meiksin Norah Myerson Evaluation of a training program in Namibia I-­‐TECH Use of birthing centers in Timor-­‐Leste; "situational analysis" Health Alliance International Jen Nguyen Colorado health department planning Jordana Pickman Barbara Rose Policy work on smoking/obesity in Snohomish County Community Health Services of Pitkin County, Colorada Gary Goldbaum, SCHD Anna Rosenbaum Social determinants of birth outcomes; evaluation of a conference PH-­‐SKC, Maria Carlos Sara Jaye Sanford Laila Taji Survey analysis Gay City Social marketing at Garfield High School Garfield HS Sarah Wylie Commujnity mobilizatin and sex ed in WA public schools Center for Health Training UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2012 GRADS Student Capstone Title Vanessa Barone Fidelity evaluation of motivational interviews by promotoras. Peter Blackburn Water project in Honduras Kate Cole Evaluation of the Farmers Market Access Project efforts to increase the number of vendors who accept WIC and food stamps. Erika Fardig Health messaging for newly-­‐arrived refugee populations Setting Thompson Studies Group at the Hutch; Gloria Coronado Water 1st International and COCEPRADIL , Kirk Anderson PH-­‐SKC, King County Dept of Natural Resources and Parks/ "Farmers Market Access Project"; Karen Kinney Sharon Bogan and Eyal Oren, PH-­‐SKC; and the Refugee Helath Clinic COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 41 Jesse Gritton Planning and evaluation for community kitchens as a way to conrol type II diabetes PH-­‐SKC; Janet Knapp Seattle Tilth: Leika Suzumara Paula Kett Qualitative analysis of MCH usage in the village of Mbita, Kenya Gita Krishnaswamy Development of a college-­‐reeadines-­‐culture index for local public high schools Med25 project in Kenya/Rebecca Conte Okelo, Executive Director College Access Now, Jennie Flaming Erin Larsen-­‐
Cooper Amy Lee Design an emergency transport system for Malawi Rudy Owens Disaster preparedness communications for vulnerable populations Valerie Pacino Repeal of flame resistance standard ("12 second" rule) Sophia Teshome Feasibility of building an HIV clinic in Ethiopia Faye Ziegweid Policy on and access to reprodutive services Curriculum development on SDH UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2013 GRADS Student Capstone Title Stacey Cunningham of Village Reach API Freedom School, Yong Chan Miller Seattle Housing Authority (SHA) Contact: Bob Wyda, Hsg. Ops. Support Manager Sightline, Alan Durning Gondar University Medical School, Ethopia; Shitaye Alemu, MD, FRCP, Head of the Department of Internal Medicine Planned Parenthood Votes Northwest (PPVN), Jennifer Allen, Director of Public Policy Setting Ashraf Amlani toolkit for pilot Microsavings Program for Young Adults Experiencing Homelessness in Seattle University District Youth Center Patricia Atwater Evaluation of public health practice-­‐based research networks (PBRN) dissemination activities PBRN at the Office of the Director of Public Health Seattle King County, Laura Hitchcock COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 42 Amber Bronnum To develop a comprehensive understanding of the public health system in King County and all of the interconnections and partnerships. Jennifer Muhm, Legislative Affairs Director, Public Health – Seattle & King County Clarissa Brundage Family planning services evaluation in Cote d'Ivoire HAI (Julia Robinson at UW and Atta Bamba in Cote d'Ivoire) Elizabeth Burpee evaluation tool kit for helping small Latino-­‐ non-­‐profits in California to better evaluate their programs. Latino Community Foundation, San Francisco, CA (Raquel Donoso) Nicholas Canavas develop an evidence-­‐based, locally-­‐informed instrument which assesses a school’s overall climate in regards to mental health (MH). Kristy Ludwig Senior Fellow and Mental Health Practitioner, BRISC, Child Health Institute Sara Colling Owning Equity: Fostering community engagement in the County’s Equity and Social Justice Initiative PH-­‐SKC (Matias Valenzuela) Erik Friedrichsen Back injuries and fire departments Alan Abe, Public Health-­‐Seattle & King County EMS Division, Jennifer Morton The feasibility of AIDS education in faith based organizations Lifelong AIDS Alliance (Renee McCoy) Barbara Obena Access to preventive vision services for children in the Yakima Valley to improve academic achievement. The Child Vision Project (an Americorps project) (M. Helen Spencer, JD) Genya Shimkin Develop a Q Card for queer youth to talk with caregivers, teachers, etc. Group Health Evaluation Center, Ian Maki Tiffany Sin evaluate the effectiveness of the promotora approach with the Tracee Mayfield, RS, PH-­‐SKC, Environmental Chinese community on Beacon Hill on preventing lead poisoning. Health Division Sierra Rotakhina Evaluation of the implementation of FLASH curriculum in Skagit County Skagit County Public Health, Peter Browning Jenna Udren Assessment of the implementation of the National Rural Health Mission of India as it pertains to the provision of reproductive health services for women living with AIDS International Community of Women Living with HIV-­‐ Asia Pacific, Anandi Yuvaraj; and the Centre for Health and Social Justice, Abhijit Das Lindasy Van Nostrand Angela Wood Legislation development on Family Leave Economic Opportunity Institute, Marilyn Watkins Lisa Hymes-­‐Davis, King County Juvenile Detention Curriculum for jailed youth UW COPHP Capstone Titles: 2014 GRADS Student Capstone Title Leigh Alderman “One nation … indivisible … with liberty and justice for all.” Breaking our Pledge: How the network of policies on mass incarceration divides and imprisons many of our children.” Setting Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 43 Lindsay Bosslet “I don’t always text, but when I do it’s to get health insurance: Implementing a text message service for health insurance enrollment” “Gathering Credible Evidence: Supporting the Capacity of Urban Indian Health Organizations to Conduct Program Evaluations” Public Health Seattle and King County, Communications Team; Hillary Karasz Nuha Elkugia “Educational Attainment as a Health Determinant: Field Testing The College-­‐Going Culture Index and Developing an Advocacy Strategy” College Access Now; Daniel Curme, Gita Krisnaswamy Kyle Davidson “Entrevista Peru/Interview Peru." A Mixed Methods Analysis of Stigma and Access to Medical Care Among Men Who Have Sex With Men and Transgender Persons Living With HIV in Lima, Peru” “A Public Health Model for Correctional Health Care for Skagit County’s New Jail” Agency: Asociación Civil Impacta Salud y Educación Yamile Molina Agency: Skagit County Corrections Charlie Wend Public Health Seattle and King County; Communications Team; Hillary Karasz Shayla Compton Patricia Duffy Urban Indian Health Institute; Julie Loughran Kate Forand “My Health, My Way: a Pilot Text Messaging Program for Teens in the Seattle School-­‐Based Health Centers” Kelly Gilmore “Yes We Can! Provide Long-­‐Acting Reversible Contraception (LARC) in A School-­‐Based Health Center Setting: Evaluating the Neighborcare Health experience” Neighborcare Health, Janet Cady Colin Maloney “Implementing Tobacco-­‐free Policies at Behavioral Health Treatment Facilities in King County” Public Health Seattle and King County Tobbacco Prevention; Sarah Ross-­‐Viles Johnny Mao “Evaluating Implementation of Collaborative Care for Maternal Depression in Community Health Clinics” Lena Nachand Kristen Savage UW Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Advancing Integrated Mental Health Solutions (AIMS) Center Jürgen Unützer “Population Level Prevention: The Washington State Health Care Washington State Departmentof Health; Sue Innovation Plan in a Prevention Framework” Grinnell “Soul Fathers as Health Educators: Integrating Religious Leaders into Gondar, Ethiopia's Health Care Delivery System” “A Service Training Curriculum for Community Medical Technicians” Strengthening Care Opportunities through Partnership in Ethiopia (SCOPE): Judd Walson Susana Tat “Leveraging Academic-­‐Community Partnerships to Teach High School Students Public Health” UW SPH; Greg Wilson Lina Walkinshaw “East Whatcom County Community Food Landscape Assessment” Whatcom County Public Health Department; Astrid Newell, Melissa Morin Elliot Swanson Public Health Seattle and King County; Erik Friedrichsen COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 44 Factoids about COPHP Capstones: COPHP capstones by foreign or domestic Cohorts # graduates 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 12 16 17 20 13 16 16 15 13 16 15 # foreign* 3 2 4 8 7 4 3 4 4 2 2 Ecuador, Canada, Cote D’Ivoire, Ethiopia (2), E Timor (3), Geneva, Ghana (2), Guatemala, India, Kenya, Mozambique, Palestine, Peru (5), Rwanda (2), Tibet, Turkey, Rwanda, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda (2), Zambia COPHP CAPSTONE HANDBOOK UPDATED AUGUST 2014 45