Week 3: Observational Learning Experience (OLE) Agency Repor…

OLE AGENCY REPORT STAGE 1 COMPLETION DETAILS:

Select the health problem and target population that your site provides services and programs to (i.e., diabetes among children ages 12-14 who are overweight) and search for program(s) that address this issue. Provide the name and a one or two sentence description of a program you found along with the APA formatted citation that will address your selected issue (you may actually have to explore several to find 1 program you like).

Once you have selected your health problem and target population based upon the site mission, visit the website(s) of the organization where you will be completing your in-person observational learning experience and complete the Agency Report attached. Should you be unable to find everything that is asked on the report, please contact the agency by phone or email, and obtain as much of the content as possible.

Students will apply the PERIE process to their chosen OLE site:

1. Problem: Describe the key health issue addressed by the site.
2. Etiology: Identify contributing factors from both lifespan and systems perspectives.
3. Recommendations: Propose feasible interventions (informed by lifespan care and system improvement strategies).
4. Implementation: Outline how the site could adopt them.
5. Evaluation: Suggest metrics for assessing effectiveness.

Use the attached form to complete your report.

• Complete each section with full details.
• One or two sentences is not acceptable.
• Use professional/scholarly writing.
• Critical thinking and some research is necessary.

Attachments (Supporting Documents)

Attachment (For Submission)

Watch

This video may display YouTube ads.

This video may display YouTube ads.

Review from 3:13 – 4:16 for PERIE

This video may display YouTube ads.

Week 3: Observational Learning Experience (OLE) Agency Report- Stage 1

Week 3: Observational Learning Experience (OLE) Agency Report- Stage 1

CriteriaRatingsPointsHealth Problem & Target Population Selection

Highly Developed

Clearly identifies a specific, well-defined health issue and a precise target population aligned with the site mission. The issue is appropriate, evidence-based, and reflects public health significance.

10 pts

Developed

Health issue and population are clear and mostly appropriate, though may lack some specificity or depth of connection to the site mission.

7.5 pts

Developing

Health issue or target population is partially defined or lacks clear relevance to the sites mission. Shows limited understanding of public health focus.

5 pts

Under Developed

Health issue and population are vague, inappropriate, or unrelated to the site mission. Minimal understanding of relevance.

2.5 pts

/10 pts

Program Identification & APA Citation

Highly Developed

Identifies an evidence-based, well-matched program that clearly addresses the selected issue. Provides an accurate, properly formatted APA citation and a concise, informative summary (12 sentences).

10 pts

Developed

Program selected is mostly relevant and described adequately; APA citation contains minor errors.

7.5 pts

Developing

Program may only partially relate to the health issue; summary lacks clarity or depth; citation contains multiple errors.

5 pts

Under Developed

No relevant program identified or major citation errors; summary missing or unclear.

2.5 pts

/10 pts

Problem Identification (Problem)

Highly Developed

Clearly and comprehensively identifies the primary health issue addressed by the OLE site. Demonstrates deep understanding of its relevance to community and population health. Integrates data or evidence to support the issue.

10 pts

Developed

Accurately identifies the main health issue with adequate explanation of relevance. Some supporting data or rationale provided.

7.5 pts

Developing

States a general or surface-level issue with limited connection to the sites mission or community impact.

5 pts

Under Developed

Issue is unclear, inaccurate, or unrelated to the sites purpose. Lacks evidence or rationale.

2.5 pts

/10 pts

Etiology Analysis

Highly Developed

Insightfully analyzes contributing factors from both lifespan and systems perspectives. Demonstrates integration of biological, behavioral, environmental, and systemic determinants.

10 pts

Developed

Identifies relevant contributing factors from lifespan and systems perspectives, though some areas lack depth or connection.

7.5 pts

Developing

Mentions contributing factors but does not fully integrate lifespan or systems perspectives.

5 pts

Under Developed

Contributing factors are missing, inaccurate, or lack connection to lifespan and systems views.

2.5 pts

/10 pts

Recommendations

Highly Developed

Proposes innovative, evidence-informed interventions that align with lifespan care and systems improvement strategies. Feasibility and impact are clearly justified.

10 pts

Developed

Suggests practical interventions that are somewhat evidence-based and feasible, but justification or depth is moderate.

7.5 pts

Developing

Provides interventions that are partially feasible or lack evidence-based rationale. Limited connection to lifespan or systems care

5 pts

Under Developed

Interventions are vague, impractical, or unrelated to the problem. No clear evidence or rationale.

2.5 pts

/10 pts

Implementation Strategy

Highly Developed

Provides a clear, detailed plan for implementing interventions at the OLE site. Demonstrates understanding of organizational capacity, stakeholders, and resource needs.

10 pts

Developed

Outlines a feasible implementation plan with some attention to site context, resources, and stakeholders.

7.5 pts

Developing

Describes a general plan, but key elements such as timeline, resources, or stakeholder roles are missing.

5 pts

Under Developed

Lacks a clear implementation plan or fails to connect to site context.

2.5 pts

/10 pts

Evaluation Plan

Highly Developed

Proposes meaningful, measurable metrics for evaluating effectiveness. Demonstrates strong understanding of outcomes, data collection, and continuous improvement.

10 pts

Developed

Identifies metrics that are generally appropriate but may lack specificity or measurement detail.

7.5 pts

Developing

Mentions evaluation ideas but lacks clear metrics or connection to outcomes.

5 pts

Under Developed

No evaluation metrics identified or suggestions are irrelevant or unmeasurable.

2.5 pts

/10 pts

Research Integration & Critical Thinking

Highly Developed

Demonstrates strong use of credible scholarly sources and integrates research effectively to support analysis and recommendations. Reflects advanced critical thinking and understanding of public health systems.

10 pts

Developed

Includes appropriate references and demonstrates sound reasoning, though integration of evidence may be uneven.

7.5 pts

Developing

Limited scholarly support or shallow reasoning; critical thinking is emerging but inconsistent.

5 pts

Under Developed

Minimal or no research integration; lacks critical thought or demonstrates misconceptions.

2.5 pts

/10 pts

Professionalism, Organization, and Scholarly Writing

Highly Developed

Writing is clear, professional, and scholarly. Follows logical organization, uses precise language, and is free of grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres fully to APA style throughout.

5 pts

Developed

Writing is generally clear and professional with minor errors. Logical organization and minimal APA errors.

3.75 pts

Developing

Writing shows lapses in clarity or professionalism; multiple grammatical/spelling/APA errors affect readability.

2.5 pts

Under Developed

Writing is disorganized, unprofessional, or unclear; pervasive grammar, spelling and APA issues; lacks structure.

1.25 pts

/5 pts

Conclusion

Highly Developed

Provides a thoughtful, cohesive conclusion that synthesizes all PERIE components. Demonstrates deep reflection on the sites overall public health impact and implications for practice. Connections between lifespan, systems, and evidence-based strategies are clear and compelling.

15 pts

Developed

Offers a clear conclusion summarizing key points and implications, though synthesis across PERIE elements could be stronger.

11.25 pts

Developing

Provides a basic summary but lacks integration or reflection on broader implications.

7.5 pts

Under Developed

Conclusion is missing, unclear, or fails to connect the analysis to public health impact.

3.75 pts

/15 pts