| Course | HCA 502 Research and Program Evaluation Issues in Aging |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Qualitative article assessment |
| Length | About 490 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | MA in Aging |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HCA 502 Module 5
"Like a Person Again": Assessing a Qualitative Study of Meals on Wheels Social Connection Programs
Student Name
MA in Aging, Arizona State University
HCA 502: Research and Program Evaluation Issues in Aging
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
"Like a Person Again": Assessing a Qualitative Study of Meals on Wheels Social Connection Programs
Article
Gadbois et al. (2024) studied how social connection programs offered by Meals on Wheels organizations affect homebound older clients and the volunteers and staff who deliver them.
Research Question
The study asked how three types of social connection programs influence the well-being of homebound older adults and the people delivering the programs. The question is exploratory and focused on experience and meaning, which suits a qualitative approach better than a survey would.
Design
The authors describe a descriptive qualitative study. This design aims to describe experiences in participants' own terms without building a new theory, which fits a question about how programs are experienced.
Sampling
Participants came from six Meals on Wheels social connection programs across the United States, and included clients, volunteers and staff, 117 people in all. Including three groups allows the findings to be compared across perspectives, a form of triangulation. Readers should look for how programs and participants were selected, since programs that agreed to take part may be those working best.
Data Collection
Data came from semi-structured interviews, which use a common guide while allowing follow-up questions. This approach suits homebound adults who may be easier to reach by phone or at home.
Analysis
The team used thematic analysis, identifying patterns across interviews and organizing them into themes. In a strong report, readers expect a description of who coded the data, how codes were agreed and how disagreements were resolved.
Findings
Participation in the programs was associated with substantial benefits: supportive friendships, reduced feelings of loneliness and a better overall sense of well-being, with benefits reported by volunteers and staff as well as clients (Gadbois et al., 2024). The title quotation, a client saying the program made them "feel like a person again," captures how the programs restored a sense of identity, not only company.
Trustworthiness
| Criterion | Evidence in the study | Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Credibility | Multiple perspectives and many interviews | Strong |
| Transferability | Six programs across the country | Moderate, depends on program description |
| Dependability | Semi-structured guide and thematic method | Moderate |
| Confirmability | Reflexivity and coding procedures should be reported | Check the methods section |
Limits
Participants who agree to be interviewed are likely to be those who value the programs, which may tilt findings toward benefits. Qualitative findings describe experiences, not effect sizes, so the study cannot say how much loneliness fell. Those questions require trials such as one in which empathy-focused telephone calls reduced loneliness scores among Meals on Wheels clients compared with a control group (Kahlon et al., 2021).
Contribution
The study adds the voices of homebound adults, volunteers and staff to research that has often measured loneliness only with scales. It agrees with interview research in which homebound older adults described feeling dependent and isolated and valued regular contact with others (Cheng et al., 2022). For my report, it suggests that friendship and identity, not only contact, are mechanisms worth measuring.
References
Cheng, J. M., Batten, G. P., & Yao, N. A. (2022). A qualitative study of the social and lived experiences of homebound older adults. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 41(3), 744-753. https://doi.org/10.1177/07334648211040383
Gadbois, E. A., Brazier, J. F., Turner, J., Hawes, C., Florence, L. C., & Belazis, L. (2024). "It made me feel like a person again": Benefits of Meals on Wheels-based social connection programs. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 43(12), 1924-1938. https://doi.org/10.1177/07334648241257798
Kahlon, M. K., Aksan, N., Aubrey, R., Clark, N., Cowley-Morillo, M., Jacobs, E. A., Mundhenk, R., Sebastian, K. R., & Tomlinson, S. (2021). Effect of layperson-delivered, empathy-focused program of telephone calls on loneliness, depression, and anxiety among adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry, 78(6), 616-622. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.0113
Reading the HCA 502 Module 5 assignment instructions
HCA 502's qualitative Peer-Reviewed Article Assessment, also 125 points, falls in Module 5, after the module on qualitative methods. Choose a peer-reviewed qualitative study on an aging issue, ideally connected to your final report topic, and assess it using qualitative standards rather than the statistical standards used for quantitative work. Address the research question, the design, sampling, data collection, analysis, findings and trustworthiness, and explain what the study contributes. Follow the Canvas rubric and APA style. Choose a study that clearly reports its design, sampling and analysis, since vague methods sections make assessment difficult. Qualitative studies on aging often use interviews or focus groups; confirm which your article used.
How the HCA 502 Module 5 example is put together
The sample describes the article and its question, explains why a descriptive qualitative design fits, and evaluates sampling, interviews and thematic analysis, noting what a reader should look for in the methods section. Findings are summarized with a quoted phrase tied to its theme. A trustworthiness table rates credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability, and the assessment ends with limits and the study's contribution to the student's own topic. The trustworthiness table makes the evaluation visible at a glance, and the limits section explains why self-selection matters in interview studies. The contribution section ties the article to the student's own topic, which prepares for the evidentiary review table. Each judgment cites evidence from the article.
Where the marks sit in the HCA 502 Module 5 rubric
For the 125 points, instructors look first at whether the student names the qualitative design, evaluates sampling and analysis with appropriate criteria such as trustworthiness, interprets findings without treating them as statistics and recognizes limits such as self-selection and researcher influence. Marks drop for judging qualitative work by sample size alone, for summarizing themes without evaluation, for skipping the analysis method and for choosing a mixed-methods or quantitative article by mistake. Strong work also notes what the article leaves unreported, such as reflexivity or how disagreements in coding were handled, and treats those gaps as limits rather than ignoring them. Linking qualitative findings to quantitative evidence on the same topic shows mature synthesis.
HCA 502 Module 5 help: mistakes that cost marks
Confirm that your article collected words, observations or images rather than numbers. Find the sentence naming the design and the analysis method. Look for reflexivity, coding procedures and member checking. Use the four trustworthiness criteria as headings if your rubric allows. Quote one short phrase from participants to show a theme. Say what the study cannot tell you. If qualitative criteria are new to you, the desk can explain them. Look for words such as "thematic analysis," "grounded theory" or "phenomenology" to identify the approach. Read a few participant quotations closely; they show how themes were built. Note who did and did not take part. Then judge its fit for your topic.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HCA 502 and MA in Aging sample papers
- HCA 502 Module 4: Peer-Reviewed Article Assessment: Quantitative
- HCA 502 Module 6: Evidentiary Review Table
- HCA 502 Module 7: Paper: Research and/or Evaluation for Aging Issues Report
- HCA 507 Module 3: Field Interview and Reflection
- HCA 508 Module 4: Paper: Understanding Aging Through the Humanities and Arts
- HCA 501 Module 6: Geriatric Syndrome Presentation
- HCA 503 Module 7: Paper: Nomadland and Diversity in Aging
HCA 502 Module 5 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HCA 502 Module 5 sample paper?
The full assessment of a qualitative study of Meals on Wheels social connection programs is on this page.
How do you evaluate a qualitative study?
By its fit of design to question, sampling, data collection, analysis and trustworthiness.
What is trustworthiness in qualitative research?
Credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability, the qualitative counterparts of validity and reliability.
What did the Meals on Wheels study find?
Participants described supportive friendships, less loneliness and better well-being.
Is a small sample a weakness in qualitative research?
Not by itself; depth and fit of the sample to the question matter more than size.