| Course | HEP 456 Health Promotion Program Evaluation |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Program introduction section |
| Length | About 472 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | BS in Health Education and Health Promotion |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HEP 456 Module 2
Walk With Ease Mesa: Introduction to the Program Under Evaluation
Student Name
BS in Health Education and Health Promotion, Arizona State University
HEP 456: Health Promotion Program Evaluation
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Walk With Ease Mesa: Introduction to the Program Under Evaluation
Program Overview
Walk With Ease Mesa adapts the Arthritis Foundation's Walk With Ease model for older adults in Mesa, Arizona. Trained leaders run groups of up to 15 participants three times a week for six weeks, 18 sessions in all.
Components and Activities
Each one-hour session follows the same pattern used in the original group format: a short health education talk, a warm-up and stretching period, a walk of 10 to 35 minutes that lengthens over the six weeks and a cool-down (Callahan et al., 2011). Talks cover topics such as managing pain during activity, pacing, footwear, heat safety and setting walking goals. Participants receive a guidebook and a walking diary, and each week the leader reviews diaries and helps participants set a goal for the next week.
Goal and Objectives
The planner's goal is to help older adults with arthritis in Mesa become and stay physically active to reduce pain and maintain function.
| Type | Objective as written by the planner |
|---|---|
| Process | Enroll 120 participants in eight cohorts between January and December 2027 |
| Process | 70% of enrollees attend at least 12 of 18 sessions |
| Impact | Participants increase average weekly minutes of walking from baseline to week 6 |
| Impact | Participants report lower pain and higher confidence in managing arthritis at week 6 |
| Outcome | By week 6, half of completers meet the national aerobic activity guideline |
Expected Impact
Based on the program model, participants are expected to report less pain, stiffness and fatigue, more confidence in managing symptoms and better strength and balance by the end of six weeks. The planner hopes that a share of completers will keep walking with their group after the program ends.
Participants
Eligible participants are adults aged 55 and older who report arthritis and can stand for 10 minutes without increased pain, the screening criterion used in the original program. Recruitment is through the centers' newsletters, primary care offices and a local arthritis support group.
Location
Sessions take place at two City of Mesa active adult centers. From June through September, walks move indoors to a recreation center track because of heat.
Justification
More than one in five Maricopa County adults report arthritis and one in five report no leisure-time activity (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2025). Walking is low cost and adaptable, and the six-week model has improved symptoms, function and walking pace in an earlier multisite evaluation (Callahan et al., 2011). Activity is recommended for adults with chronic conditions as their abilities allow (Piercy et al., 2018).
Details to Confirm with the Planner
The plan does not state who trains the leaders, whether participants pay, how weekly walking minutes will be recorded or whether a self-directed option will be offered to people who cannot attend. These questions go to my partner with this form.
References
Callahan, L. F., Shreffler, J. H., Altpeter, M., Schoster, B., Hootman, J., Houenou, L. O., Martin, K. R., & Schwartz, T. A. (2011). Evaluation of group and self-directed formats of the Arthritis Foundation's Walk With Ease Program. Arthritis Care & Research, 63(8), 1098-1107. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.20490
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). PLACES: Local data for better health, county data, 2025 release [Data set]. https://data.cdc.gov/500-Cities-Places/PLACES-Local-Data-for-Better-Health-County-Data-20/swc5-untb
Piercy, K. L., Troiano, R. P., Ballard, R. M., Carlson, S. A., Fulton, J. E., Galuska, D. A., George, S. M., & Olson, R. D. (2018). The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans. JAMA, 320(19), 2020-2028. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.14854
What the HEP 456 Module 2 instructions ask for
Module 2 in HEP 456 completes Section 5 of the Program Evaluation Plan, the introduction to the program, worth 28 points with a separate quiz. On the Module 2 summary form you describe the program, its components and activities, its goals and objectives, the expected impact, the participants, the location and the justification. Because you are the evaluator, not the planner, describe the program as designed, record its objectives faithfully and note anything unclear rather than filling the gap yourself. Share the form with your partner, who will rely on it to understand the program you are evaluating. Keep your own judgments for later sections; this one is a faithful record. Accuracy here protects every later section.
How this HEP 456 Module 2 example is built
The sample gives a two-sentence overview, then describes what happens in a session and across the six weeks. The goal is quoted and the objectives sit in a table exactly as the planner wrote them, labeled by type. Expected impact, participants and location each get a short section, the justification ties county data to the program model's evidence and a closing section lists four details the evaluator still needs to confirm. Where the earlier plan was silent, such as leader training or fees, the sample says so plainly and turns the gap into a question for the planner instead of inventing an answer. The summer move indoors shows attention to local conditions that could affect attendance.
Reading the HEP 456 Module 2 grading rubric
Section 5 is worth 28 points. Readers look for a description complete enough to evaluate, with components, activities, dose, participants and setting, along with the goals and objectives and a justification supported by sources. Marks drop when the description is vague about what participants actually do, when objectives are missing or rewritten, when participants are described without eligibility criteria and when the justification repeats Section 4 without connecting the evidence to this program. Clear dose details, the number, length and frequency of sessions, matter because process evaluation in later modules will measure whether that dose was delivered. Objectives labeled by type also help your partner and instructor see what can be evaluated.
HEP 456 Module 2 help with common mistakes
Pull every program detail from the earlier plan into a list before writing. Describe one session so concretely that a reader could run it. Copy the objectives exactly and label them process, impact or outcome. Note unanswered questions instead of guessing. Keep the justification to a paragraph that links need and evidence. If the earlier plan is thin, the desk can help you decide what to ask. Draw a quick sketch of one week of the program, listing what happens on each day, and check that your description matches it. Note the eligibility rules carefully; they shape who can be surveyed later.
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 HEP 456 and BS in Health Education and Health Promotion sample papers
- HEP 456 Module 1: Section 4: Background and Significance of the Health Problem
- HEP 456 Module 3: Section 6: Stakeholders, Evaluation Objectives and Questions
- HEP 456 Module 4: Section 7: Participant Recruitment, Consent Form and Consent Process
- HEP 456 Module 5: Sections 8 and 9: Evaluation Design and Pre-Post Survey
- HEP 456 Module 6: Sections 10 and 11: Evaluation Timeline and Communication Plan
- HEP 456 Module 7: Final Program Evaluation Plan
- HEP 386 Module 2: Module 2 Assignment: Literature Review Plan
- HEP 452 Module 2: Module 2 Assignment: Opinion Editorial with SMOG Readability Assessment
- HEP 444 Module 5: Epidemiology Data Analysis and Evaluation Short Report
- HEP 251 Module 5: Harm Reduction Program Rationale: A Mobile Outreach Van for West Phoenix
HEP 456 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HEP 456 Module 2 sample paper?
The full Section 5 introduction to a Walk With Ease walking program is on this page.
What goes in Section 5 of the HEP 456 evaluation plan?
The program description, components and activities, goals and objectives, expected impact, participants, location and justification.
Should I change the program's objectives in Section 5?
No; record them as the planner wrote them and raise problems in later sections.
What is the Walk With Ease program?
A six-week Arthritis Foundation walking program for adults with arthritis, offered as instructor-led groups or self-directed.
How long is each Walk With Ease group session?
In the sample program, one hour, three times a week for six weeks.