| Course | HEP 466 Health Promotion Program Management |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 6 |
| Paper type | Stakeholder and meeting plan presentation |
| Length | About 521 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 slide deck with speaker notes |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | BS in Health Education and Health Promotion |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HEP 466 Module 6
Partners Who Stay: Stakeholder Relationships and Meetings for a Fall-Prevention Program
Student Name
BS in Health Education and Health Promotion, Arizona State University
HEP 466: Health Promotion Program Management
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Slide 1: Partners Who Stay
Stakeholder relationships and meetings for A Matter of Balance in Tempe.
Speaker notes: A good program can still fail if the people around it lose interest. The workshop itself has trial evidence behind it (Tennstedt et al., 1998), but evidence alone does not keep partners at the table. This plan is about keeping partners engaged from launch to year two.
Slide 2: Who Our Stakeholders Are
Senior center managers. City senior services. Volunteer coaches. Participants and families. Primary care clinics. The funder.
Speaker notes: I listed everyone who can affect the program or is affected by it, which is the starting point for stakeholder analysis (Bryson, 2004).
Slide 3: Power and Interest Grid
High power, high interest: center managers, funder. High power, lower interest: city senior services, clinics. Lower power, high interest: coaches, participants.
Speaker notes: The grid helps decide how much time each group gets. Managers and the funder are key players to manage closely. The city and clinics need to be kept satisfied. Coaches and participants need to be kept informed and involved, and some of them can gain influence as champions.
Slide 4: Cultivation Plan
Center managers: monthly check-in, shared calendar. Funder: quarterly two-page update. Clinics: referral cards and a results summary. Coaches: recognition events and a peer chat group. Participants: an alumni walk and a seat on the advisory group.
Speaker notes: Each relationship has a regular touch point and something of value for the partner. Clinics, for example, get data showing their patients took part.
Slide 5: The Partner Meeting
60 minutes, every other month, hybrid. Purpose: review progress and solve one problem.
Speaker notes: Many meetings fail because they have no clear purpose. This one has two jobs only: share progress and make one decision.
Slide 6: Agenda
5 min welcome and purpose. 10 min progress dashboard. 25 min one problem to solve. 10 min decisions and owners. 10 min partner news and close.
Speaker notes: The agenda goes out three days ahead in a shared Google Doc, so partners can add comments before the meeting.
Slide 7: Roles and Rules
Chair keeps time. Note-taker records decisions and owners. Decisions by consensus; if none in 10 minutes, the chair proposes and the group votes.
Speaker notes: A clear decision rule prevents long debates from ending without action, which wears partners out.
Slide 8: After the Meeting
Notes with decisions, owners and dates within 48 hours. Progress on each action reviewed at the next meeting. A short survey twice a year on whether meetings are worth attending.
Speaker notes: Follow-through is where trust is built. If partners see their input turn into action, they keep coming.
Slide 9: Using ChatGPT
Drafted a first agenda and a stakeholder list. Missed participants and coaches; added them. Rewrote the tone of the invitation to sound local.
Speaker notes: The AI draft treated stakeholders as organizations only. The program depends on volunteers and participants, so I added them and gave them a voice, consistent with community engagement principles (Clinical and Translational Science Awards Consortium Community Engagement Key Function Committee Task Force on the Principles of Community Engagement, 2011). I welcome your questions.
References
Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do when stakeholders matter: Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030410001675722
Clinical and Translational Science Awards Consortium Community Engagement Key Function Committee Task Force on the Principles of Community Engagement. (2011). Principles of community engagement (2nd ed., NIH Publication No. 11-7782). National Institutes of Health.
Tennstedt, S., Howland, J., Lachman, M., Peterson, E., Kasten, L., & Jette, A. (1998). A randomized, controlled trial of a group intervention to reduce fear of falling and associated activity restriction in older adults. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 53B(6), P384-P392. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/53B.6.P384
Reading the HEP 466 Module 6 assignment instructions
For the Module 6 artifact, HEP 466 students design plans for cultivating stakeholder relationships and running effective meetings, using ChatGPT and Google Docs, and to present them; it is the second of two 50-point artifacts. Base the plan on a real or realistic health promotion program, identify the stakeholders, analyze their power and interest, describe how you will build and keep each relationship and design a meeting that partners will find worth their time. The course aligns with the CHES competency on coordinating relationships with partners and stakeholders, so show practical skills, not only definitions.
How this HEP 466 Module 6 example is built
The sample identifies six stakeholder groups and places them on a power and interest grid, then gives each a touch point and a benefit in the cultivation plan. Three slides design the partner meeting: its purpose, a timed agenda and roles with a decision rule. A follow-up slide explains how decisions are tracked, and a final slide reports what ChatGPT drafted, what it missed and how the student fixed it. The notes under each slide hold the reasons and sources. Each slide builds on the one before: identify, map, cultivate, meet, follow up. The agenda is timed to the minute and published in advance, and the decision rule shows how the group avoids endless discussion. The AI slide is specific about what the tool got wrong.
HEP 466 Module 6 rubric: what earns full marks
The artifact is worth 50 points. Readers check that stakeholders are identified and analyzed with a recognized tool, that cultivation strategies differ by stakeholder, that the meeting plan includes a purpose, agenda, roles and follow-up and that AI use is described critically. Marks drop for generic lists, for plans that treat every stakeholder the same, for meeting designs without decisions or owners and for slides that copy AI output without evaluation. Graders also value plans that show reciprocity, where each stakeholder receives something useful, and meeting designs that end with named owners and deadlines. Including participants and volunteers as stakeholders, not just organizations, demonstrates the community engagement the course emphasizes.
HEP 466 Module 6 help with common mistakes
List stakeholders broadly before narrowing, and include the people the program serves. Sort stakeholders by how much power and interest each holds. Give each stakeholder something they value. Time every agenda item. Decide in advance how the group will make decisions. Ask ChatGPT for a draft agenda, then check it against your partners' real needs. If your plan reads like a textbook definition, the desk can help make it specific. Draw your power and interest grid on paper before making slides. For each stakeholder, write one sentence on what they want from the program. Test your agenda by timing a practice run with classmates. Save the AI draft so you can show how you changed it.
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 466 and BS in Health Education and Health Promotion sample papers
- HEP 466 Module 3: Module 3 Artifact: Program Budget Presentation
- HEP 386 Module 3: Module 3 Assignment: Literature Review Data Collection
- HEP 454 Module 10: Assignment 10: Final Program Plan
- HEP 456 Module 2: Section 5: Introduction to the Program
- HEP 444 Module 3: Article Review: Case-Control Study
HEP 466 Module 6 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HEP 466 Module 6 sample paper?
This page holds all nine slides of the partner and meeting plan, with speaker notes.
What is a power and interest grid?
A tool that sorts stakeholders by their influence over and interest in a program to decide how to engage each.
What makes a meeting effective?
A clear purpose, a timed agenda, defined roles, a decision rule and prompt follow-up.
Which CHES area does HEP 466 address?
Area VII, Leadership and Management, including coordinating relationships with partners and stakeholders.
Should participants be stakeholders in a health program?
Yes; people the program serves can shape it and champion it.