The community health nursing program of the University of Perpetual Help System Laguna : an evaluation / Maria Jannice A. Delgado 6

Thesis (M.A.) -- Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, Intramuros, Manila, 1999.;A thesis presented to the faculty of Graduate School of Arts, Sciences, Education, and Nursing, Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Nursing. 56

5

ABSTRACT. Statement of the Problem: The study evaluated the Community Health Nursing Program of the University of Perpetual Help System Laguna. Specifically, the study answered the following questions: 1. How can the Community Health Nursing Program of UPHS Laguna be categorized based on the following aspects: 1.1 design of the program? 1.2 delivery of the program? 1.3 content of the program? 1.4 community preceptor, and? 1.5 resources of the program? 2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Community Health Nursing Program (CHNP)? 3. Is there a significant difference in the evaluation of Community Health Nursing (CHNP) in terms of its design, delivery, content, community preceptor and resources of the program among the following respondents: 3.1 students, 3.2 alumni, 3.3 community residents 3.4 administrator, and 3.5 faculty Sampling and Instrumentation: The total number of respondents is one hundred and forty-two (142) which included all the twenty-nine (29) graduating students for school year 1999-2000, forty-one (41) alumni belonging to batch 1988 and 1999, sixty (60) community residents comprising at least 30% of the population, ten (10) faculty members and two (2) administrators. The study utilized the descriptive research method through purposive sampling technique with the use of questionnaire as an instrument. The Community Health Nursing Program (CHNP) evaluation questionnaire containing the items comprising the different aspects of CHNP including its sub-program was adopted as the instrument and had provided answers to specific question provided in this study. In accomplishing the CHNP evaluation questionnaire a 5 point numerical scale of assessment was used with the qualitative interpretation of the items resulting from a formulated numerical scale utilized to determine the strengths and weakness of the program. Findings: The design of the Community Health Nursing Program of University of Perpetual Help System Laguna in most items is very satisfactory except for the community residents who evaluated most of the items under design as excellent. It is evident that all of the items referring to the delivery of the program were considered as very satisfactory by most of the respondents, while community residents evaluated the items referring to the health teachings were given according to the client's level of understanding focusing on the promotion of health and prevention of illness, measures to assess the actual plight of the people's health condition in terms of socio-political aspects and its effect to the National Health Situation and the exhibition of resourcefulness and creativity in the pursuit of common goals as excellent. Most of the subprogram except for growth monitoring, feeding program, Operation Timbang and Nutrition Program evaluated as excellent by the community residents and vital statistics collection categorized residents as satisfactory by the faculty and administrators categorized them as satisfactory. Most of the respondents categorized the items as very satisfactory except for the item referring to exceptional faculty members invited to act as community preceptor categorized as satisfactory by the students and items indicating that the community preceptor is evaluated in terms of his/her balanced contribution to theoretical instruction and community service and evaluation is based on his/her creative and external community service evaluated as satisfactory by the alumni. Students, alumni and the faculty categorized most of the items as satisfactory but the items indicating that a specific budget is allocated by the institution to meet the set objectives of the program and the equipment, materials and supplies are available to support the varied projects under the program showed a mean level of evaluation as satisfactory by the respondents. Most of the respondents considered the first aspects of the program namely design, delivery, content , community preceptor and resources as strengths except for the vital statistics subprogram which was considered as marginal by the students, alumni, administrator and faculty and the resources which was evaluated as marginal by the students, alumni and faculty (refer to pages 37 to 44 for the itemized evaluation). There is a significant difference in the evaluation of the design of the Community Health Nursing Program among the respondents. The mean scores of the community residents are significantly greater than the student and alumni. There is a significant difference in the evaluation of the delivery of the Community Health Nursing Program among the respondents. The mean scores of the community residents are significantly greater than the students and alumni. There is no significant difference in the evaluation of the care during pregnancy, postpartum care, proper newborn care, problems of newborn and postpartum mothers, family planning, growth promotion components of the Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Care program as well as the Medical Services Program among the students, faculty, alumni, administrators and community residents. There is a significant difference in the evaluation of the growth monitoring, feeding program, operation timbang components of the MCH Care program as well as in the nutrition program, environmental sanitation and beautification, vital statistics and school health services of the Community Health Nursing Program (CHNP). The mean score of the community residents are significantly greater than the students in the evaluation of the growth monitoring, feeding program, operation timbang of the MCH Care Program as well as in the evaluation of the Nutrition Program, Environmental Sanitation and Beautification, Vital Statistics and School Health Services of the Community Health Nursing Program. The mean score of the community residents is also significantly greater than the faculty in the evaluation of the growth monitoring, feeding program of the MCH Care Program as well as in the evaluation of the Vital Statistics and School Health Services while the mean score of the community residents is significantly greater than the alumni in the evaluation of the Feeding Program, Operation Timbang of the MCH Care Program as well as in the evaluation of the Environmental Sanitation and Beautification, Vital Statistics and School Health Services of the Community Health Nursing Program. The mean score of the alumni is significantly greater than the students in the evaluation of the Feeding Program while the mean scores of the faculty is significantly greater than the students in the evaluation of Operation Timbang. There is a significant difference in the evaluation of the community preceptor of the Community Health Nursing Program wherein the mean scores of the community residents are significantly greater than that of the mean score of the students and alumni. There is a significant difference in the evaluation of the resources of the Community Health Nursing Program. The mean scores of the community residents are significantly greater than that of the mean scores of the faculty, students and alumni. Conclusion: Based from the results of the study, the following conclusions were drawn: There is significant difference in the evaluation of the delivery of the Community Health Nursing Program among the respondents wherein the mean scores of community residents are significantly greater than the students and alumni. There is also a significant difference in the evaluation of the resources of the Community Health Nursing Program. It showed that the mean scores of the community residents are significantly greater than the faculty, students and alumni. Most of the aspects of the Community Health Nursing Program were categorized as very satisfactory by the respondents with the community residents evaluating a number of the aspects as excellent while the resources of the program was categorized as satisfactory by the students and the faculty. The design, delivery, content as well as the preceptor were considered as strengths of the Community Health Nursing Program (CHNP) while the resources were considered as marginal. The students and alumni also considered some items under the community preceptor as marginal.

There is a significant difference in the evaluation of the design, delivery, resources and community preceptor of the Community Health Nursing Program as well in the evaluation of most sub-programs except for the care during pregnancy, postpartum care, proper newborn care, problems of newborn and postpartum mothers, family planning and growth promotion component of MCH Care Program as well as Medical Services Program which shows no significant difference in the evaluation of the respondents namely the students, faculty, alumni, administrators and community residents. Recommendation: After a careful analysis of the findings of this study and after drawing the conclusion, the researcher recommends the following: 1. The school administrators and faculty members should ensure the viability of the program by providing an effective delivery of the activities which falls under the program as well as the manpower and material resources that would help the students and preceptor in sustaining the quality health care service directed toward the maintenance of wellness among the citizenry. 2. A regular evaluation of the Community Health Nursing Program in terms of its design, delivery, content, community preceptor and resources should be undertaken by the constitution to make necessary modifications on the said aspects. 3. Successful alumni should make the necessary move to contribute towards the improvement of the program by sharing their resources in the form of monetary help, supplies, materials as well as providing some time and effort in sharing their expertise in the field of community health. 4. Community preceptor should take the initia

5