DPH 890 Module 5 An Executive Summary for Decision Makers Example

Two Pages for a Decision: Briefing County Leaders on Community Health Workers and Blood Pressure

Student Name

Doctor of Public Health Program, Aspen University

DPH 890: Doctor of Public Health Capstone

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

Two Pages for a Decision: Briefing County Leaders on Community Health Workers and Blood Pressure

County commissioners and health department leaders will not read a 150-page capstone. They need a short document that tells them what was found, how confident they can be and what they should do. This paper writes a two-page executive summary of a capstone evaluating the county's community health worker hypertension service and explains the choices behind it.

What Decision Makers Need

Reviews of how policymakers use evidence find that timely, relevant research, clear summaries with recommendations and personal contact with researchers increase use, while poor timing, lack of relevance and mistrust reduce it (Innvær et al., 2002; Oliver et al., 2014). An executive summary addresses timeliness and clarity; a meeting to present it addresses personal contact.

Structure

The summary follows a simple structure: the bottom line first, then the problem, what was done, what was found, what it costs and what to do. Methods receive only a sentence or two, with a note that full details are available. Each section heading states its point, such as what we found, so readers can skim.

The Summary: Bottom Line

Residents who worked with the county's community health workers were more likely to get their blood pressure under control than similar residents who did not. For about every ten people who join, one more reaches control within a year. We recommend continuing the program and expanding it to two more neighborhoods.

The Summary: The Problem

Fewer than half of east-side residents with high blood pressure have it controlled. Uncontrolled blood pressure causes strokes and heart attacks and helps explain why east-side residents die about nine years sooner than people elsewhere in the county.

The Summary: What We Did

We compared 700 residents who joined the program in 2024 and 2025 with 700 similar residents from the same clinics who did not join, using clinic records to track blood pressure for one year. We also interviewed participants and community health workers.

The Summary: What We Found

After one year, 58% of participants had controlled blood pressure, compared with 48% of similar residents, a difference of about 10 percentage points. Systolic pressure fell about 6 points more among participants. Results held up in several checks. Participants valued trusted home visits, home blood pressure monitors and help with pharmacies.

Key Numbers in Plain Language

The table translates key results for decision makers.

The Summary: What It Costs

The program costs about $900 per participant per year, or about $630,000 for 700 people. Because about one additional person reaches control for every ten who join, the cost per additional person controlled is roughly $8,600. Fewer hospital visits may offset part of this cost.

The Summary: What to Do

First, continue the program and seek stable funding through Medicaid and hospital community benefit dollars. Second, expand to two more neighborhoods with high rates of uncontrolled blood pressure within 18 months. Third, add evening and weekend visits so working residents can take part.

Design Choices

Dagenais and Ridde (2018) argue that policy briefs succeed only if they are read, which requires brevity, clear messages and attractive design. The summary uses short paragraphs, headings as plain statements, one table and a single chart, and avoids technical terms such as odds ratio and propensity score.

Testing the Summary

A draft was shown to a health department manager and a community advisory board member. Both asked for the cost per additional person controlled, which was added, and the manager asked that recommendations name who would act, which was clarified in the presentation.

Delivery

The summary will be sent to commissioners a week before a 20-minute briefing, presented at the board of health and shared with community partners. Personal presentation, not only a document, increases the chance that findings are used. The student will bring printed copies and keep the spoken briefing under ten minutes to leave time for questions.

What Was Left Out

Much of the capstone is absent from the summary: the literature review, detailed methods, subgroup analyses and statistical terms. Decision makers can request the full report, but the summary gives them what they need to act. Choosing omissions takes as much judgment as choosing content.

Confidence and Caveats

The summary includes one sentence on confidence: because residents chose to join, the study cannot prove the program caused the improvement, but the results held up in several checks and match research elsewhere. Stating this plainly builds trust without burying the message.

Visual Design

A single chart shows the percentage with controlled blood pressure in each group with a line marking the difference. The county's colors and logo appear on the first page, and white space separates sections. Visual clarity invites reading.

Timing

The summary will be delivered before the county's budget hearings, when decisions about the program's future will be made. Research delivered after decisions are taken has little effect, so timing is part of the design.

Adapting the Summary for Other Audiences

The same content will be adapted for other audiences: a shorter version for the county newsletter, a version emphasizing clinical results for health center leaders and a version for state legislators emphasizing financing. Each keeps the bottom line and changes the emphasis.

Follow-Up

After the briefing, the student will send a thank-you note with the summary attached and offer to answer further questions. Commissioners' questions will be recorded and answered in writing, and the health department will be informed of any decisions.

Why Lead With the Bottom Line

Decision makers often read only the first paragraph. Placing the finding and recommendation first ensures that even a quick reader leaves with the main message. Supporting detail follows for those who continue.

Accessibility

The summary is available in large print and as an accessible electronic document, and a Spanish version is prepared for community partners. Accessible formats extend the summary's reach beyond the commissioners' table.

Conclusion

An executive summary turns a capstone into a tool for decisions. Leading with the bottom line, translating results into plain language, stating costs and recommending specific actions, then testing and presenting the summary in person, gives county leaders what they need to decide the program's future.

References

Dagenais, C., & Ridde, V. (2018). Policy brief as a knowledge transfer tool: To "make a splash", your policy brief must first be read. Gaceta Sanitaria, 32(3), 203-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2018.02.003

Innvær, S., Vist, G., Trommald, M., & Oxman, A. (2002). Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: A systematic review. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 7(4), 239-244. https://doi.org/10.1258/135581902320432778

Oliver, K., Innvar, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J., & Thomas, J. (2014). A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Services Research, 14, Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-2