| Course | MPH 505 Public Health Education and Program Oversight |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Program planning paper |
| Length | About 1,079 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Master of Public Health |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for MPH 505 Module 2
From Diagnosis to Design: Using PRECEDE-PROCEED and the Health Belief Model to Plan a Prevention Program
Student Name
Master of Public Health Program, Aspen University
MPH 505: Public Health Education and Program Oversight
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
From Diagnosis to Design: Using PRECEDE-PROCEED and the Health Belief Model to Plan a Prevention Program
A needs assessment says where to act; a planning model says how to get from a problem to a program. Behavior theory then explains why people act as they do and what a program must change. This paper applies the PRECEDE-PROCEED model and the health belief model to plan a lifestyle program for south-side residents of a composite Southwestern county whose blood sugar sits in the prediabetes range and who mostly speak Spanish at home.
Why a Planning Model
Without a model, programs tend to start with a favorite activity, such as a brochure or a health fair, and hope it fits the problem. A planning model forces the team to work backward from the desired outcome to its causes, and only then to choose activities. It also builds in evaluation from the start.
PRECEDE-PROCEED in Brief
PRECEDE-PROCEED begins with the quality of life a community wants and works backward through health problems, behaviors and environments to the factors that shape them. Its PRECEDE phases diagnose; its PROCEED phases implement and evaluate. An introduction to the model describes it as a logical sequence that links assessment, intervention and evaluation, and stresses that it requires community participation at every phase (Crosby & Noar, 2011).
Social Assessment
Residents described what they valued: staying healthy enough to work, caring for grandchildren and avoiding the complications they had watched relatives suffer. Those hopes became the program's long-range aim, keeping families strong by keeping adults free of diabetes.
Epidemiological Assessment
The health problem was prediabetes progressing to type 2 diabetes. The behaviors linked to it were low physical activity, large portions of refined carbohydrates and sweetened drinks, and rarely being screened. Environmental factors included few safe places to walk, the cost of fresh produce and long work shifts.
Educational and Ecological Assessment
This phase sorts the causes of behavior into three groups, summarized in the table.
| Factor type | Definition | Examples in the county |
|---|---|---|
| Predisposing | Knowledge, beliefs and attitudes before behavior | Belief that diabetes is inevitable; low awareness of prediabetes |
| Enabling | Skills, resources and access that make behavior possible | No Spanish-language classes; unsafe streets; food cost |
| Reinforcing | Rewards and feedback after behavior | Family meals built around tradition; praise from peers and promotoras |
Administrative and Policy Assessment
The health department had funds for staff and materials, a partnership with two health centers and access to church halls. Policies that could help included health center standing orders for A1C screening and a school district agreement to open walking tracks in the evening. Barriers included limited bilingual staff and no budget for childcare during classes.
The Health Belief Model
This theory holds that people act to prevent illness when they believe they are susceptible, believe the illness is serious, believe action will help and see few barriers, prompted by cues to action and supported by confidence in their ability. A review of a decade of research found perceived barriers to be the most powerful single dimension in explaining health behavior (Janz & Becker, 1984).
Applying the Theory
Each construct shaped a program element. To raise perceived susceptibility, promotoras will offer free finger-stick A1C tests at churches. To address the belief that diabetes is inevitable, classes will share evidence that lifestyle change can prevent it; a major trial found that intensive lifestyle intervention cut progression to diabetes by more than half (Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group, 2002). To lower barriers, classes will meet in the evening with childcare, and recipes will use familiar foods at low cost. Cues to action will include radio segments and text reminders. Self-efficacy will grow through cooking demonstrations and group walks.
Why This Theory Fits
Focus group participants spoke of fatalism and fear, which map directly onto perceived benefits and severity. They named time and cost, which are barriers. The health belief model therefore fit what residents said. Its limits, particularly its focus on the individual, are offset by PRECEDE-PROCEED's attention to enabling factors and policy.
Community Participation
A community advisory board of eight residents, two promotoras, a pastor and a health center nurse reviewed each phase. The board changed the program's name, suggested involving spouses and warned that some residents avoid government buildings, which is why classes will be held in churches and community centers.
Link to the Essential Services
The planning work reflects the essential public health services of communicating effectively to inform and educate, strengthening community partnerships and creating and implementing plans that support health. Planning with residents rather than for them also advances equity, a principle running through the essential services framework.
Why Not Another Model
The team considered two alternatives. The social ecological model would have highlighted the many levels influencing behavior but offered less guidance on sequencing planning steps. Intervention mapping offers detailed steps but demands more time and technical expertise than the small team had. PRECEDE-PROCEED combined a clear sequence with attention to environments and policy, and it has been used widely for community programs, making it a practical choice.
Other Theories Considered
Social cognitive theory, with its focus on self-efficacy, observational learning and the environment, also fit the program, and several of its ideas, such as cooking demonstrations that let participants watch and practice, were built in. The transtheoretical model was set aside because staging each participant's readiness would add complexity for coaches. Using one main theory, with ideas borrowed from another, kept messages consistent.
From Diagnosis to Evaluation
The PROCEED phases connect directly to evaluation. Process evaluation will ask whether classes were delivered as planned. Impact evaluation will look at changes in the predisposing, enabling and reinforcing factors and in behavior, such as knowledge of prediabetes and minutes of weekly activity. Outcome evaluation will look at weight and, over time, diabetes incidence. Building these links during planning means the program will know what to measure before it begins.
Limits of the Plan
The plan relies on residents who attended meetings and focus groups, who may differ from those the program most needs to reach. The team will test its assumptions during the pilot cohort and revise messages if participants respond differently than expected.
Conclusion
PRECEDE-PROCEED gave the team a disciplined path from residents' hopes to specific causes, and the health belief model explained the beliefs the program must address. Together they point to a program that raises awareness of risk, challenges fatalism with evidence, removes practical barriers and builds confidence, delivered in trusted places and shaped by residents themselves.
References
Crosby, R., & Noar, S. M. (2011). What is a planning model? An introduction to PRECEDE-PROCEED. Journal of Public Health Dentistry, 71(Suppl. 1), S7-S15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-7325.2011.00235.x
Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. (2002). Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. New England Journal of Medicine, 346(6), 393-403. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa012512
Janz, N. K., & Becker, M. H. (1984). The health belief model: A decade later. Health Education Quarterly, 11(1), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019818401100101
MPH 505 Module 2 instructions, in plain terms
MPH 505 centers on building a program for one population, and since the module's own instructions sit behind the classroom login, this paper takes up the planning step that follows a needs assessment. Planning assignments usually ask you to choose a planning model and at least one behavior theory, justify both, and show how they shape the program. Check whether your instructor names a required model, such as PRECEDE-PROCEED, intervention mapping or the MAP-IT framework. Summarize the model briefly, then spend most of your words applying it to your population. Link each theory construct to a concrete activity rather than defining constructs in the abstract. Say why the theory fits what residents told you.
Inside the MPH 505 Module 2 example
Roughly 1,000 words fill this sample, with a three-row factors table placed in the educational and ecological assessment. After explaining why a planning model is needed and summarizing PRECEDE-PROCEED, it works through social, epidemiological, educational and administrative assessments. The health belief model is then introduced and applied construct by construct. Sections on fit, community participation, the essential services, alternative models, other theories, links to evaluation and the plan's limits follow. The side note by the model summary explains why describing the logic of working backward helps a reader see why the model was chosen. The conclusion states how model and theory together point toward specific program features. Headings follow the model's own phases so the structure mirrors the method.
Where the marks sit in the MPH 505 Module 2 rubric
Planning and theory papers usually earn marks for an accurate summary of the model, thorough application to the population, correct use of theory constructs, clear links from constructs to activities and a justified choice. This sample cites an introduction to PRECEDE-PROCEED, the classic review of the health belief model and the landmark prevention trial in APA style. The factors table shows systematic application. Each construct maps to a named program element, which is the step many papers skip. Sections comparing other models and theories show that the choice was considered, not assumed. Attention to community participation and evaluation links shows the grader that planning connects to the rest of the program.
MPH 505 Module 2 help: mistakes that cost marks
A frequent weakness is spending most of the paper defining a model and a theory, leaving little room to apply them. Some students also choose a theory that does not match their population's barriers, such as an individual-level theory for a problem driven by environment. Tie each construct to evidence from your needs assessment. Avoid claiming a theory predicts behavior perfectly; note its limits. For help deciding between planning models, a tutor can walk through two options with you and show how each would organize your program. End by listing the three or four program elements your model and theory point to most clearly. Keep the theory section tied to the people you are serving, not to a textbook example.
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 Aspen 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 MPH 505 and Master of Public Health sample papers
- MPH 505 Module 1: Community Needs Assessment
- MPH 505 Module 3: Goals, Objectives and Logic Model
- MPH 505 Module 4: Selecting an Evidence-Based Intervention
- MPH 505 Module 5: Developing Health Education Materials
- MPH 505 Module 6: Program Implementation Plan
- MPH 505 Module 7: Program Evaluation Plan
- MPH 505 Module 8: Final Program Proposal
- MPH 503 Module 6: Individual Liberty Versus the Common Good
- MPH 530 Module 4: Food Safety and Foodborne Disease
- MPH 540 Module 2: Accountability and Accreditation
- MPH 550 Module 6: Ecological Model and Community Action
MPH 505 Module 2 questions, answered
What does MPH 505 Module 2 usually ask for?
Aspen's MPH 505 covers planning a public health program, so choosing and applying a planning model and behavior theory is a typical assignment. Check your classroom prompt.
What are predisposing, enabling and reinforcing factors?
Predisposing factors are beliefs and knowledge before behavior, enabling factors are skills and resources that make it possible, and reinforcing factors are rewards and feedback afterward.
What is the health belief model?
A theory that people take preventive action when they feel susceptible, see the illness as serious, believe action helps, face few barriers and feel able to act.
Where can I find a free MPH 505 Module 2 sample paper?
Module 2's paper, applying PRECEDE-PROCEED and the health belief model, sits above this section with its factors table, and it builds on the Module 1 assessment.
How are planning models and behavior theories used together in MPH 505 Module 2?
The planning model organizes the steps from problem to program, while the theory explains why people behave as they do and which beliefs or barriers the program should change.