developing healthy communities

Identify a local health related community development need, design an intervention/project to address the need, producing a bid for funding of their project. Can you base my proposal on interventions for Adult obesity within the UK, specifically the city; Birmingham. Use Harvard referencing please and use models and theories models related to child obesity interventions within the UK please. At the end talk about how the project intervention chosen can be successful at the end of the year and the benefits. Assignment brief: Submission Date: ………. The writing of this 3000 word (+/- 10%) funding proposal should not be undertaken purely to fulfil the academic requirements of this module, but as an effective means of developing employability skills including communication with future policy makers and health and social care practitioners and commissioners. However as this is an academic piece of work you are also required to demonstrate evidence of critical discussion, debate and analysis not always present in a traditional funding proposal. This will therefore require reference to appropriate literature, theories, models, frameworks, research, policy etc. Your funding proposal should include the following: 1. Introduction – 200 words (5%):- It should be concise and well organised, using headings and sub-heading if required to outline the contents of the proposal. This should also provide the background information providing answers to questions such as • What is your proposed intervention/project? • Who is the funding proposal aimed at? 2. Background/Justification to your proposed project – 800 words (20%):- here the author outlines the issues that have led to the production of the funding proposal. This section is about setting the scene or starting point. This section should include an overview of the evidence base utilising journal articles, reports and numerical statistics to support the need for your project. You therefore may also wish to explore and include any relevant political drivers or national and local policies that support your proposed intervention/project. Tables and graphs can assist to highlight the evidence base. State exactly where this project will be delivered with a rationale (E:G; Ward, Area etc). State clearly who (Audience / Population) will access this project with a rationale . 3. Theoretical basis for the intervention/project – 1000 words (30%):- • Describe the aim(s) of your intervention/project, e.g. what do you hope to achieve as a result of your project? • Explore the theoretical approach and/or model(s) that best applies to this intervention/project. • Alternatives considered and why dismissed. This should be brief but will assist with your critical discussion. • Critical examination and evaluation of previous interventions/projects. This should assist you in determining and stipulating the expected outcomes of your proposed intervention/project. 4. Methods of evaluation – 800 words (30%):- you need to provide details of how you intend to evaluate your proposed intervention/project in order to demonstrate its quality. You will need to select an appropriate evaluation framework to structure this part of the funding proposal and assist your critical discussion. This will include the identification and justification of an evaluative measuring tool highlighting its strengths and limitations. 5. Conclusion – 200 words (5%):- This is a summary and should be kept brief. Any conclusions drawn should result from evidence provided within sections 2-4. No new information should be presented at this stage. Arguments should be summarised so that recommendations can emanate from these. 6. Academic presentation (10%):- All work should be presented concisely, grammatically correct and aligned correctly to the University of Wolverhampton Harvard referencing handbook. Your work will be marked according to the University level 5 grade descriptors. Level 5 Grade descriptors Percentage Descriptor 90-100% Outstanding Exceptionally detailed and original response to the assessment, with critical use of independently sourced contextual material. Outstanding demonstration of linked understanding and application of relevant theory, concepts and models. Extremely well structured with high level of analysis. No obvious errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate. 80-89% Excellent Very full, independent response to the assessment with totally relevant material which is well beyond any module input, demonstrating independent study. Excellent understanding and application of relevant theory, concepts and models. Very clear logical structure. Very few errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate. 70-79% Very good Full response to the assessment with all content relevant and focused. Very good understanding of relevant theory, concepts and models. Application of appropriate theory to examples/practice, demonstrating a rigorous approach to a variety of ideas, contexts and frameworks. Few errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate. 60-69% Good Answers most if not all detailed aspects of the question. Content mainly relevant and accurate. Good knowledge and understanding of relevant theory and concepts and application of theoretical models. Evidence of a developing appreciation of contextual issues. Some small repeated errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate 50-59% Competent Main issues addressed and solid attempt to answer question. Some relevant content applied. Sound knowledge and understanding of relevant theory and concepts and identification of main issues. Some repeated errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate. 40-49% Pass Satisfactory attempt to address question/issues with some content relevant to assessment topic. Material engages with relevant module materials, but largely repeats taught input and lacks development or personal interpretation. Some general understanding of topic theory and concepts. Lacks coherence. 30-39% Fail Some learning outcomes and / or assessment criteria not met. Question not answered fully. Content not wholly relevant. Little or no evidence of understanding of relevant theory. Very repetitive of taught input with no development or application. The use of extensive quoted passages evident. Evidence of sufficient grasp of learning outcomes to suggest that the student will be able to retrieve the module on resubmission. 20-29% Fail No learning outcomes fully met. Little attempt to engage with the module materials or ideas. 10% – 19% Fail Little attempt to engage with assignment brief and has not met learning outcomes. Inadequate demonstration of knowledge or understanding of key concepts, theories or practice. 0-9% Fail No real attempt to address the assignment brief or learning outcomes What is the name of your project/intervention? Try and keep your project/intervention name short and snappy What is your proposed project/intervention? A brief description Who is the funding proposal aimed at? Where do the people who will benefit from your project/intervention mainly live? Background/justification to your proposed project. The need for your project: Need is the term we use to describe a problem or issue, or situation where something needs to change to make things better for a group of people. What problems will your project deal with? (300 words) Be as specific as you can. For example: if you were aiming to involve young people in their local community, you need to tell us why the young people you want to work with aren’t already involved. This may be because they have been repeatedly excluded from school, are living in an area of high unemployment, are pessimistic about their future and are becoming increasingly isolated from their community. What evidence do you have to show that your project is needed? (500 words) • Examine the local demographics highlighting the need. • Explore relevant political drivers, national and local policies. • Statistics or other research studies. • Tables and graphs can assist to highlight the evidence base. Theoretic basis for the project/intervention What is the aim of your project/intervention? (100 words) Tell us what you want your project to achieve. The aim is a brief statement of the overall purpose of your project/intervention. What do you hope to achieve as a result of your project? Explore the theoretical approach and/or model(s) that best apply to this project. (600 words) You are required to critically identify and justify the relevant theoretical health promotion, prevention and/or protection approach/model, demonstrating an understanding and application to your chosen project/intervention. You are required to critically discuss the alternatives considered and why they have been dismissed. A critical examination and evaluation of previous projects. (400 words) You are required to demonstrate a critical review of previous projects highlighting any possible strengths, limitations and potential causes for their lack of engagement within the targeted community. A previous project must have some synergy with your own project although a target audience, delivery mode and setting may differ. Some previous projects may not have been successful… Methods of evaluation. (800 words) • You are required to apply an evaluation framework to your proposed funding proposal. This will certainly require you to stipulate your proposed project outcomes. The project outcomes need to clearly identify who will benefit from this change. • Describe the activities that will help you achieve each of the project outcomes. Activities are the tasks, actions or services that take place in your project to achieve its outcomes. • How will you measure your outcomes/progress/success? You will need to explore the types of evaluation i.e. formative or summative and provide a rationale for your decision, whilst also critically examining an appropriate measuring tool. Conclusion. (200 words) This is a summary of what you have already presented. No new information should be present. References Harvard Reference style must be applied