Warning Initiative and Intervention C-HIP Model Essay

November 26, 2022

Warning Initiative and Intervention C-HIP Model Essay

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Warning, Initiative, Intervention, C-HIP Model, Essay

[Order Now]

Submit your assignment, which required you to design a warning initiative or intervention as a means to enhance safety to curtail injuries and/or illnesses. The assignment should be submitted in APA format. Any graphics, figures, etc. should be included as Appendices. See the grading rubric prior to submission of your assignment.

You will need to select a particular product, chemical, hazard, task, etc. that you want to address within your workplace. If you are unable to perform this task in a workplace, select a product, chemical, hazard, task that is applicable to a specific population (gasoline – general public, radon – homeowners, magnets – parents of young children, etc.).

You will use the C-HIP Model to develop your warning initiative or intervention. You must provide details for each aspect of the model. You must detail the intervention or initiative that you intend to develop and you must provide justification. This should be done for all aspects of the model. Thus, you should discuss and justify the source of the risk information and you should detail the media and channel as to how the warning will be presented and why (justify).

You need to address all aspects of the receiver. In your justification be sure to incorporate theoretical concepts and principles from the content learned in the module associated with sensation, perception, and information processing. Lastly, discuss the intended behavior that should be produced from the initiative or intervention.

After this information is presented, you should detail a strategy as to how you plan to evaluate your initiative or intervention. You should address process evaluation, impact evaluation, and outcome evaluation within your evaluation plan (this may require some additional research as to what should be included in these evaluation measures). The following sources will provide guidance as to definitions for the types of evaluations and items that need to be assessed in each aspect of the evaluation.

Professional Plagiarism Free Paper in APA/MLA/Harvard/Turabian Format, Instant Delivery, High Quality Submissions, 100% Unique, Turnitin Report Attached

Warning Initiative and Intervention C-HIP Model Essay

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.