| Course | NUR-8200 Integrating and Evaluating Population Health in Advanced Nursing Practice |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 4 |
| Paper type | Population health paper: social needs and community health workers |
| Length | About 1,026 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Doctor of Nursing Practice |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 8200 Module 4
Two Dollars and Forty-Seven Cents: Building a Community Health Worker Program for Social Needs After Discharge in Camden
Student Name
Doctor of Nursing Practice, Thomas Edison State University
NUR-8200: Integrating and Evaluating Population Health in Advanced Nursing Practice
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
Two Dollars and Forty-Seven Cents: Building a Community Health Worker Program for Social Needs After Discharge in Camden
The Problem
The Camden hospital here is fictional, a 400-bed hospital whose patients are largely covered by Medicaid or uninsured. A social needs screen added to admission last year found that 41 percent of adult medical patients reported at least one unmet need, most often food, housing, transportation or utilities. Patients with needs were more likely to miss their first follow-up visit and to return to the hospital within 30 days. Social workers focus on the most complex discharges, and many patients leave with only a printed list of resources. The DNP-prepared vice president for population health was asked to design a program.
The screen used asks ten questions in English and Spanish about food, housing quality and stability, transportation, utilities, safety and ability to pay for medicines. Nurses ask the questions at admission and enter answers in structured fields, so the data can be counted. Of 4,200 adult medical admissions screened last year, 1,722 reported a need. Food and transportation were the most common, but housing instability was the need most strongly linked with returning to the hospital within 30 days.
What Community Health Workers Can Do
Kangovi et al. (2014) randomized 446 general medicine inpatients who were poor, uninsured or on Medicaid at two Philadelphia hospitals either to usual care or to IMPaCT, whose community health workers met patients during admission, created action plans around the patients' own goals and provided support for two weeks after discharge. Patients in the program were more likely to get primary care within 14 days, 60.0 percent compared with 47.9 percent, to report high-quality discharge communication, and to improve in mental health and patient activation. Physical health, satisfaction and medication adherence did not differ, and total 30-day readmissions were similar, though repeat readmissions were lower in the program group.
Kangovi et al. (2020) then analyzed return on investment using data from a randomized trial of IMPaCT rather than a before-and-after comparison, which can be misleading because patients with very high use tend to improve on their own. On their estimate, a Medicaid payer would recover $2.47 within twelve months for each dollar spent, largely through fewer hospital days.
The Value of In-Person Navigation
Gottlieb et al. (2016) tested social needs screening in pediatric primary and urgent care clinics at two safety-net hospitals in San Francisco. All 1,809 caregivers were screened; half received written information about community services and half received in-person navigation from a trained navigator, with follow-up. Four months later, the number of social needs fell more in the navigation group, and caregivers in that group reported greater improvement in their children's overall health. The trial showed that screening alone is not enough; help connecting families to services adds benefit.
| Evidence | Key finding | Design choice |
|---|---|---|
| IMPaCT trial | More timely primary care after discharge | Start during admission; patient-set goals |
| Return on investment | $2.47 per Medicaid dollar | Present to board and Medicaid plans |
| Navigation trial | Navigation beat written lists | Replace printed lists with navigators |
Program Design
The program hires six community health workers from Camden neighborhoods, chosen for life experience and listening skills rather than degrees, and trains them using the published IMPaCT curriculum, which the program's developers make available. Each worker carries about 25 patients at a time. Eligibility is adult medical patients who are uninsured or on Medicaid and live in Camden County. Workers meet patients in the hospital, ask about their goals rather than starting from a checklist, and build a plan together. After discharge, workers accompany patients to their first primary care visit when needed, help apply for food assistance and utility relief, connect them to housing services and check in weekly for at least two weeks, longer for those with complex needs.
A nurse and a social worker share supervision, receive regular caseload review and are paid a living wage with benefits, since turnover would undermine relationships with patients.
A typical patient shows how the work unfolds. A 58-year-old man admitted for heart failure says his goal is to get back to his job as a school custodian. His worker learns that he ran out of his water pill because his car broke down and the pharmacy is two bus rides away. Before discharge, the worker arranges mail-order delivery, helps him apply for a transportation benefit through his Medicaid plan and books a clinic visit for the following Tuesday, then rides the bus with him to that visit.
Partnerships
The program depends on community partners. The paper proposes formal agreements with a food bank, a housing nonprofit, the county welfare office and a legal aid clinic, with referral pathways that confirm whether help was received rather than ending at a phone number. The hospital's existing relationships with the Camden Coalition and faith communities are used.
Fidelity and Measures
Because programs that drift from their design lose effect, the program tracks fidelity: the share of patients met before discharge, with a goal-based plan and with contact after discharge. Outcomes include the share with a primary care visit within 14 days, social needs resolved at 30 days, patient activation, 30-day readmissions and hospital days over six months. A comparison with eligible patients not served during the first year, while the program grows, provides a reference, though the paper notes this is weaker than a randomized trial.
Cost and Payment
The annual cost, mostly salaries for six workers and two part-time supervisors, is presented to the board alongside the return-on-investment finding. New Jersey's Medicaid program and its managed care plans are approached about paying for community health worker services, and the hospital's community benefit budget covers start-up.
Conclusion
Four in ten adult medical patients at this Camden hospital have unmet social needs that affect their recovery. A randomized trial showed that community health workers improve timely primary care and patient activation, a trial-based analysis showed a return of $2.47 per Medicaid dollar, and a navigation trial showed that in-person help outperforms printed lists. The program hires and trains workers from the community, builds partnerships that confirm help was received, tracks fidelity and outcomes and seeks payment from Medicaid plans.
References
Gottlieb, L. M., Hessler, D., Long, D., Laves, E., Burns, A. R., Amaya, A., Sweeney, P., Schudel, C., & Adler, N. E. (2016). Effects of social needs screening and in-person service navigation on child health: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatrics, 170(11), Article e162521. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.2521
Kangovi, S., Mitra, N., Grande, D., Long, J. A., & Asch, D. A. (2020). Evidence-based community health worker program addresses unmet social needs and generates positive return on investment. Health Affairs, 39(2), 207-213. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00981
Kangovi, S., Mitra, N., Grande, D., White, M. L., McCollum, S., Sellman, J., Shannon, R. P., & Long, J. A. (2014). Patient-centered community health worker intervention to improve posthospital outcomes: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(4), 535-543. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.14327
What the NUR 8200 Module 4 instructions ask for
Designing care delivery models that close gaps in services is part of TESU's NUR-8200 catalog description, and lacking a public syllabus, module four designs a community health worker response to social needs. Expect a DNP paper that measures social needs in the target population, reviews randomized evidence on community health workers and navigation, examines cost and return on investment with attention to study design, designs the program with hiring, training, caseloads, supervision and partnerships, tracks fidelity and outcomes and plans payment. Some sections assign a food insecurity program, a housing partnership or a medical-legal partnership instead. Read the instructions for whether they want a stakeholder analysis, a logic model or a specific screening tool named, and be clear about the strength of any comparison you plan.
Inside the NUR 8200 Module 4 example
An invented Camden hospital's social needs screen, showing four in ten patients with unmet needs, opens the paper. The IMPaCT trial is reported with its outcomes, including what did not change, and the return-on-investment analysis is explained with its design advantage. The pediatric navigation trial shows why printed lists are not enough. A three-row table turns each finding into a design choice. The program covers hiring, training, caseloads, the patient-goal approach, supervision and wages, and partnerships that confirm help was received. Fidelity and outcome measures, cost and payment and a conclusion complete the paper. Alongside the text, brief notes explain the evidence-driven design and the attention to fidelity. One heart failure patient's path, from a missed water pill to a bus ride to clinic, shows the work in practice.
Reading the NUR 8200 Module 4 grading rubric
Rubrics for a social needs program reward measuring needs in the population, reviewing randomized evidence and its limits, examining cost with attention to study design, a detailed program design with workforce, training, supervision and partnerships, fidelity and outcome measures and a payment plan. Mentors credit papers that report outcomes that did not improve as well as those that did. Recognizing that before-and-after cost studies can overstate savings is often noted. Hiring workers from the community and paying a living wage shows understanding of what makes these programs work. Kangovi's two papers are told apart by year in each citation, and Gottlieb's trial size is quoted exactly. Showing a single patient's journey through the program is often rewarded.
NUR 8200 Module 4 help: mistakes that cost marks
Students often propose screening without a plan to help; include navigation and follow-up. Another frequent error is citing savings from before-and-after studies without noting regression to the mean. Report what the trial did not change. Specify caseloads, training and supervision. Build partnerships that confirm help was received. Track fidelity, not only outcomes. For a social needs program of your own, whether food, housing or legal help, our writers turn your mentor's brief into a first version at no cost. Describe one patient's path through the program so the reader can see the work.
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 Thomas Edison State 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 NUR 8200 and Doctor of Nursing Practice sample papers
- NUR 8200 Module 1: Population Health Measures Paper: Income, Life Expectancy and Midlife Mortality in a County Profile
- NUR 8200 Module 2: Care Gap Paper: Hypertension Control Data, a Registry Program and the Barbershop Trial
- NUR 8200 Module 3: Prevention Program Paper: Diabetes Prevention Program, Fifteen-Year Results and the National DPP
- NUR 8200 Module 5: Care Model Evaluation Paper: The Hotspotting Trial, Medicare Care Coordination and ACO Savings
- NUR 8200 Module 6: Program Evaluation Paper: RE-AIM, CFIR and Implementation Outcomes for a Falls Prevention Rollout
- NUR 8150 Module 3: Clinical Decision Support Paper: Alert Overrides, a Sepsis Model's Validation and Better Design
- NUR 8000 Module 5: Collaboration Paper: Team Training for Rapid Response Calls
- NUR 8420 Module 5: Outcomes Management Paper: Sepsis Measures, Sepsis-3 and Clinical Surveillance Data
- NUR 8250 Module 4: Revenue Cycle Paper: Billing and Insurance-Related Costs, Claim Denials and a Leaner Process
NUR 8200 Module 4 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NUR 8200 Module 4 sample paper?
The community health worker program design for an invented Camden hospital leads this page, from the screening data to the payment plan.
Do community health workers improve outcomes after discharge?
In the IMPaCT trial, timely primary care rose from 47.9 to 60.0 percent, with better mental health and patient activation.
Do community health worker programs save money?
A trial-based analysis of IMPaCT found $2.47 returned for each dollar invested by an average Medicaid payer within a year.
Is social needs screening enough?
A trial of 1,809 families found in-person navigation reduced social needs more than written resource information.
Why measure program fidelity?
Programs that drift from their design often lose effect, so tracking whether core steps are delivered helps protect outcomes.