Health Education Programme Design Training Course

Participants can define a priority health education problem using multiple evidence sources.

• Rapid needs assessment combining epidemiological, service-use, behavioural and community evidence
• Incidence, prevalence, mortality and burden measures interpreted for programme priorities
• Disaggregate data by sex, age, location, disability and socioeconomic status
• Community asset mapping identifies trusted channels, leaders, services and informal support
• Triangulate routine data, surveys, focus groups and key-informant interviews
• Problem statements distinguish health status, behavioural causes and service barriers

Participants can identify priority audiences and describe their decisions, constraints and information needs.

• Audience segmentation using demographic, behavioural, psychographic and service-access variables
• Primary, secondary and tertiary audiences assigned distinct programme roles
• Persona profiles capture beliefs, routines, constraints, media habits and decision-makers
• Journey mapping identifies moments of risk, choice, referral and follow-up
• Health literacy assessment considers language, numeracy, formats and accessibility needs
• Co-design recruitment protects representation of marginalised and low-trust groups

Participants can diagnose priority behaviours and formulate practical behaviour change objectives.

• COM-B diagnosis examines capability, opportunity and motivation behind priority behaviours
• Behavioural objectives specify actor, action, condition, criterion and timeframe
• Behaviour change techniques selected using the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy
• Determinants ranked by importance, changeability, evidence strength and feasibility
• Barrier analysis separates knowledge deficits from structural, social and emotional constraints
• Protective behaviours framed without blame, fear appeals or victim stigmatisation

Participants can select theory-informed methods that address identified behavioural determinants.

• Health Belief Model constructs applied to perceived risk and action
• Social Cognitive Theory links modelling, self-efficacy, reinforcement and social support
• Stages of Change informs readiness-tailored messages and referral options
• Theory of Planned Behavior identifies attitudes, norms and perceived control
• Intervention Mapping matrices connect determinants, change objectives and methods
• Ecological models align individual education with household, community and policy action

Participants can build a results-focused programme logic model with measurable objectives.

• SMART outcome objectives distinguish behavioural, health, service and learning results
• Baseline values, targets and deadlines set with evidence and operational constraints
• Logic model assumptions tested against local resources, referral capacity and policy
• Results chains show plausible pathways from sessions to population-level outcomes
• Equity objectives define intended reductions in access, uptake or outcome gaps
• Assumption registers record external dependencies, risks and mitigation owners

Participants can create audience-specific messages and materials that support informed health action.

• Message matrices align audience barriers, benefits, calls-to-action and evidence
• Plain-language drafting uses active voice, familiar terms and short sentences
• Health literacy techniques test numeracy, pictograms, teach-back and translated materials
• Risk communication states likelihood, severity, uncertainty and recommended protective action
• Gain-framed and loss-framed appeals matched to behaviour and audience context
• Pretesting protocols assess comprehension, relevance, acceptability and unintended interpretations

Participants can select delivery channels and connect education activities to appropriate services.

• Channel selection compares reach, trust, cost, accessibility and interaction
• Interpersonal education planned through peers, community health workers and clinicians
• Mass media schedules coordinate radio, print, outdoor and community announcements
• Digital content plans account for device access, data costs and moderation
• Referral pathways connect education contacts with testing, treatment and social services
• Communication calendars sequence messages around campaigns, seasons and service availability

Participants can develop structured health education sessions and facilitator guidance.

• Session plans align learning objectives, content, facilitation methods and assessment
• Adult learning principles address relevance, experience, practice and immediate application
• Participatory methods include demonstration, role play, problem solving and peer teaching
• Facilitator guides specify prompts, timings, materials, adaptations and safeguarding responses
• Teach-back checks participant understanding before referral, self-care or behaviour commitments
• Training-of-trainers plans set selection criteria, supervision and fidelity checks

Participants can translate a programme design into coordinated activities, responsibilities and controls.

• Work breakdown structures assign activities, owners, dependencies, milestones and approvals
• RACI matrices clarify accountable decisions for clinical, communications and field teams
• Microplans specify sites, target numbers, session frequency and outreach routes
• Procurement lists cover print materials, venue, transport, translation and equipment
• Risk registers address misinformation, political sensitivity, stock-outs and safeguarding incidents
• Stakeholder engagement plans define influence, interests, commitments and feedback mechanisms

Participants can prepare resource requirements and costed delivery options for a health education programme.

• Activity-based budgets calculate staff time, materials, media, travel and overheads
• Unit-cost analysis compares delivery options by participant reached and outcome
• Resource plans match staff competencies, workload, supervision ratios and geographic coverage
• Scenario budgets distinguish essential activities from scale-up and contingency costs
• Funding proposals connect requested inputs to outputs, outcomes and measurement plans
• Financial controls record approvals, expenditure tracking, variances and corrective actions

Participants can identify and address equity, ethical and safeguarding risks in programme design.

• Equity impact assessment identifies who may be excluded, harmed or underserved
• Universal design principles improve access for disability, language and literacy needs
• Gender analysis examines roles, safety, decision power and care burdens
• Trauma-informed communication avoids triggering content, coercion and unnecessary disclosure
• Safeguarding protocols establish reporting routes, confidentiality limits and referral support
• Community feedback mechanisms document complaints, responses, closure and learning

Participants can create a practical monitoring system for delivery, reach and early outcomes.

• Indicator reference sheets define numerator, denominator, source, frequency and responsibility
• Process indicators track sessions delivered, materials distributed, attendance and reach
• Outcome indicators measure knowledge, confidence, intentions, behaviours and service uptake
• Data collection tools use consent scripts, unique identifiers and validation rules
• Data quality assessments check completeness, timeliness, accuracy, integrity and confidentiality
• Dashboards compare actual performance with targets, disaggregation and action thresholds

Participants can select evaluation methods that answer credible questions about programme performance.

• Evaluation questions distinguish implementation, outcome, impact and economic assessment
• Pre-post designs estimate change while recognising attribution and selection limitations
• Comparison groups strengthen causal inference where ethical and operationally feasible
• Sampling plans define population, frame, sample size, recruitment and nonresponse handling
• Qualitative interviews explain mechanisms, acceptability, unintended effects and contextual variation
• Mixed-methods triangulation integrates monitoring, survey, observation and participant feedback

Participants can use performance evidence to improve delivery and assess scale-up readiness.

• Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles test small changes against defined improvement measures
• After-action reviews capture successes, failures, adaptations and accountable next steps
• Fidelity monitoring distinguishes essential components from permitted local adaptations
• Audience feedback loops revise messages, channels, timing and facilitation methods
• Scale-up criteria assess evidence, cost, workforce, supply chains and governance
• Knowledge products translate findings into briefs, donor reports and community updates

Participants can build, review and present a complete evidence-based health education programme design package.

• Programme brief defines priority population, health problem, behaviour and setting
• Evidence summary justifies need, inequities, determinants and selected intervention strategy
• Logic model and measurable objectives establish the programme results architecture
• Implementation microplan integrates channels, curriculum, workforce, budget and risk controls
• Monitoring and evaluation plan specifies indicators, tools, analysis and reporting
• Peer review tests feasibility, ethical safeguards, equity and evidence alignment
• Presentation defends design choices, trade-offs, resourcing and improvement actions