PUBH 8410 Week 5 Readiness Assessment Example

Course	PUBH 8410 Fundamentals of Leadership, System Evaluation, and Interventions in Public Health
Week	Week 5
Paper type	Organizational readiness assessment
Length	About 580 words, 5 pages
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Walden University
Program	PhD in Public Health
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for PUBH 8410 Week 5

Willing Is Not the Same as Able: A Readiness Assessment of Five Composite Sites for Starting and Continuing Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in Pregnancy, Rating Commitment and Efficacy Apart

Student Name

Walden University

PUBH 8410: Fundamentals of Leadership, System Evaluation, and Interventions in Public Health

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title separates the two halves of readiness, because a site that wants the change and a site that can carry it out need different help.

Willing Is Not the Same as Able: A Readiness Assessment of Five Composite Sites for Starting and Continuing Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in Pregnancy, Rating Commitment and Efficacy Apart

Purpose and Theory

Ridgeline County, a composite county, plans to start buprenorphine for pregnant patients in two emergency departments, continue medication at jail intake and route positive toxicology results to a navigator. The organizations below are real kinds of institutions, but each one is assembled for this sample. Weiner (2009) described organizational readiness as something members hold in common, made of change commitment, the members' joint determination to implement, and change efficacy, their joint confidence that the organization is capable of it. Readiness belongs to the organization, so one enthusiastic physician does not make an emergency department ready.

What this page is doingDefining readiness as collective at the outset explains why the methods aggregate by site.

Methods

At each site, staff completed a brief survey adapted from a published readiness measure that scores commitment and efficacy separately (Shea et al., 2014). Scores were averaged by site rather than reported by person. Structured interviews with four roles per site (a manager, a frontline clinician, a pharmacist or nurse, and a records or intake worker) added context on resources, staff time and leadership sponsorship.

Findings

Ridgeline General's staff want the change but doubt they can deliver it; few clinicians have prescribed buprenorphine and the pharmacy does not keep it in the department. Stocking the drug and pairing new prescribers with experienced ones would raise efficacy.

St. Brendan's has the skills but not the will. Its leaders cite waiting-room crowding and see addiction care as another service's job. Sharing local case reviews and the trial evidence that emergency starts keep people in treatment (D'Onofrio et al., 2015) would address why the change matters there.

The jail contractor is low on both. Staff believe continuation is outside their contract, and they are right. Raising either dimension requires the county to amend the contract first.

Hollis Street already treats pregnant patients with medication, consistent with professional guidance (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG], 2017), and can accept referrals within days.

The navigator team is committed but stretched; one more position would make result routing realistic.

Table 1

Readiness ratings by site

Site	Commitment	Efficacy	Resources	Staff time	Sponsorship \|
Ridgeline General emergency department	High	Low	Low; buprenorphine not stocked in the department	Moderate	Strong \|
St. Brendan's emergency department	Low	Moderate	Moderate	Low	Weak \|
Jail medical contractor	Low	Low	Low; contract does not fund medication	Low	Weak \|
Hollis Street Community Health Center	High	High	Moderate	Moderate	Strong \|
Health department navigator team	High	Moderate	Low	Low	Strong \|

Ratings summarize composite survey and interview results; they are illustrative.

Sequencing

Start where both halves are present. Hollis Street and Ridgeline General should launch first, with Hollis Street receiving every emergency start. Early results from that pair can build commitment at St. Brendan's. The jail should follow once its contract is revised, because asking low-commitment, low-efficacy staff to act without funding would likely produce failure that hardens resistance.

The sequence also protects the pathway's reputation. A failed launch at the jail in the first month would be the story every other site heard. A working pair of sites gives clinicians at St. Brendan's colleagues they can call, which tends to persuade more than a briefing.

Limitations

Staff who answered the survey may be those most interested in the change, so commitment could be overstated. Five sites and four interviews per site are too few for anything beyond a planning judgment, and readiness can shift quickly when leaders change.

References

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2017). Committee opinion no. 711: Opioid use and opioid use disorder in pregnancy. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 130(2), e81-e94. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002235

D'Onofrio, G., O'Connor, P. G., Pantalon, M. V., Chawarski, M. C., Busch, S. H., Owens, P. H., Bernstein, S. L., & Fiellin, D. A. (2015). Emergency department-initiated buprenorphine/naloxone treatment for opioid dependence: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 313(16), 1636-1644. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.3474

Shea, C. M., Jacobs, S. R., Esserman, D. A., Bruce, K., & Weiner, B. J. (2014). Organizational readiness for implementing change: A psychometric assessment of a new measure. Implementation Science, 9, Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-7

Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4, Article 67. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67

Reading the PUBH 8410 Week 5 instructions

Readiness assessments ask students to judge whether the organizations involved in a planned intervention are prepared to implement it. Prompts usually name a theory, often Weiner's organizational readiness for change, and require a description of methods, findings for each site, an interpretation and a recommendation about where or when to begin. Students may be asked to design a brief survey or interview guide. Because readiness is defined as a collective state, instructors expect the unit of analysis to be the organization. Assessments that treat readiness as a single score, or rely on the views of one champion, tend to lose credit because they cannot tell a site that lacks will from one that lacks means.

Inside the PUBH 8410 Week 5 example

The paper defines readiness as shared commitment and efficacy, then explains that responses are averaged by site for that reason. Methods combine an adapted published measure with interviews across four roles. The findings table rates every site on both dimensions and three conditions. Each site then gets a paragraph: one department willing but without stock or experienced prescribers, another able but unconvinced, a jail contractor low on both until its contract changes, a health center ready on both counts and a committed but stretched navigator team. Sequencing pairs the two strongest sites. A closing limitations section addresses response bias and small numbers.

Reading the PUBH 8410 Week 5 rubric

Rubrics typically reward correct application of the readiness theory, a sound method, findings reported by organization, interpretation that leads to action and honest limitations. Keeping commitment and efficacy separate earns credit because it shows the author understands why the remedies differ. Graders often look for site-level recommendations tied to the weaker dimension. A sequencing argument drawn from the findings, not from convenience, shows strategic thinking. Citing a validated measure strengthens the methods. Papers that report only overall impressions, or that recommend launching everywhere at once despite uneven readiness, usually earn lower marks than those that let the findings shape the rollout. Graders also notice when the survey measure is cited and its adaptation explained, and when interview roles are chosen to capture both clinical and administrative views of the same site.

PUBH 8410 Week 5 help from the desk

Separate your questions about commitment from those about efficacy before you collect anything; a site's answer to "do we want this" says little about "can we do this." Interview several roles at each site, including someone who handles records or intake, because they see practical barriers others miss. Report findings by organization, and for each one, write the single change that would raise its weaker dimension. Let the pattern decide where you start. If your readiness findings are mixed and you are unsure how to sequence a rollout, we can draft a sample assessment matched to your sites and intervention.

Get a PUBH 8410 Week 5 example written to your instructions

Identify the organizations expected to change, and the change itself, then send the Week 5 prompt and rubric; a readiness assessment separating commitment from efficacy, with a sequencing recommendation, comes back in 24 to 48 hours, the first one free. Sections requiring a named instrument or implementation framework get the assessment built around it.

More PUBH 8410 papers and PhD in Public Health samples

PUBH 8410 Week 5 questions, answered

Where can I find a free PUBH 8410 Week 5 sample paper?

The complete Week 5 readiness assessment appears above, rating five composite sites for a treatment pathway in pregnancy.

What are the two parts of organizational readiness?

Change commitment, the shared resolve to implement, and change efficacy, the shared belief that the organization can do it.

Why is readiness assessed by organization?

Weiner defines it as a collective state, so one enthusiastic clinician does not make a whole department ready.

Which sites launch first?

The community health center and the emergency department with high commitment, since both halves are present or easily raised there.

Why does the jail launch later?

It is low on both dimensions until the county amends and funds its contract.