Effective utilization of the available healthcare resources to benefit the community

The cost of obtaining these facilities have also been known to be high only to favour the few that can afford it and thus majority living below the poverty line were at a disadvantage (Johansson, Lindberg and Söderberg 73-83). Rural health clinics have been established in the rural areas of California in a bid to provide health care services to the elderly, and the communities made up of low-income earners, id different regions of the counties. However, it is reported that approximately more than two-thirds of these counties to get to the targeted minimum number of the primary health care physicians that are meant to be in every county in a bid to adequately meet the demand as dictated by the population.

Rural areas tend to have a lower number of physicians per capita as compared to those in the urban regions (GRAHAM 101-124). This paper aims at analyzing ways that could be adopted to help bridge the gap that exists between the rural and urban health care facilities and strike a balance in the number of physicians found in the hospitals in both regions. To find out some of the challenges facing healthcare facilities in California 2. To establish some of the healthcare facilities available public healthcare facilities, but are unevenly distributed 3. To develop some of the initiatives that could be put in place to help improve the healthcare services rendered, in a bid to benefit the communities After the evaluation process, there will be follow-up activities to assess whether or not the suggested interventions have been implemented and find out whether or not the interventions were of benefit to the community.

Some of the expected outcomes of the evaluation process include: 1. Increased number primary cares and other healthcare facilities in the rural areas to match the number of people living in a given community. A difference is reported regarding the life expectancy among Americans, where the wealthiest have a higher life expectancy as compared to the poorest Americans. This is because the wealthy have better access to better health care facilities that would help in the sustaining of life. They can get advice on the various methods that could be used to improve their lives. Whenever they face life-threatening situations and illnesses, they are in a position to be attended to by the most qualified physicians. This is also contributed to by their locations of residence.

The requirements to the access of the medical care involve getting entry to the health care systems, being able to get to the exact location where one can receive the much-needed services, as well as finding the healthcare providers that much the needs of the patient. The providers in this need to be people with whom the patients can establish an understanding relationship concerning mutual communication and trust (Wells and Root 298-304). There is the number of ways that can be used to describe and define precisely what it means to have access to medical attention, however, is mainly characterized by the factors that result in the first contact with medical providers. According to Levesque et al. (2013), access to medical attention has five dimensions of approach, and this includes approachability, acceptability, availability and accommodation, affordability and appropriateness.

Accordingly, therapeutic services experts pick how and where to function. Fair dissemination of the workforce and access to mind generally depend on market powers, with the critical however inadequate petition from the government, therapeutic schools, and wellbeing net projects. The outcome is incongruences between the geographic area and claim to fame decision of the wellbeing workforce and continuing therapeutic services needs of the U. S. population. Indeed, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in creating updated rules on bosom malignancy screening did not consider cost. However, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) supports research to decide both clinical viability and near adequacy, including assessments dependent on similar expenses, and works with clinicians and social insurance associations to scatter this information.

Most investigations of near-competence assess new drugs and treatments contrasted and no petition or a fake procedure, instead of distinguishing both new and existing medicines with one another and to non-pharmacologic mediations (e. g. , diet or work out) or different prescription approaches. The RE-AIM framework has some dimensions during the evaluation of phenomena where the first dimension is the Reach. Reach; this is the first dimension of the RE-AIM evaluation framework that refers to the level of participation of the targeted audience, and how the individuals were receiving the intervention is represented, and the representation is evaluated. Reach measures the dimension and coverage of the intervention in the community. This component was determined by calculating the proportion of participants on the first day of the program divided by the number of people who possibly became aware of the program through various forms of advertising.

This study used the following advertising strategies: health centre teams were asked to refer patients; banners were displayed in the neighbourhood; a car broadcasting an audio message in the neighbourhood; door-to-door distribution of invitations and personal invitations within health centre waiting rooms. 50 participants will be chosen randomly in different hospitals as a representation of the whole population. This will give the survey participants a wider scope of information, hence a more accurate evaluation of the current situation of healthcare in the rural regions. In a bid to ensure there is a wider coverage, the evaluation team will first establish the exact number of healthcare facilities in the whole rural regions. In the regard, the evaluation will follow with a target of 50 percent total coverage.

To get to the 50 percent target, random healthcare facilities will be chosen all over the rural areas, to make sure that the information collected is an accurate representation of the whole region. The main focus will be to evaluate whether or not the number of physicians in the hospitals have increased. Whether or not there is more medical equipment in the hospitals. This will also evaluate the cost of implementation of the multiple changes and the ease with which they were applied. This stage will also analyse the cost incurred in the implementation of the proposed interventions Maintenance; this is the last dimension of evaluation which refers to the long-term sustainability of the program. This stage of evaluation will involve carrying out follow-up activities after the implementation the proposed changes to assess whether or not the changes had a long-term impact on the on the targeted population.