AIDS Education and Training Centers (AETC) National Evaluation Center (NEC)
Sector: Education • Location: United States of America
Source: Grants.gov
This announcement solicits application for the AIDS Education and Training Centers (AETC) National Evaluation Center (NEC) program. Evaluating the AIDS Education and Training Centers (AETC) program should involve methodical assessment of whether funded programs have produced the intended HIV practice and clinical outcomes. Optimally, the strongest evaluation activities are planned during the cur
Project Information FAQ
Project Information
Want to explore the full details? View the full report
Participants
Sponsoring Agency | Obfuscated Data |
Company | Obfuscated Data |
Status
Original status | archived |
Taiyo status | Obfuscated Data |
Taiyo last update | 00-00-0000 |
Available timestamps | 00-00-0000 |
Available timestamp type | Obfuscated Data |
Contact
Contact name | Obfuscated Data |
Phone | 0000000000 |
ObfuscatedData@email.com | |
Address | Obfuscated Data, Obfuscated data, obfuscated data, Obfuscated data |
Description
Description | This announcement solicits application for the AIDS Education and Training Centers (AETC) National Evaluation Center (NEC) program. Evaluating the AIDS Education and Training Centers (AETC) program should involve methodical assessment of whether funded programs have produced the intended HIV practice and clinical outcomes. Optimally, the strongest evaluation activities are planned during the curriculum development phase of training, with the evaluation taking place concurrently and post training. Evaluation activities must provide feedback and motivation for continued improvement for clinical participants, faculty, and curriculum designers. To ensure that important questions are answered and relevant needs met, it is necessary to be methodical in designing a process of evaluation. An evaluation should be purposive, analytic, and empirical (Maxfield 2001). That is, its purpose should be known, it should be based on logic, and the results should be based on experience and data. Evaluation activities assess outcomes along the progressive sequence of health care professional training and education needs to patient clinical outcomes, with an emphasis on the impact of training on the skills and clinical practices of health care providers. Being able to measure learning progress satisfactorily and evaluate performance objectively are extremely important elements in the process of improving the quality of HIV training, education and clinical consultation. The rapid and dynamic advances in technology such as the upsurge of social media platforms have considerably altered the way in which health care providers are being trained and educated as well as how they deliver clinical consultation services. Effective use of social media in training can provide additional support for sustaining new learning and transferring formal training back to the workplace (Bozarth 2010). The purpose of the AETC National Evaluation Center (AETC NEC) is to develop methodology and tools that measure the impact and outcomes of training, education and clinical consultation services, as well as, distance learning education aimed to improve the care of people living with HIV/AIDS. The AETC NEC evaluation activities must be learner-centered and contribute to the continuous quality improvement of the entire AETC program to include training, education, and clinical consultation activities as well as distance learning education. The AETC NEC through the development of innovative methodologies has a role in documenting the impact of AETC training, education and clinical consultation in providers' clinical practice. The AETC NEC is also charged with promptly disseminating evaluation results of completed activities, and providing technical assistance to all regional, national and telehealth centers in the design and implementation of AETC national, regional and local outcome-based evaluation activities. |
Original sub-sector | Obfuscated |
Original Currency | USD |
Original budget | 000000000000000 |
Procurement method | Obfuscated Data |
Budget | 000000000000000 |
Location
Region | Obfuscated |
Country | Obfuscated |
State | Obfuscated Data |
County | Obfuscated |
Location | Obfuscated Data, Obfuscated data, obfuscated data, Obfuscated data |
Source
Source reliability | High |
Data quality score | 100% |
Source | Obfuscated Data |
URL | obfuscated_data,obfuscateddata.com |
More Details
Project Type | Obfuscated Data |
Article Published Date | Obfuscated Data |
