Description It should be noted, from the onset, that amongst many persons, behavioral, emotional, as well as mental problems happen to be rather commonplace. This is more so the case given the various challenges that people – both young and old - group tend to encounter in their daily living. RAND undertook an “evaluation of California’s state-wide mental health prevention and early intervention programs” (Eberhart et al., 2015, p. 1). It is important to note that the three initiatives that RAND sought to evaluate were inclusive of; the reduction of discrimination as well as stigma, prevention of suicide, and the mental health of students.

How was the success of the program or policy measured?

Essentially, the RAND undertook a baseline survey that covered the entire state. It should be noted that the said survey took into consideration various groups with an intention of evaluating findings for the various schemes or initiatives as has been highlighted elsewhere in this text.

How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?

The program was state-wide and diverse groups were sampled across all three initiatives. It is important to note that in the final analysis, it was found out that “the CalMHSA PEI initiatives are successfully launched and are already showing positive outcomes in stigma and discrimination reduction, suicide prevention, and improvement of student mental health” (Eberhart et al., 2015, p. 1). As it has further been...

With regard to the discrimination and stigma education initiative, prevention and early intervention were inclusive of online resources, trainings, and social marketing campaign. On the other hand,...…improvement realms. This would be on the basis of my observation of the outcomes and the entre process of implementation. Next, I would also actively evaluate the policy to ensure that it matches evidence-based standards. This is more so the case given that “the most critical part of evaluating a clinical policy is examining the evidence that supports it” (Gilbert and Taylor, 1999).
General Notes/Comments

In the final analysis, it should be noted that as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – CDC (2017) observes, program evaluation is of great essence in the further improvement of public health undertakings. This is more so the case given that in most cases, the said evaluation makes use of processes that are accurate. It is for this reason that the World Health Organization – WHO (2018) points out that “monitoring and evaluation of any programme or intervention is vital to determine whether it works, to help refine programme delivery, and to provide evidence for continuing support…