improving the wellbeing of the homeless people
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
improving the wellbeing of the homeless people
Running head: NEEDS STATEMENT, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES 1
NEEDS STATEMENT, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES 1
Needs Statement, Goals, and Objectives
Pasqualina L. Anderson
Walden University
HUMN 6207-3, Grant Writing
Dr. Frances Mills
December 14, 2018
Needs Statement, Goals, and Objectives
Needs Statement
This grant proposal is aiming at improving the wellbeing of the homeless people within our community (The Week. 2018). An estimate of around 500,000 people live outside the house in the USA and this is a risky thing among human beings. Nevertheless, these people are prone to health issues that are uncontrollable (Rogers, 2018).
Goals
- The first goal of the article is to expound on the commitment of the funder. Although there may be other funders who also show commitment towards the research activity, their involvement differs. I will use several concepts to discover this goal in the article.
- Another goal of the article is to show how the funder is committed to supporting research students. Students from any field that concerns research find it difficult to raise funds on their own to support their brilliant ideas. Therefore, this goal will look at showing how committed the Lois and Samuel fund is, in supporting research.
- The last goal of the article is to show the motivation of the project. The real scenario, which inspired my research is identified, and it acts as a support for the research
Objectives
- The first objective of the article is to expound on the potential commitment of Lois and Samuel Silberman Fund (Nguyen et al.,(2018). This will be possible by looking at past activities of the funder towards different research funds they were engaged in to discover more commitment of the firm; we looked at the various fields which the firm fund’s projects and discovered that The Lois and Samuel Silberman Fund is committed to helping projects from diverse fields including my field.. Before deciding on which funder I will select, I carried out intensive research to look for the funder, which is more commitment to help the researcher.
- The second objective of the project is to determine how the Lois and Samuel Silberman fund is committed to helping young researchers by looking at the requirements to be funded. The requirements, however, are simple and clear, unlike other funders. To achieve this objective I also looked at the amount that they offer to social work students researchers, which turn out to be a reasonable amount that will boost the performance of the research. The program offered by the Lois and Samuel Silberman fund is suitable for most research in the social work field. Thus, it has proven to be committed to ensuring that researchers are comfortable.
- The last objective of my work is to explain what inspired me to do the research. To elaborate on this objective, I looked at the estimated number of homeless people within the boundaries of America and on what way they can get help with their situation. The mental conditions and health issues the homeless are facing are explored.
Evaluation criteria
In the first goal and objective, which are directly relating I will evaluate them by looking at their impact on the general performance of the research (Chrystal et al., 2015). Where the commitment of the selected funder affects the research operations in a negative way, then it could reach a conclusion that the goal and objective has not been achieved. When the research operation is affected positively, then the research will be fairing on well. The evaluation is performed to previous researches, which were funded by the Lois and Samuel Silberman fund. By analyzing them, will be in a better position to estimate the probability of my research to fail or success. Another criterion that might apply at this point is looking at the sustainability of the commitment of the funder. This means that a thorough evaluation of the developments of the research associated with the commitment of the Lois and Samuel Silberman fund happen on a regular basis. The same will be observed in previous researches, which involves the Lois and Samuel Silberman fund. Where the sustainability results turn out to be positive, then the Lois and Samuel Silberman fund will have proved its commitment towards research.
The second goal and objective respectively will undergo an evaluation using the relevance of the activity, reported impacts, and efficiency (Chrystal et al., 2015). Starting with the relevance of the funder being committed, the only way I can tell if the funder is committed is by telling whether its presence is increasing the relevance of the research or not. The relevance also depends on, whether; the funder joins the partnership for their benefits, or to make up a good and efficient living place for the homeless. Another criterion that will show if the Lois and Samuel Silberman fund is committed is a measurement of the impacts. When the impacts observed due to the involvement of the funder are positive, then we can conclude that the funder is committed to ensuring a better livelihood. The last criterion that will evaluate the second goal and objective is the efficiency of the research. Where the results of the research directly match the involvement of Lois and Samuel Silberman fund, then I can argue that it is committed towards research.
The evaluation criterion for the last goal and objective takes into account feedback. To evaluate if the motivational factors of the research pass the intended knowledge then I will have to know its impact on people lives and experiences. Through getting feedback on the inspiration factors, I will be able to tell if the objective is achieved or not (Chrystal et al., 2015). This will also enable me to figure out if the research is necessary or not and views and opinions about the necessity of the research.
Reference
Chrystal, J. G., Glover, D. L., Young, A. S., Whelan, F., Austin, E. L., Johnson, N. K., …& Kim, T. A. (2015). Experience of primary care among homeless individuals with mental health conditions.PloS one, 10(2), e0117395.
Grant Forward. (2018). Lois and Samuel Silberman Fund.Retrieved on 7th December 2018 from, https://www.grantforward.com/sponsor/detail/lois-and-samuel-silberman-fund-2460
Nguyen, C. M., Sebastiani, R., Giorgini, P., &Mylopoulos, J. (2018). Multi-objective reasoning
with constrained goal models. Requirements Engineering, 23(2), 189-225.
Rogers, D. (2018). Mental health care for the homeless.pp.1-49
The Week.(2018). America’s homelessness crisis. Retrieved on 7th December 2018 from, https://theweek.com/articles/759683/americas-homelessness-crisis
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!