| Course | HLTH 5053 Public Health Literacy and Communication |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Communication strategy design |
| Length | 1,180 words, about 4 pages plus title and reference pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | American College of Education |
| Program | Master of Public Health |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for HLTH 5053 Module 3
A Phone Call Before the Heat: A Communication Strategy for Older Adults Living Alone, Built on Threat and Efficacy and Delivered by Trusted Messengers
Student Name
American College of Education
HLTH5053: Public Health Literacy and Communication
Module 3 Assignment
Instructor Name
October 19, 2026
Audience and Objective
The first two modules established the problem. Roughly 900 people over 65 live on their own in the composite city's six subsidized senior buildings; two in three screened as possibly having limited health literacy; fewer than a quarter could explain an advisory; and the health department's fact sheet, text alert and poster scored poorly on understandability and actionability. This module designs a strategy to reach that audience before and during extreme heat.
The strategy's objective is behavioral, not informational. During each heat warning next summer, at least 80% of residents living alone should be contacted by a person they know, and those without working air conditioning should spend at least several hours a day in a cool place, either a cooling center or a building common room with air conditioning. Secondary objectives are that residents can name one warning sign of heat illness and one place to go.
Theory: Threat Plus Efficacy
Heat warnings are fear appeals, and fear appeals can backfire. The Extended Parallel Process Model explains why. Witte (1992) proposed that people first appraise the threat, its severity and their susceptibility to it, and then their efficacy, whether the recommended response works and whether they can carry it out. When both threat and efficacy are high, people act to control the danger. When threat is high but efficacy is low, they act instead to control their fear, through denial, avoidance or dismissing the message.
The model fits this audience closely. Many residents already doubt that heat is dangerous for them, so perceived susceptibility is low; and many cannot easily travel to a cooling center or afford to run an air conditioner, so perceived efficacy is also low. A message that raises fear without solving the problem of how to get somewhere cool would push residents toward fear control. The strategy therefore pairs every threat message with a specific, achievable action and removes barriers to it, such as arranging free rides and opening air-conditioned common rooms in each building. Telling an 84-year-old woman with no car that heat can kill her, without telling her how to get to the library, is not a warning; it is a source of anxiety.
Culture and Trusted Messengers
Who delivers a message shapes whether it is heard. Kreuter and McClure (2004), reviewing the role of culture in health communication, described how cultural values, beliefs and norms influence how people perceive and respond to health messages, and argued for approaches that reflect the audience's culture and involve its members. For this audience, the most trusted sources are building managers and resident leaders, the community health workers who already visit, faith communities, and family members who call regularly. Residents who prefer Spanish or Vietnamese look to bilingual staff and to churches and temples in their neighborhoods. The strategy therefore routes messages through these messengers rather than relying on the department's name alone, and it involves resident leaders in writing and testing messages in each language.
Messages
The strategy uses three core messages, each written below a sixth-grade reading level and tested with residents. The threat message is personal and concrete: extreme heat is especially dangerous for people over 65 who live alone, and it can make you sick fast, even if you feel fine. The action message is specific: on hot days, spend the afternoon in a cool place such as the air-conditioned community room on your floor or the library on Main Street, open from 10 to 6, and call the listed number for a free ride. The warning signs message names the symptoms and the number to use: dizziness, confusion, a pounding headache or not sweating are signs to call the nurse line or 911. All three messages use the same simple words, colors and pictures in every channel, so that each repetition strengthens the others.
Channels in Layers
No single channel reaches this audience, so the strategy layers four. The first is personal contact: a buddy call list, run by building managers and volunteers, that calls every resident living alone once a day during a heat warning and arranges a visit if the resident does not answer. The second is automated voice calls in English, Spanish and Vietnamese to residents who opt in, triggered by the National Weather Service warning. The third is building-level visual cues: a bright heat-day poster placed on each floor and in elevators only when a warning is in effect, so its appearance signals danger. The fourth is local television and radio, where the department's spokesperson and a trusted local weather forecaster repeat the same messages.
The layered design draws on evidence that heat warning systems with personal outreach components can save lives. Ebi et al. (2004), estimating the costs and benefits of Philadelphia's heat watch and warning system, which paired media announcements with neighborhood outreach, volunteer check-ins, visits by health staff and a phone line, concluded that the system saved lives at a cost far below the value of the lives saved.
Timeline and Roles
Preparation begins in March: recruit and train buddy volunteers in each building, enroll residents in voice calls, write and test messages in three languages, and confirm that common rooms have working air conditioning. In May, each building hosts a heat-readiness gathering, with a cooling center map and a practice run of the buddy list. During each heat warning, the program coordinator activates voice calls, managers begin daily calls, posters go up, and the ride line extends its hours. After each warning, the team reviews how many residents were reached and adjusts. The health department's communications officer owns messages and media; the community health worker supervisor owns the buddy system; and building managers own on-site cues and common rooms.
Testing Before Launch
A strategy is a set of predictions about how people will respond, and the cheapest time to find out it is wrong is before summer. In April, the team will test the three core messages with small groups of residents in each language, reading each message aloud and asking residents to say what it means and what they would do. Messages that residents misread will be rewritten and tested again. The buddy call guide will be tried in role plays between volunteers and resident leaders, who will say where the questions felt intrusive or confusing. The voice call will be played to a group of residents with hearing loss to check its pace and volume. Finally, the team will run a practice activation in May, sending a test voice call, posting heat-day posters for one day and completing a full round of buddy calls, and will count how many residents were reached and how long the calls took. The results will set realistic staffing for real warnings. Testing also serves the theory at the heart of the strategy: if residents do not believe they can do what a message asks, the team will learn that in April rather than in the middle of a heat wave.
References
Ebi, K. L., Teisberg, T. J., Kalkstein, L. S., Robinson, L., & Weiher, R. F. (2004). Heat watch/warning systems save lives: Estimated costs and benefits for Philadelphia 1995-98. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 85(8), 1067-1073. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-85-8-1067
Kreuter, M. W., & McClure, S. M. (2004). The role of culture in health communication. Annual Review of Public Health, 25, 439-455. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.25.101802.123000
Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communication Monographs, 59(4), 329-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759209376276
The HLTH 5053 Module 3 assignment instructions
HLTH 5053 Module 3 typically asks you to design a communication strategy for a specific audience and health issue. Prompts usually ask for communication objectives, a theory or model that guides the approach, key messages, messengers, channels, a timeline and roles, and sometimes a budget. Many sections want the strategy to build on an earlier audience assessment or materials review. Graders expect the theory to shape the messages rather than be named in passing, and they reward objectives stated as behaviors with targets. Write out your actual messages instead of describing them, and test at least one with a member of the audience, and check Canvas for whether a message map or channel table must be included.
How this HLTH 5053 Module 3 example is built
The sample begins with the audience findings from earlier modules and sets behavioral objectives. It explains the Extended Parallel Process Model from its source and uses it to show why threat messages must be paired with barrier removal for this audience. Culture and trusted messengers are addressed with a review and specific sources for each language group. Three core messages are written out at a low reading level and made consistent across channels. Four channels are layered to match how residents actually get information, supported by evidence from a heat warning system with personal outreach. A timeline with owners closes the strategy.
Where the points sit in the HLTH 5053 Module 3 rubric
Communication strategy rubrics generally reward measurable objectives, correct application of a communication theory, audience-appropriate messages, well-chosen messengers and channels, and a feasible plan. Graders check that the theory's constructs are defined and visibly shape the messages, and they notice when a theory appears only in the introduction. Messages earn credit when they are written out and matched to the audience's literacy and language. Channel choices score highest when justified by evidence about the audience's habits. Feasibility, including timeline and roles, is usually required. Attention to culture and equity is valued. Supporting research and correct APA 7 references complete the score, while a short message map helps graders see how the pieces fit.
HLTH 5053 Module 3 help from the desk
Strategy papers often lose points by setting awareness objectives, such as increase knowledge of heat risks, with no behavioral target. Another common problem is naming a theory in the introduction and never using it again. Students also describe messages instead of writing them, and choose social media for audiences that do not use it. Set objectives people could observe. Show how your theory changes your messages. Write the actual words. Choose channels from evidence about your audience, not from what the agency already uses. Vaccination campaigns, cancer screening outreach and flood warnings follow the same structure; tell us who the audience is and what the rubric expects, and a Module 3 strategy can be built for that group.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official American College of Education document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HLTH 5053 and Master of Public Health sample papers
- HLTH 5053 Module 1: Health Literacy Assessment
- HLTH 5053 Module 2: Health Materials Critique
- HLTH 5053 Module 4: Risk Communication Plan
- HLTH 5053 Module 5: Campaign Plan and Evaluation
- HCI 5073 Module 4: Dashboard Evaluation
- HLTH 5013 Module 5: Epidemiologic Research Proposal
- HLTH 5033 Module 4: Capital Expenditure Evaluation
- HLTH 5083 Module 2: Capstone Evidence Synthesis
HLTH 5053 Module 3 questions, answered
What does HLTH5053 Module 3 usually ask for?
HLTH5053's third module usually asks you to design a communication strategy for one audience: objectives, a guiding theory, messages, messengers, channels and a timeline. The audience and issue come from your own section.
What is the Extended Parallel Process Model?
A theory of fear appeals holding that people act to control a danger when they see both a real threat and an effective, achievable response, but act to control their fear when threat is high and efficacy is low.
Why use trusted messengers in public health communication?
Because cultural values and relationships shape how people receive messages. Information from people they know and trust is more likely to be heard and acted on.
Where can I find a free HLTH 5053 Module 3 sample paper?
You can read the complete Module 3 heat-health communication strategy for older adults living alone on this page, with its theory, trusted messengers, three messages, layered channels, timeline and roles.
Should communication objectives measure awareness or behavior?
Where possible, behavior. Awareness is easier to measure but does not guarantee action, so strong strategies set objectives for what people will do.