| Course | HLTH 5473 School-Community Health Partnerships |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Partner identification and analysis |
| Length | 1,250 words, about 5 pages plus title and reference pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | American College of Education |
| Program | M.Ed. in Health and Wellness Education |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for HLTH 5473 Module 2
Who Should Be at the Table? Identifying and Analyzing Partners for a Rural Middle School's Response to Adolescent Diabetes Risk
Student Name
American College of Education
HLTH5473: School-Community Health Partnerships
Module 2 Assignment
Instructor Name
October 12, 2026
Introduction
Module 1 of this project examined a composite middle school of roughly six hundred students in a small farming town, finding rising numbers of students referred for elevated blood sugar, a food environment dominated by dollar stores and fast food, few safe places for activity and many community assets. It set three priorities: more daily physical activity, better access to and skills with healthy food and connection of higher-risk students and families to care. No school can accomplish these alone. This paper identifies potential partners, analyzes what each brings and needs and recommends the kind of relationship the school should seek with each.
Why Partnerships and What Kind
Partnerships vary in depth. Some organizations simply share information; others coordinate activities, share resources or commit to a common plan with shared decision making. Butterfoss et al. (1993) described community coalitions as formal, lasting alliances of organizations and individuals that come together to work on a common problem, and they identified benefits such as pooling resources, reaching more people, avoiding duplication and building community ownership, along with challenges such as turf conflicts, unequal power and the time needed to maintain relationships. Not every partner needs to be a full coalition member. The school should match the depth of each relationship to what the partner can offer and what the work requires. The school health model built around the whole child also reminds the school that community involvement and family engagement are core components of school health, not add-ons (Lewallen et al., 2015).
Criteria for Analyzing Partners
Each potential partner is analyzed on four questions. What is its interest in adolescent diabetes risk, and how closely does that interest align with the school's priorities? What resources can it offer, such as staff, expertise, funding, space, trusted relationships or access to families? What influence does it have in the community or over decisions that matter? And what does it need in return, since partnerships last only when each partner benefits? The answers point to the role each partner should play.
Health Care and Public Health Partners
The federally qualified health center clinic in town is the most important health care partner. Its interest is strong: it serves many of the school's families and must meet quality measures for chronic disease screening. It can offer clinicians, screening, follow-up care and possibly a school-based visit schedule. It needs referrals, help reaching families and space at the school. The county health department brings population data, public health nurses and connections to state programs; it needs local partners to reach its goals. Local pediatricians refer students with elevated blood sugar and could provide education at the school; they need an efficient way to connect families with community resources. These partners should be core members of a school health partnership team with shared goals and regular meetings.
Food and Nutrition Partners
The county extension office runs nutrition education for low-income families through its federally funded program and has trained educators who teach cooking and gardening. Its interest aligns closely, and it needs sites and participants. The school's own food service director is a partner often overlooked; the cafeteria serves most students two meals a day and can change menus, offer taste tests and support a garden-to-cafeteria program within federal rules. The local chef who runs a catering business has offered to teach cooking and could help the cafeteria make healthy dishes more appealing. The grocery store on the highway could support a healthy food incentive or a produce stand at school events, gaining customers in return. The extension office and food service director should be core partners; the chef and grocery store are best engaged as contributors to specific activities.
Physical Activity Partners
The town parks department controls the park and the rail-trail and could improve lighting, extend hours and co-sponsor after-school activities; it needs usage and community support to justify its budget requests. Coaches and the youth football league reach many students and families and have credibility with them. The volunteer fire department could host walking events and has a strong community presence. The 4-H program offers structured youth activities, including some focused on healthy living. These partners suit a cooperative relationship, contributing programs and facilities while the core team sets direction.
Faith and Family Partners
Churches are among the community's most trusted institutions. Two already run health ministries with blood pressure checks, and pastors expressed willingness to host family cooking nights and walking groups. A Catholic parish serves many of the town's Spanish-speaking families, who were underrepresented in the Module 1 assessment. Faith partners offer trust, volunteers and space; they need programs that fit their mission and do not burden small congregations. Parents and students themselves are essential partners, not merely audiences. The parent-teacher organization, a student health club and parents of students with elevated blood sugar should hold seats on the partnership team so that decisions reflect the people most affected, a principle central to community-based approaches that emphasize shared power and mutual benefit (Israel et al., 1998).
What the Evidence Says About Partners
Research on school-based diabetes prevention underlines why the cafeteria, physical education staff and families belong among the partners. The HEALTHY study, a large cluster randomized trial in 42 middle schools, combined changes to school food and beverages, more vigorous physical education, classroom behavior change activities and school-wide communication campaigns (HEALTHY Study Group, 2010). The combined prevalence of overweight and obesity fell in both intervention and control schools, with no significant difference between them, but intervention schools saw greater reductions in body mass index z scores, in the share of students with large waist circumference, in fasting insulin and in obesity prevalence. Two lessons follow for partner selection. First, the components that changed the most, food service and physical education, depend on school staff who are easy to overlook when thinking about community partners. Second, a program confined to the school day may not be enough; the modest results suggest that families, clinics and community settings must reinforce what the school does. That is why the recommended structure places both school staff and community organizations on the core team.
Risks and Tensions
Partnerships carry risks. Partners may have competing priorities or claim credit unevenly. Some potential partners carry conflicts of interest; a soft drink distributor that funds scoreboards, for example, would not be a suitable partner for a diabetes prevention effort. Power imbalances can silence families, especially when professionals dominate meetings. Small organizations such as churches can be overwhelmed by requests. The school can reduce these risks by setting clear criteria for partners, writing agreements that define roles and credit, holding meetings at times and places families can attend, offering interpretation and asking what partners need before asking what they can give.
Recommended Structure
The analysis suggests a two-tier structure. A core partnership team of about ten members, including the school nurse, principal, food service director, clinic, health department, extension office, a church representative, the parish, two parents and a student, would meet monthly, set goals and share decisions. A wider network of contributing partners, including the parks department, coaches, 4-H, the chef, the grocery store and the fire department, would take part in specific activities and gather twice a year. This structure gives the work a stable core while allowing many community members to contribute. Module 3 will develop communication and outreach strategies to engage families and partners.
References
Butterfoss, F. D., Goodman, R. M., & Wandersman, A. (1993). Community coalitions for prevention and health promotion. Health Education Research, 8(3), 315-330. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/8.3.315
HEALTHY Study Group. (2010). A school-based intervention for diabetes risk reduction. New England Journal of Medicine, 363(5), 443-453. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1001933
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 173-202. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173
Lewallen, T. C., Hunt, H., Potts-Datema, W., Zaza, S., & Giles, W. (2015). The Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child model: A new approach for improving educational attainment and healthy development for students. Journal of School Health, 85(11), 729-739. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12310
What the HLTH 5473 Module 2 instructions ask for
Module 2 of HLTH 5473 commonly asks you to identify the partners a school-community health effort needs and to analyze them. Prompts typically expect you to name specific types of organizations and individuals, explain what each can offer and what it needs, assess alignment and influence and recommend the role or depth of partnership for each. Families and students should be included as partners with real decision-making roles, not only as audiences. Build on the priorities and assets from your Module 1 assessment. Consider risks such as conflicts of interest and power imbalances, and describe how the partnership would manage them in practice. Check Canvas for whether a partner matrix or stakeholder map should accompany the narrative and how many partners you are expected to analyze.
Inside the HLTH 5473 Module 2 example
The example explains why partnerships vary in depth and sets four criteria for analyzing partners. It then examines health care and public health partners, food and nutrition partners, physical activity partners and faith and family partners, stating each one's interest, resources, influence, needs and recommended role. A section discusses risks, including conflicts of interest and power imbalances, and the paper closes with a two-tier structure: a core partnership team with shared decision making and a wider network of contributing partners. A section draws on a large middle school trial to show why cafeteria and physical education staff must sit alongside community partners.
Where the points sit in the HLTH 5473 Module 2 rubric
Graders usually reward partner analyses that are specific about each partner's interests, resources and needs rather than listing organizations. Explaining the appropriate depth of partnership shows understanding of collaboration. Including families and students as decision makers reflects current practice in school and community health. Recognizing risks and how to manage them demonstrates judgment. A clear recommended structure connects the analysis to action. Organized sections and APA 7 citations for partnership frameworks complete the paper. Evidence about which partners made a difference in similar programs strengthens the case for your choices. Be realistic about what small organizations can give, and show how each partner benefits in return, since partnerships that serve only the school rarely last.
HLTH 5473 Module 2 help: mistakes that cost points
Partner papers often list organizations without explaining why they matter or what they need. If you are unsure how to analyze partners, decide on the depth of each relationship or handle conflicts of interest, we can help. Share your Module 1 assessment and the assignment wording, and a writer will prepare a Module 2 analysis that names realistic partners for your community, explains what each brings and needs and proposes a structure for working together. We tailor the partner list to your community, including faith, business and youth organizations, and we suggest how to manage the tensions that partnerships bring.
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 5473 and M.Ed. in Health and Wellness Education sample papers
- HLTH 5473 Module 1: School Community Assessment
- HLTH 5473 Module 3: Outreach Strategy
- HLTH 5473 Module 4: Health Challenge Analysis
- HLTH 5473 Module 5: Partnership Action Plan
- HLTH 5493 Module 4: Implementation Plan
- HLTH 5403 Module 1: Culture and Behavior Analysis
- HLTH 5463 Module 2: Theory-Based Lesson Design
- HLTH 5091 Module 1: Capstone Introduction and Goals
HLTH 5473 Module 2 questions, answered
What does HLTH5473 Module 2 usually ask for?
The second HLTH5473 module commonly asks you to identify potential school and community partners for a health priority and analyze each one's interests, resources, influence and appropriate role.
What is a community coalition?
A formal, lasting alliance of organizations and individuals working together on a shared problem, pooling resources and building community ownership.
Should parents and students be partners?
Yes. Community-based approaches emphasize shared power, so the people most affected should help make decisions, not only receive programs.
Where can I find a free HLTH 5473 Module 2 sample paper?
A full Module 2 partner analysis is posted here, examining health care, nutrition, activity, faith and family partners for a rural middle school's response to adolescent diabetes risk.
Are there partners a school should avoid?
Partners whose interests conflict with the health goal, such as sugary drink sponsors in a diabetes prevention effort, can undermine trust and the program's message.