CHES Exam Prep 9 Week Study Plan

Week 1 — Part I: Assessment of Needs and Capacity

Difficulty: Heavy

What it covers:

• The role of the Certified Health Education Specialist and the seven Areas of Responsibility established by NCHEC

• Priority populations, health disparities, health equity, and the social determinants of health driving disparate outcomes

• The Healthy People framework and its role in aligning community-level assessment goals to national priorities

• Quantitative vs. qualitative data collection methods and when each is appropriate

• Reliable secondary data sources and surveillance systems — BRFSS, YRBSS, NHANES, NHIS, vital statistics — and their limitations

• PRECEDE-PROCEED and MAPP needs assessment models and when each is best suited

• Capacity, asset, and community readiness assessments

• Triangulation of multiple data sources to prioritize health problems and inform program planning

Print: 1 Mind Map, 3 Comparison Charts, 2 Cornell Notes pages

Study Tasks

☐ Read the Study Guide first — complete the High-Yield Objectives, Key Terms and Definitions, and Concept Overview sections before opening the chapter.

☐ Highlight as you read using the Made Easy Highlighting System on the page before — apply each color category consistently as you encounter the content.

☐ Anchor the foundational definitions before anything else. Health education is the planned combination of learning experiences; health promotion is the broader process of enabling people to control and improve their health through educational, environmental, regulatory, and organizational supports. The CHES exam tests the distinction directly, and every later Part assumes you can keep them straight.

☐ Master the disparity-equity-SDOH chain. Health disparities are differences closely tied to social, economic, or environmental disadvantage. Health equity is the goal — the attainment of the highest level of health for all. SDOH are the upstream conditions (the places people are born, live, learn, work, play, worship, and age) that produce disparities. Expect scenario questions that ask you to identify which level the intervention is targeting.

☐ Lock in the major secondary data sources. BRFSS is the premier state-level adult telephone survey for behaviors and chronic conditions. YRBSS surveys high school students for risk behaviors. NHANES combines interviews with physical exams. NHIS is the broadest U.S. household health interview survey. Vital statistics capture births, deaths, marriages, and divorces. Know which one you would pull for a given assessment question.

☐ Compare PRECEDE-PROCEED and MAPP head-to-head. PRECEDE-PROCEED is an 8-phase outcome-based planning model that starts with desired outcomes and works backward — best when you have a defined health problem and need a structured plan. MAPP is a community-driven strategic framework developed by NACCHO — best when local public health partners are leading and the priorities themselves still need community input. The exam tests model selection by scenario.

☐ Complete the Practice Questions for Part I in your quiz bank. Review every rationale — correct and incorrect.

How to Use Your Templates

☐ Mind Map: Central node = Assessment of Needs and Capacity. Main branches: Role of the CHES & Seven Areas of Responsibility → Priority Populations, Disparities & Equity → Social Determinants of Health → Healthy People Framework → Needs Assessment Process → Quantitative vs. Qualitative Data → Secondary Data Sources (BRFSS, YRBSS, NHANES, NHIS, vital statistics) → Planning Models (PRECEDE-PROCEED, MAPP) → Capacity, Asset & Community Readiness Assessment → Data Triangulation & Prioritization.

Comparison Charts:

☐ Chart 1 — PRECEDE-PROCEED vs. MAPP: Origin and developer, structure (phases vs. phases), starting point, driver (planner-led vs. community-led), best-fit scenario, and typical deliverable at completion.

☐ Chart 2 — Quantitative vs. Qualitative Data: Question type each answers, data form (numbers vs. words/images/observations), example methods, strengths, limitations, and when to combine the two through triangulation.

☐ Chart 3 — Secondary Data Sources (BRFSS, YRBSS, NHANES, NHIS, Vital Statistics): Population covered, data collection method, content focus, geographic granularity, and typical assessment question each is best suited to answer.

Cornell Notes:

☐ Page 1 — Cue questions: What are the seven Areas of Responsibility for the CHES, and which two carry the heaviest weight on the exam? What is the difference between health disparity, health equity, and a social determinant of health, and how do they connect causally?

☐ Page 2 — Cue questions: When would you select PRECEDE-PROCEED over MAPP for a community needs assessment, and what is the trade-off? What is community readiness, and how does its stage influence whether you launch a program now or build capacity first?

Week 2 — Part II: Planning Health Education and Promotion Programs

Difficulty: Heavy — High Yield

What it covers:

• The Health Belief Model (HBM) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) — the two foundational intrapersonal/interpersonal behavior theories

• Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), reciprocal determinism, and the four sources of self-efficacy

• The Transtheoretical Model's six stages of change and matching processes of change to the appropriate stage

• The Social Ecological Framework and designing multi-level interventions (intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, policy)

• Diffusion of Innovations — adopter categories and the characteristics that accelerate or impede uptake

• SMART goals, behavioral/learning/environmental objectives, and complete logic models linking inputs to long-term outcomes

• Selecting evidence-based interventions from The Community Guide, RTIPs, and Healthy People Evidence-Based Resources

• Cultural tailoring and health literacy principles in program design

Print: 1 Mind Map, 4 Comparison Charts, 3 Cornell Notes pages

Study Tasks

☐ Read the Study Guide first — complete the High-Yield Objectives, Key Terms and Definitions, and Concept Overview sections before opening the chapter.

☐ Highlight as you read using the Made Easy Highlighting System on the page before — apply each color category consistently as you encounter the content.

☐ Lock in the core constructs of each theory before attempting any quiz-bank questions. HBM = perceived susceptibility + severity + benefits + barriers + cues to action + self-efficacy. TPB = attitudes + subjective norms + perceived behavioral control → intention → behavior. SCT = reciprocal determinism among person, behavior, and environment, anchored by self-efficacy. TTM = the six stages (precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, termination) plus processes of change matched to each stage. Every theory question reduces to whether you can name the constructs and place them in the correct model.

☐ The Social Ecological Framework is tested as a level-identification skill. Intrapersonal (individual knowledge, attitudes), interpersonal (family, peers), organizational (worksite, school), community (norms, coalitions), and policy (laws, regulations). When the exam describes an intervention, identify which level it targets — and recognize that the strongest programs operate at multiple levels simultaneously.

☐ Diffusion of Innovations is two-part. Adopter categories: innovators (2.5%), early adopters (13.5%), early majority (34%), late majority (34%), laggards (16%). Characteristics of innovations that drive adoption: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, observability. Expect scenarios that ask which adopter category to target first or which innovation characteristic is limiting uptake.

☐ Master SMART goals and logic models because they appear across multiple Areas. SMART = Specific, Measurable, Achievable/Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound. A logic model links Inputs → Activities → Outputs → Short-term/Intermediate/Long-term Outcomes, with assumptions and external factors noted. Be able to write SMART objectives at the behavioral, learning, and environmental levels, and be able to construct a complete logic model from a program description.

☐ Complete the Practice Questions for Part II in your quiz bank. Review every rationale — correct and incorrect.

How to Use Your Templates

☐ Mind Map: Central node = Planning Health Education and Promotion Programs. Main branches: Health Belief Model → Theory of Planned Behavior → Social Cognitive Theory & Self-Efficacy → Transtheoretical Model & Stages of Change → Social Ecological Framework → Diffusion of Innovations → SMART Goals & Objectives → Logic Models → Evidence-Based Intervention Selection (Community Guide, RTIPs, Healthy People) → Cultural Tailoring & Health Literacy.

Comparison Charts:

☐ Chart 1 — Health Belief Model vs. Theory of Planned Behavior: Core constructs, dominant predictor of behavior, role of self-efficacy, best-fit application, and one limitation unique to each.

☐ Chart 2 — Social Cognitive Theory vs. Social Ecological Framework: Unit of analysis, key construct (self-efficacy vs. nested levels of influence), how each defines environment, intervention implication, and example program for each.

☐ Chart 3 — Transtheoretical Model Stages of Change: Stage definition, characteristic behavior, matched processes of change, intervention strategy, and one example message or activity per stage.

☐ Chart 4 — SMART Goal vs. Behavioral Objective vs. Learning Objective vs. Environmental Objective: What each specifies, who or what is the target, how it is measured, when it is achieved, and one example written for the same program at each level.

Cornell Notes:

☐ Page 1 — Cue questions: What are the six core constructs of the Health Belief Model, and which one was added later because the original five failed to predict sustained behavior change? What are the four sources of self-efficacy in Social Cognitive Theory, and which is the strongest?

☐ Page 2 — Cue questions: What are the six stages of the Transtheoretical Model, and what is the appropriate intervention strategy for someone in precontemplation versus action? How do you write a SMART behavioral objective, and what does it look like at each of the five SMART elements?

☐ Page 3 — Cue questions: What are the five levels of the Social Ecological Framework, and what does an intervention at each level look like in practice? What are the five characteristics of innovations that drive adoption in Diffusion of Innovations theory, and which one most commonly stalls uptake?

Week 3 — Part III: Implementation of Health Education and Promotion Programs

Difficulty: Heavy

What it covers:

• Implementation planning with realistic timelines, milestones, dependencies, and accountability assignments

• Project management tools including Gantt charts and Work Breakdown Structures (WBS)

• Pilot testing — design, conduct, and how pilot results inform full-scale implementation decisions

• Program fidelity, its five dimensions, and how to balance fidelity with appropriate adaptation

• Recruiting, training, supervising, and supporting paid staff and volunteers using adult learning principles

• Budget management during implementation — variance tracking, burn-rate analysis, and corrective action

• Facilitation methods and instructional strategies appropriate to audience, content, and learning objectives

• Process monitoring and mid-course corrections through Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles

• Stakeholder engagement using the IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation

Print: 1 Mind Map, 3 Comparison Charts, 2 Cornell Notes pages

Study Tasks

☐ Read the Study Guide first — complete the High-Yield Objectives, Key Terms and Definitions, and Concept Overview sections before opening the chapter.

☐ Highlight as you read using the Made Easy Highlighting System on the page before — apply each color category consistently as you encounter the content.

☐ The fidelity-adaptation tension is one of the most-tested concepts in this Part. The five dimensions of fidelity are adherence (delivered as designed), exposure/dose (amount delivered), quality of delivery, participant responsiveness, and program differentiation (unique elements preserved). Adaptation is sometimes necessary to fit context — but the exam will ask which adaptations are acceptable (surface-level: language, examples, channel) and which compromise the program's evidence base (deep-structure: changing the theory or core components).

☐ Master the PDSA cycle as your mid-course correction tool. Plan the change → Do (implement on a small scale) → Study (analyze the data) → Act (adopt, adapt, or abandon). PDSA is iterative — small cycles compound into systemic improvement. Expect scenarios where you have to identify which PDSA stage the team is in or what action comes next.

☐ Know the IAP2 Spectrum cold. Inform → Consult → Involve → Collaborate → Empower. The promise to the public increases at each level, and so does the impact of public input on the final decision. When a stakeholder asks "what was the point of my input," the answer depends on which level you promised them.

☐ Adult learning principles drive your facilitation strategy. Adults are self-directed, bring life experience, are problem-centered (not subject-centered), and need to know why they are learning something. Match facilitation methods to the goal: lecture for foundational knowledge, demonstration for skills, role-play for interpersonal scenarios, case study for application, small group for shared learning.

☐ Complete the Practice Questions for Part III in your quiz bank. Review every rationale — correct and incorrect.

How to Use Your Templates

☐ Mind Map: Central node = Implementation of Health Education and Promotion Programs. Main branches: Implementation Planning (timelines, milestones, dependencies) → Project Management Tools (Gantt, WBS) → Pilot Testing → Program Fidelity & Adaptation → Staff & Volunteer Management (recruitment, training, supervision) → Adult Learning Principles → Budget & Resource Management → Facilitation Methods & Instructional Strategies → Process Monitoring & PDSA Cycles → Stakeholder Engagement & IAP2 Spectrum.

Comparison Charts:

☐ Chart 1 — Fidelity vs. Adaptation: Definition, five dimensions of fidelity, surface-level vs. deep-structure adaptation, when each is appropriate, and the documentation required to defend the choice.

☐ Chart 2 — Gantt Chart vs. Work Breakdown Structure: What each shows, time orientation, level of decomposition, how each is built, and when each is the better tool during implementation planning.

☐ Chart 3 — IAP2 Spectrum (Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate, Empower): Goal at each level, promise to the public, public-input impact on decision, example technique, and a scenario where each level is the right choice.

Cornell Notes:

☐ Page 1 — Cue questions: What are the five dimensions of program fidelity, and what is the difference between an acceptable surface-level adaptation and an adaptation that compromises the evidence base? What is the purpose of a pilot test, and what three decisions does it inform before full-scale implementation?

☐ Page 2 — Cue questions: What are the four steps of the PDSA cycle, and how does an iterative series of small PDSA cycles drive continuous quality improvement? What are the five levels of the IAP2 Spectrum, and what promise does the planner make to the public at each level?

Week 4 — Part IV: Evaluation and Research

Difficulty: Heavy — High Yield

What it covers:

• The three types of evaluation — process, impact, and outcome — and which questions each answers

• Formative vs. summative evaluation and when each is used in the program life cycle

• Evaluation designs from strongest to weakest — RCTs, quasi-experimental, pre-post, post-only

• The 8 classic threats to internal validity and how design choices minimize each

• External validity and the trade-off with internal validity

• Reliability and validity in measurement and selecting instruments accordingly

• Descriptive and inferential statistics — statistical significance, effect size, and confidence intervals

• Thematic and content analysis of qualitative data, including coding and credibility strategies

• Dissemination of findings to scientific, practitioner, and community audiences

• The Belmont Report principles, the Common Rule, and IRB requirements for human subjects research

Print: 1 Mind Map, 4 Comparison Charts, 3 Cornell Notes pages

Study Tasks

☐ Read the Study Guide first — complete the High-Yield Objectives, Key Terms and Definitions, and Concept Overview sections before opening the chapter.

☐ Highlight as you read using the Made Easy Highlighting System on the page before — apply each color category consistently as you encounter the content.

☐ The process-impact-outcome trio is the single most-tested distinction in this Part. Process evaluation = was the program delivered as planned (reach, dose, fidelity)? Impact evaluation = did short-term and intermediate outcomes change (knowledge, attitudes, behavior)? Outcome evaluation = did long-term health outcomes change (morbidity, mortality, quality of life)? Match the evaluation type to the logic model row, not to the program phase — that is where most students lose points.

☐ Formative vs. summative is the second major distinction. Formative evaluation happens before and during the program to improve it (needs assessment, pilot testing, mid-course correction). Summative evaluation happens at or after program completion to judge it (impact and outcome evaluation). Formative shapes; summative scores.

☐ Memorize the 8 classic threats to internal validity. History, maturation, testing, instrumentation, statistical regression, selection, mortality (attrition), and selection-maturation interaction. Be able to recognize each in a scenario and name the design feature that minimizes it (control group, random assignment, blinding, pre-testing, etc.).

☐ Reliability is consistency; validity is accuracy. Reliability types: test-retest, inter-rater, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha). Validity types: face, content, construct, criterion (concurrent and predictive). A measure can be reliable without being valid, but it cannot be valid without being reliable. The exam tests this directly.

☐ Know the Belmont Report by heart. Three principles: respect for persons (autonomy → informed consent), beneficence (maximize benefit, minimize harm → risk-benefit analysis), and justice (fair selection of participants → equitable distribution of research benefits and burdens). The Common Rule operationalizes these principles through IRB review categories (exempt, expedited, full board) and informed consent requirements.

☐ Complete the Practice Questions for Part IV in your quiz bank. Review every rationale — correct and incorrect.

How to Use Your Templates

☐ Mind Map: Central node = Evaluation and Research. Main branches: Process Evaluation → Impact Evaluation → Outcome Evaluation → Formative vs. Summative → Evaluation Designs (RCT, quasi-experimental, pre-post) → Internal Validity & 8 Threats → External Validity → Reliability & Validity in Measurement → Quantitative Statistics (descriptive, inferential, significance, effect size, CI) → Qualitative Analysis (thematic, content, credibility) → Dissemination → Belmont Report, Common Rule & IRB.

Comparison Charts:

☐ Chart 1 — Process vs. Impact vs. Outcome Evaluation: What is being measured, where it sits on the logic model, example indicators, typical data sources, and the program decision each evaluation informs.

☐ Chart 2 — Formative vs. Summative Evaluation: When it occurs in the program life cycle, primary purpose, audience for the results, example methods, and how findings are used.

☐ Chart 3 — Reliability vs. Validity (with subtypes): Definition, subtypes (reliability: test-retest, inter-rater, internal consistency; validity: face, content, construct, criterion), how each is established, and which threats apply when each is compromised.

☐ Chart 4 — Belmont Report Principles (Respect for Persons, Beneficence, Justice): Definition of each principle, IRB application, example scenario where each principle is at stake, and the standard procedural safeguard tied to each.

Cornell Notes:

☐ Page 1 — Cue questions: What is the difference between process, impact, and outcome evaluation, and how does each connect to a specific row of the logic model? When in the program life cycle is formative evaluation used, and when is summative evaluation used?

☐ Page 2 — Cue questions: What are the 8 classic threats to internal validity, and what design strategy minimizes each? Why can a measure be reliable without being valid, but never valid without being reliable?

☐ Page 3 — Cue questions: What are the three principles of the Belmont Report, and how does each translate into a specific IRB requirement? What are the three IRB review categories, and what kinds of research fall into each?

Week 5 — Part V: Advocacy

Difficulty: Moderate–Heavy

What it covers:

• Defining advocacy in the context of health education and promotion

• The distinct forms — case, class/cause, peer, and self-advocacy

• The policy process: agenda-setting → formulation → adoption → implementation → evaluation

• Kingdon's Three Streams framework (problem, policy, politics) and identifying policy windows

• Policy levers at federal, state, and local levels — legislation, regulation, executive action, funding, taxation

• Coalition building and the stages-of-development framework

• The legal line between advocacy and lobbying under IRS rules for 501(c)(3) nonprofits, including the substantial part and 501(h) expenditure tests

• Direct vs. grassroots lobbying — what counts and what does not under federal regulations

• Media advocacy — framing for access vs. framing for content

• Reframing health issues from individual responsibility to systemic, structural, and policy framing

Print: 1 Mind Map, 3 Comparison Charts, 2 Cornell Notes pages

Study Tasks

☐ Read the Study Guide first — complete the High-Yield Objectives, Key Terms and Definitions, and Concept Overview sections before opening the chapter.

☐ Highlight as you read using the Made Easy Highlighting System on the page before — apply each color category consistently as you encounter the content.

☐ The advocacy vs. lobbying distinction is high-yield and frequently misunderstood. Advocacy is the broad set of activities that influence public opinion, policy, or systems — most of it is fully permitted for 501(c)(3) nonprofits. Lobbying is a specific subset that attempts to influence specific legislation, and it is restricted (not prohibited) under IRS rules. Know the substantial part test (the default rule) and the 501(h) election (the alternative — an expenditure-based test with bright-line limits). The exam will give you a scenario and ask whether the activity counts as lobbying or as permitted advocacy.

☐ Direct vs. grassroots lobbying. Direct lobbying is communication with a legislator (or staff) that states a position on specific legislation. Grassroots lobbying is communication with the general public that states a position on specific legislation and includes a call to action. Communications with a legislator without a position, or with the public without a call to action, generally do not count as lobbying. The distinction matters for both reporting and limits.

☐ Memorize Kingdon's Three Streams. The problem stream (a public problem gets attention), the policy stream (solutions exist and are ready), and the politics stream (the political climate is favorable). A policy window opens when all three streams converge. Policy entrepreneurs watch for that window and act fast. Expect scenario questions that ask which stream is currently driving a policy moment.

☐ Media advocacy has two framings. Framing for access is how you get coverage at all (newsworthiness — conflict, novelty, drama, local angle). Framing for content is the message itself once you have coverage (problem definition, attribution of responsibility, solutions). The reframe from individual responsibility to structural/policy framing is the single most important media advocacy move in health education.

☐ Complete the Practice Questions for Part V in your quiz bank. Review every rationale — correct and incorrect.

How to Use Your Templates

☐ Mind Map: Central node = Advocacy. Main branches: Defining Advocacy (case, class/cause, peer, self) → Policy Process (agenda-setting, formulation, adoption, implementation, evaluation) → Kingdon's Three Streams & Policy Windows → Policy Levers (legislation, regulation, executive action, funding, taxation) → Federal, State & Local Levels → Coalition Building & Stages of Development → Advocacy vs. Lobbying (substantial part test, 501(h)) → Direct vs. Grassroots Lobbying → Media Advocacy (framing for access vs. content) → Reframing from Individual to Structural.

Comparison Charts:

☐ Chart 1 — Advocacy vs. Lobbying (for 501(c)(3) Nonprofits): Definition, what activities qualify, what is permitted vs. restricted, the two IRS tests (substantial part vs. 501(h)), reporting requirements, and one example each of activity that does and does not count as lobbying.

☐ Chart 2 — Direct vs. Grassroots Lobbying: Target audience, required elements (position on specific legislation; call to action for grassroots), examples that count, examples that do not, and reporting implications under 501(h).

☐ Chart 3 — Kingdon's Three Streams (Problem, Policy, Politics): What each stream contains, how it independently evolves, what convergence creates (the policy window), the role of the policy entrepreneur, and one historical example of a window opening.

Cornell Notes:

☐ Page 1 — Cue questions: What is the legal distinction between advocacy and lobbying for a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, and how do the substantial part test and the 501(h) election differ? What activities count as direct lobbying versus grassroots lobbying versus neither?

☐ Page 2 — Cue questions: What are the three streams in Kingdon's framework, and what must happen for a policy window to open? What is the difference between framing for access and framing for content in media advocacy, and how does reframing from individual responsibility to structural framing change public discourse?

Week 6 — Part VI: Communication

Difficulty: Heavy

What it covers:

• Major health communication theories — Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM), and the Communication-Persuasion Matrix

• Health literacy at personal and organizational levels, plus plain-language and universal-precautions approaches

• Risk communication vs. crisis communication, and CDC's CERC principles for emergency communication

• Targeting, tailoring, and personalization in message design — and when to use each

• Communication channels (mass, social, interpersonal) selected by reach, richness, audience, and objective

• Social marketing — the 4 Ps and audience segmentation applied to behavior change campaigns

• Cultural competence frameworks — CLAS Standards, LEARN, PEN-3 — and culturally responsive communication

• Readability, suitability, and cultural appropriateness assessment with SMOG, Flesch-Kincaid, and SAM

Print: 1 Mind Map, 3 Comparison Charts, 2 Cornell Notes pages

Study Tasks

☐ Read the Study Guide first — complete the High-Yield Objectives, Key Terms and Definitions, and Concept Overview sections before opening the chapter.

☐ Highlight as you read using the Made Easy Highlighting System on the page before — apply each color category consistently as you encounter the content.

☐ ELM and EPPM are the two communication theories most likely to appear on the exam. ELM (Petty and Cacioppo): two routes to persuasion — the central route (deep cognitive processing of message content, when motivation and ability are high) and the peripheral route (surface cues and heuristics, when motivation or ability is low). EPPM (Witte): fear appeals work only when both perceived threat and perceived efficacy are high. If threat is high but efficacy is low, the audience flips into fear control (denial, avoidance) instead of danger control (protective behavior change). Every fear-appeal scenario on the CHES tests this rule.

☐ Targeting, tailoring, and personalization sit on a spectrum of specificity. Targeting = designing for a defined audience segment (e.g., young adults in rural counties). Tailoring = designing for individual characteristics drawn from assessment (e.g., a quit-smoking message that references the participant's reported barriers). Personalization = inserting individual data (e.g., the participant's name). Targeting and tailoring change content; personalization usually does not.

☐ Master CERC's six principles for emergency communication: be first, be right, be credible, express empathy, promote action, show respect. Crisis communication is reactive (something happened; restore trust); risk communication is proactive (warn or prepare). The exam tests scenario placement.

☐ Know the health literacy assessment tools. SMOG and Flesch-Kincaid measure readability (grade level). SAM (Suitability Assessment of Materials) measures broader suitability including content, literacy demand, graphics, layout, and cultural appropriateness. Aim for materials at or below 6th-grade reading level for the general public, lower for populations with limited literacy.

☐ Complete the Practice Questions for Part VI in your quiz bank. Review every rationale — correct and incorrect.

How to Use Your Templates

☐ Mind Map: Central node = Communication. Main branches: ELM & Two Routes to Persuasion → Extended Parallel Process Model (Threat × Efficacy) → Communication-Persuasion Matrix → Health Literacy (Personal & Organizational) → Plain Language & Universal Precautions → Risk vs. Crisis Communication & CERC → Targeting, Tailoring, Personalization → Communication Channels (Mass, Social, Interpersonal) → Social Marketing & 4 Ps → Cultural Competence (CLAS, LEARN, PEN-3) → Readability & Suitability Tools (SMOG, Flesch-Kincaid, SAM).

Comparison Charts:

☐ Chart 1 — ELM vs. EPPM: Theoretical focus (persuasion route vs. fear appeal mechanism), key constructs, predicted outcomes when conditions are met or violated, and example message designs for each.

☐ Chart 2 — Targeting vs. Tailoring vs. Personalization: Level of specificity, data required to design the message, what changes between audience members, resource intensity, and one example message at each level for the same campaign.

☐ Chart 3 — Risk Communication vs. Crisis Communication (with CERC overlay): Timing relative to the event, primary purpose, target audience, tone, and how each of CERC's six principles applies in each context.

Cornell Notes:

☐ Page 1 — Cue questions: What are the two routes of persuasion in the Elaboration Likelihood Model, and what audience conditions favor each? Under the Extended Parallel Process Model, when does a fear appeal trigger danger control versus fear control, and what design rule keeps you on the right side of that line?

☐ Page 2 — Cue questions: What are the six CERC principles for crisis communication, and what is the difference between risk and crisis communication? What is the recommended reading level for general-public health materials, and which assessment tool measures readability versus broader suitability?

Week 7 — Part VII: Leadership and Management

Difficulty: Moderate–Heavy

What it covers:

• The distinction between leadership and management

• Major leadership theories — transformational, transactional, servant, situational, and emotional intelligence

• Strategic planning — mission, vision, values, SWOT, and PEST analyses

• Program budgeting — line-item, program, performance, and zero-based budgets; direct vs. indirect costs

• Grant funding sources and competitive proposal writing aligned to funder priorities

• Personnel management through the full employment cycle — recruitment, hiring, supervision, performance evaluation, progressive discipline — within EEOC and Title VII requirements

• Coalition and partnership building using MOUs, backbone organization principles, and collective impact frameworks

• Continuous quality improvement — PDSA, Six Sigma DMAIC, Lean, and Donabedian's structure-process-outcome

• Conflict resolution using the Thomas-Kilmann modes and interest-based negotiation (Fisher and Ury)

Print: 1 Mind Map, 3 Comparison Charts, 2 Cornell Notes pages

Study Tasks

☐ Read the Study Guide first — complete the High-Yield Objectives, Key Terms and Definitions, and Concept Overview sections before opening the chapter.

☐ Highlight as you read using the Made Easy Highlighting System on the page before — apply each color category consistently as you encounter the content.

☐ Leadership theories are tested by scenario. Transformational leaders inspire followers to transcend self-interest through vision, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and idealized influence — best for organizational change. Transactional leadership trades rewards for performance — best for stable, well-defined operations. Servant leadership puts followers' growth first. Situational leadership adapts style (directing, coaching, supporting, delegating) to follower readiness. Emotional intelligence — self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, social skill — underlies all four.

☐ Know your four budget formats. Line-item lists expenses by category (personnel, supplies, travel). Program budgets organize expenses by program or service. Performance budgets tie funding to measurable outputs. Zero-based budgets require every line to be justified from zero each cycle. And know direct costs (attributable to a specific program — staff salaries, program materials) vs. indirect costs (shared overhead — rent, utilities, administration). Funders define indirect cost rates differently — read the RFP.

☐ The Thomas-Kilmann conflict modes sit on a 2×2 of assertiveness × cooperativeness. Competing (high assertive, low cooperative), accommodating (low assertive, high cooperative), avoiding (low on both), collaborating (high on both), and compromising (moderate on both). Best fit varies by stakes, time, and relationship. Pair this with Fisher and Ury's interest-based negotiation: separate people from problem, focus on interests not positions, invent options for mutual gain, insist on objective criteria.

☐ Continuous quality improvement methodologies have distinct flavors. PDSA = iterative small-cycle testing. Six Sigma DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) = data-heavy variation reduction. Lean = waste elimination and flow. Donabedian's structure-process-outcome triad is the conceptual scaffold for health-service quality. Be able to match the right methodology to the right improvement problem.

☐ Complete the Practice Questions for Part VII in your quiz bank. Review every rationale — correct and incorrect.

How to Use Your Templates

☐ Mind Map: Central node = Leadership and Management. Main branches: Leadership vs. Management → Leadership Theories (transformational, transactional, servant, situational, emotional intelligence) → Strategic Planning (mission, vision, values, SWOT, PEST) → Budget Formats (line-item, program, performance, zero-based) & Direct vs. Indirect Costs → Grant Funding & Proposal Writing → Personnel Management & EEOC/Title VII → Coalitions & Collective Impact → CQI Methodologies (PDSA, Six Sigma DMAIC, Lean, Donabedian) → Conflict Resolution (Thomas-Kilmann, Fisher & Ury).

Comparison Charts:

☐ Chart 1 — Transformational vs. Transactional vs. Servant vs. Situational Leadership: Core mechanism, what motivates followers, ideal context, one strength, and one limitation of each.

☐ Chart 2 — Budget Formats (Line-Item, Program, Performance, Zero-Based): What the budget organizes around, level of detail, how it is built, when it is the right choice, and one example funder or context that prefers each.

☐ Chart 3 — CQI Methodologies (PDSA, Six Sigma DMAIC, Lean, Donabedian): Origin, core unit of analysis, key tools, best-fit improvement problem, and how each is documented.

Cornell Notes:

☐ Page 1 — Cue questions: What is the difference between leadership and management, and which leadership theory best fits an organization in the middle of a major culture change? What are the four components of situational leadership, and how does the leader's style shift as follower readiness increases?

☐ Page 2 — Cue questions: What are the four major budget formats, and when is each the right choice? What are the five Thomas-Kilmann conflict modes, and how do you choose between collaborating and compromising in a high-stakes coalition disagreement?

Week 8 — Part VIII: Ethics and Professionalism

Difficulty: Moderate

What it covers:

• The Code of Ethics for the Health Education Profession (CNHEO) and its six articles of responsibility

• The four core ethical principles — autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice — and their application to practice dilemmas

• Confidentiality, privacy, and anonymity, and the HIPAA Privacy Rule in health education practice

• Informed consent — capacity, voluntariness, and full disclosure

• Conflicts of interest, dual relationships, and professional boundaries

• Mandatory reporting and duty-to-warn obligations

• Cultural humility as an ongoing self-reflective stance and integrating anti-racism into program design, evaluation, and policy

• Maintaining CHES certification through continuing education and career development across health education settings

Print: 1 Mind Map, 2 Comparison Charts, 1 Cornell Notes page

Study Tasks

☐ Read the Study Guide first — complete the High-Yield Objectives, Key Terms and Definitions, and Concept Overview sections before opening the chapter.

☐ Highlight as you read using the Made Easy Highlighting System on the page before — apply each color category consistently as you encounter the content.

☐ The four core ethical principles are tested in scenario form. Autonomy is the patient/participant's right to self-determination — the legal foundation of informed consent. Beneficence is the obligation to act in ways that promote well-being. Nonmaleficence is the duty to do no harm. Justice is the duty to distribute benefits and burdens fairly. Most ethical dilemmas pit two principles against each other; the exam asks which should guide the response and why.

☐ Confidentiality, privacy, and anonymity are NOT synonyms. Privacy is the participant's right to control access to themselves and their information. Confidentiality is the practitioner's duty to protect information already shared. Anonymity means the identity is unknown even to the practitioner (data cannot be linked back to the individual). Many CHES test items hinge on getting this distinction right.

☐ Informed consent requires three elements simultaneously. Capacity — the person can understand the information and the consequences. Voluntariness — no coercion or undue influence. Disclosure — purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, alternatives, confidentiality protections, and the right to withdraw. If any element is missing, consent is invalid.

☐ Cultural humility differs from cultural competence. Competence implies an end state (you have mastered another culture); humility is an ongoing self-reflective stance that acknowledges the limits of your own perspective, recognizes power imbalances, and commits to lifelong learning. Anti-racism extends this from individual interaction to organizational policy and program design.

☐ Complete the Practice Questions for Part VIII in your quiz bank. Review every rationale — correct and incorrect.

How to Use Your Templates

☐ Mind Map: Central node = Ethics and Professionalism. Main branches: Code of Ethics for the Health Education Profession (six articles) → Four Core Principles (autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice) → Confidentiality, Privacy, Anonymity → HIPAA Privacy Rule → Informed Consent (capacity, voluntariness, disclosure) → Conflicts of Interest & Dual Relationships → Mandatory Reporting & Duty to Warn → Cultural Humility & Anti-Racism → CHES Certification Maintenance & Career Development.

Comparison Charts:

☐ Chart 1 — Autonomy vs. Beneficence vs. Nonmaleficence vs. Justice: Definition, example application, an ethical dilemma where the principle conflicts with another, the principle that typically takes precedence in that dilemma, and the procedural safeguard tied to each (e.g., informed consent for autonomy).

☐ Chart 2 — Confidentiality vs. Privacy vs. Anonymity: Definition, who holds the right or duty, what is being protected, an example scenario where each applies, and how data collection or storage choices reinforce each.

Cornell Notes:

☐ Page 1 — Cue questions: What are the four core ethical principles, and which one is the foundation of informed consent? What is the difference between confidentiality, privacy, and anonymity, and how does each shape data handling in a health education program? What three elements must be present for informed consent to be valid, and what invalidates it?

Week 9 — Full Review and Exam Simulation

Your final week is not about learning new material — it is about consolidating everything you have built and proving it under exam conditions.

Review Tasks

☐ Re-draw one Mind Map from memory for each Part you feel least confident about. Check it against your original.

☐ Work through your Cornell Notes cue columns for every Part — cover the right-hand notes and answer from memory.

☐ Re-do any quiz bank questions you got wrong across all Parts. Focus on the rationales.

☐ Review the Common Mistakes, Rapid Review, and Self-Assessment Checklist sections for your two or three weakest Parts.

Exam Simulation

☐ Take the full-length CHES practice exam using the QR code in the back matter of this book. Complete it in one sitting, timed, as close to real exam conditions as possible.

☐ Review your emailed score report. Identify which Parts you missed most, and spend remaining time on those Parts' Rapid Review and application scenarios only.