Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper

To ensure a safer healthcare encounter for clients, proper nursing staffing levels must be handled at a national level. Patient hospitalizations and discharges take time since they need the nurse to serve one patient for long periods of time in order to educate the patient and their family. When a nurse spends a significant amount of time with a single client, the nurse’s other clients are basically disregarded during that time. Therefore, all healthcare institutions should have adequate staffing levels, according to my policy proposal.

A1a. Issue Selection

The topic of nurse staffing levels was chosen because it has a significant influence on patient safety. If staffing levels are lowered, patients will be safer because the primary nurse caring for them will have additional time to meet each client’s requirements. Consequently, nurses will have more time to accomplish crucial activities like drug preparation, which will prevent mistakes that might lead to unpleasant or sentinel occurrences. In addition, because nursing is such a physically and intellectually demanding career, lowering nurse staffing levels may help nurses avoid burnout and, as a result, assist healthcare institutions in maintaining their nursing staff Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

A1b. Issue Relevance

Avoidable unfavorable health events cause over 400,000 fatalities in the United States each year (Nauman et al., 2020). Patient safety is a healthcare catastrophe. A link between nurse staffing levels and client safety and survival outcomes is evident (Harrington et al., 2020). Clients experience the repercussions when prescriptions or other critical patient care is neglected, or medication mistakes are made as a result of nurses being overworked, and these repercussions may be lethal. When clinicians are short-staffed, it is also more difficult to provide adequate discharge instruction to patients and families, resulting in readmission. Acceptable staffing levels will result in improved communication, less burden for nurses, and better patient outcomes.

A1c. Financial Impact

For the introduction and preparation phase, my manager predicts that hiring and training a new nurse will cost $30,000-$40,000. Adequate staffing levels would help my healthcare institution, as well as other healthcare institutions, financially in a variety of ways. Compensations are dependent on a variety of factors, including client satisfaction and readmissions. Clients would get safer care if adequate staffing levels were implemented, resulting in fewer falls and medication mistakes. Providing safer treatment will result in increased patient satisfaction and reduced readmission rates, which will result in greater reimbursements, helping not just my hospital but also other healthcare institutions financially. It is reasonable to believe that the entire cost of employing a few more team members to lower staffing levels would assist every healthcare institution financially Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

A2. Personal Values

My principles are integrity and doing the correct thing even when no one is looking because it is the proper thing. Beneficence is doing what is beneficial for patients, and nonmaleficence means not causing damage to them (Ahmed, Ali & Mahmoud, 2020). Patient safety is a top concern. Establishing safe nurse staffing levels depending on medical sensitivity, rather than merely the number of clients being attended to, is critical for reducing mistakes caused by understaffing. Adequate nurse staffing levels will help me maintain my personal beliefs by providing me with more time to serve my patients with safer, higher-quality treatment.

 

A2a. Ethical Principle or Theory

Beneficence is an essential value to me since I passionately trust in doing what is best for my clients. The fundamental obligation of a nurse, as pointed out by the American Nurses Association (ANA) (2015), is to care for the client. I act as a liaison between my patients, their families, and the physician, which entails lobbying for what is ideal for my client with the family and the physician. I am also accountable for giving my patient the adequate treatment possible. Due to personnel shortages, it is difficult to spend the required time with every client or family member to make sure they comprehend their drugs, take them, treatment choices, and any adverse effects of either. Besides, I am accountable for ensuring that they grasp the exams being conducted and why, and if they do not, getting the physician to clarify in simpler words what he is prescribing and why, and also the findings of those screenings and any discharge training to guarantee they achieve the best potential outcome.

The Top-Down Approach to Policy Advocacy

The facility I am employed in uses the top-down approach for all policies. According to the director, this means that the managers determine the larger goals and make the decisions that then filter down to the employees who will complete the tasks to enable the facility to meet those goals. Larger scale policies such as statewide policies will be addressed by Montana State Senators Dains and Tester Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

B1. Decision Maker

The policy change I am recommending will be presented to Montana State senators Dains and Tester for approval.

B1a. Explanation

 All policies at the place where I work are developed using the top-down technique. As per the director, this implies that management sets the more significant objectives and makes choices that are then passed down to the workers who accomplish the tasks that allow the facility to fulfill those objectives. Montana State Senators Dains and Tester will discuss larger-scale matters such as statewide regulations.

Research studies have found a link between patient-to-nurse levels and acquired patient illnesses. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2019), over two million individuals will get infected while receiving treatment for other ailments, and nearly 120,000 of these individuals will die consequently. In addition, when departments are understaffed, certain patient services are missed or ignored in a rush to care for several patients. The failure to provide these services might result in unfavorable or dangerous events for patients.

B2. Challenges

Senators Dains and Tester may encounter a number of challenges in their efforts to adopt a required policy to maintain appropriate nurse staffing levels. Firstly, healthcare advocates may claim that required staffing levels will limit nurse independence, leaving teams with little flexibility for modification or changes. The American Nurses Association, for instance, advocates for staffing approaches that allow every nursing department to staff based on patient requirements, resource availability, and staff nurses competence (American Nurses Association, n.d).

Furthermore, they may claim that the new regulation would result in a shortage of nurses since institutions would need to recruit many additional nurses to comply with the current standards. There is fear that while additional nurses would be needed, certain facilities will not have sufficient nurses, making them vulnerable to breaches (National Nurses United, n.d) Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

Finally, health organizations would claim that the expense of recruiting more nurses would be too expensive. In Montana, for example, they predict a rise in costs of up to $800 million annually, with minimal anticipated investments.

B3. Options and Interventions

            The initial choice for Senators Dains and Tester is to oppose the proposed policy adjustments and keep things as they are. This choice will not affect staffing levels, client safety, or reimbursement revenue. Senators Dains and Tester’s second option is to adopt the proposed policy modifications with revisions as they see fit. Adopting the policy suggestion with changes, such as temporary employment, might result in enhanced staffing levels, improved patient safety, and increased compensation. Temporary staffing employees, on the other hand, are not always fully trained or available, and their pay is often greater than those of permanent employees. Accepting the proposed regulatory adjustments and implementing safe staffing levels depending on medical awareness in Montana is the third choice. This alternative will give all patients with safer treatment, resulting in improved patient outcomes. It will also help healthcare institutions provide safer, better-quality treatment, resulting in greater patient satisfaction levels. Additional money will be generated as a result of greater reimbursements. For patients, nurses, and healthcare institutions, this is the most outstanding choice.

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

B4. Course of Action

Senators Dains and Tester will have to be convincing when putting this idea into legislation since it will almost certainly face opposition. The senators should therefore offer scientific data showing the advantages of healthy nurse staffing levels for nurses and patients when the panel gathers to address the proposed policy change. The first issue, as stated earlier, is the notion that nurses would end up losing their independence to personnel based on particular requirements. Since nursing staff are seldom engaged in staffing choices, senators may utilize a team of nurses to enlighten the Senate about how staff tasks are determined and to highlight that nurse leaders or coordinators are the ones who determine all of the nursing staffing choices. Senators Dains and Tester might address the second problem, which concerns a nurse shortage, by citing data from Montana that demonstrates the nurse shortage deficit narrowed dramatically when mandated staffing levels were implemented (National Nurses United, n.d). A team of nurses might also come before the panel and talk about the challenges they experience in providing safe health care to a rising number of patients with more complicated requirements. In regard to the original expenses to healthcare institutions, the two senators could show that the advantages of the policy change surpass the original cost surge of recruiting necessary nurses. According to National Nurses United (n.d), healthy nurse staffing levels lead to reduced poor patient outcomes and greater nurse retention, resulting in savings of up to $5 billion per facility Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

B5. Success of the Policy Brief

The proposed policy change’s primary achievement is that it has been declared favorable to all patients and has the backing of Senators Tester and Dains. Another accomplishment of the recommended policy change is the presentation to Congress of the legislation suggested by the Senators through the Committee of Hearings. The policy’s ultimate accomplishment will be determined by Congress authorization. Staffing levels that are better and provide improved health care delivery will be a long-term achievement. After the legislation is approved, sensitive patient incidents would reduce by 25 percent, nurse retention will rise by 20 percent, and compensation rates for healthcare institutions will rise by 20 percent.

The Bottom-up Approach to Policy Advocacy

The “bottom – up” technique to policy advocacy, as per Alan Brower, Emergency Department Director, entails obtaining public and staff feedback and leveraging that feedback to build institutional objectives.

C1. Identified Organization or Community

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is a collaborator for acceptable staffing levels. This organization’s objective is to enhance the performance of healthcare institutions. For years, adequate staffing levels and care quality have been a nationwide problem. AHRQ’s engagement in fostering secure high-quality patient care extends throughout the country.

C1a. Summary of Expressed Interest

According to AHRQ (2021), there is a definite correlation between patient safety and nurse staffing levels. The primary objective of the AHRQ is to guarantee patient safety in the field of healthcare. They accomplish so by employing research and evidence-based practices. They would help in having the bill passed in Montana and around the country.

C2. Community-Based Participatory Research

Principles one, two, and nine of the CBPR will be used in engaging with the people to achieve the desired change in policy.

  • Principle 1- this involves seeing the community as a basis of identification. The principle emphasizes the significance of community for individuals. Involving the people in strategic planning will guarantee that they support the essential policy shift.
  • Principle 2- entails capitalizing on the community’s resources and capabilities. People in the community possess varying knowledge and understanding levels in the field of healthcare, and their varying levels of competence may contribute vital input into policy reform.
  • Principle 9- Because it entails a lengthy procedure and a determination to long-term achievement, this principle assures legislators and the public that we are committed to devoting the resources and time required not just to complete the policy reform but also to secure the reform’s long-term accomplishments Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

C2a. Approach and Collaboration

I may contact the right persons for help with the policy concern by calling the AHRQ directly or sending an email. Details on community engagement strategies will be addressed and coordinated after a contact individual has been identified. In addition, I will attend a peer evaluation conference and provide or receive suggestions to help with the change in policy communication to the community, other employees, and administration. Recommendations on how to explain the policy shift to Senators Tester and Dains and would be appreciated and taken into consideration.

C2b. Goal Alignment

Multiple reports on the AHRQ site link to the necessity for better nurse staffing levels and unfavorable health effects when staffing is not adequate for patient awareness degrees, or there are insufficient nursing staff to complete everyday patient duties correctly. The many research papers they mention and the evidence they offer contribute to the new policy plan’s objective alignment. Patients in all healthcare institutions will benefit from improved care delivery since there will be fewer unpleasant occurrences and better treatment outcomes.

C2c. Action Steps

The very initial move in implementing the change in policy will be to examine my organization’s staffing level and estimate how much extra personnel is required to ensure a better staffing level. The panel will then be aligned. A panel moderator will be chosen to appear at our discussions; this moderator might or might not be a part of the AHRQ or an associate, depending on who is available to meet. The public, patients, and families will then be encouraged to make recommendations or comments, as well as share their encounters with staffing and other problems during medical visits, in a public meeting. Following that, a conference with hospital administration will be conducted to deliver the panel’s conclusions. Lastly, reflecting on the conclusions from the prior sessions and the policy developed to be given to Senators Tester and Dains, a session will be undertaken to codify the policy.

C2d. Roles and Responsibilities

Participants of the team will perform various functions:

  • There will be a committee coordinator, ideally from the AHRQ. Still, if that is not possible, the coordinator will be a hard-working nurse practitioner with many years of medical expertise who is also well-versed in public policy analysis and makes sure that the meetings are informative and enlightening. The coordinator will act as a community awareness advocate for the policy change initiative, addressing client concerns.
  • The panel will be led by an appointed panel chairperson who will schedule conferences and meeting places and inform the members of any modifications in activities.
  • The panel will nominate a member of the community who has substantial knowledge about a negative outcome and can demonstrate the need for appropriate staffing levels and is committed to communicating openly about it.
  • The other members of the panel will support the panel chairperson by performing studies, giving presentations, setting up conferences, and coordinating with other public organizations to help coordinate policy objectives across the community and state Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

C2e. Key Elements of Evaluation Plan

Considering the community as a core of identity is the first CBPR principle we preferred to use.  This principle will be used by our team to generate understanding of the necessity of this policy shift among a wide group of stakeholders and nurses. It will assist us in achieving our objectives by recognizing the community’s ideas and perspectives.

Another CBPR principle we choose to implement is to capitalize on the community’s resources and capabilities. We will use this approach by contacting other nurses and rallying them around healthy nurse staffing levels. This principle will enable us fulfill our objectives by creating recognition throughout the country through the community.

Finally, we chose to employ the CBPR principle of disseminating results to all stakeholders and including them in the larger dissemination phase.  Our organization will implement this principle by collaborating with the AHRQ to organize conferences and disseminating information via social media and the AHRQ’s website. We will be able to disseminate the policy proposal locally, regionally, and nationally if we follow this principle.

C2f. Community/Organization Plan

The community is the starting point for the bottom-up approach (Saefullah, 2017). A bottom-up strategy will be guaranteed by soliciting community feedback and incorporating community people on the panel. The effectiveness of a policy change depends on focusing healthcare reforms on the individuals who would benefit from them. The public will not gain from the policy change or be motivated to ensure that the policy change is effective if the panel does not grasp the public’s needs or interests.

Effectiveness of the Two Different Approaches

Regulations come from the top-down, whereas the report card comes from the bottom up (Callon et al., 2018)). According to me, the top-down strategy involves governments and administration making choices with no or little involvement from employees or involved members of the community. This strategy works because the administration and legislators make the choices; it does not need panels or participation from employees and the community. Therefore it is less costly and time-consuming to implement. The bottom-up strategy starts with the members of the community, including their interests and requirements. To guarantee the effectiveness of the suggested change in policy, a team comprised of local residents, employees, and support of a more significant body like the AHRQ is required. This strategy is more successful because it is community-oriented. The primary aim of the proposed policy change is to guarantee that all people in the community get better care.

D1. Strengths of Each Approach

Legislators and administration will benefit from the top-down strategy since it does not need teams or feedback from employees and people in the community. This technique does not need large amounts of revenue or assets for extensive study, and it will minimize expenses for healthcare institutions. The bottom-up strategy starts with the people of the community with their interests and requirements. To be effective, policy reform must begin at the grassroots level. Local people must be allowed to share their experiences about unfavorable occurrences and what they believe may have triggered them. What may be addressed, like appropriate staffing levels, guarantees that such unfavorable circumstances do not harm other people in the community. Better compensation will result from more affirmative client reviews and higher ratings, demonstrating the effectiveness of the bottom-up technique to the suggested change in policy.

D2. Challenges of Each Approach

One of the drawbacks of a top-down strategy is that local people and nurses will think they do not have a say in the policy shift and will be resistant to it. Employees might feel unappreciated and pursue new jobs, or they may choose not to enforce the proposed policy modification regulations. On the other hand, the bottom-up strategy has several drawbacks, such as a lack of cohesiveness when choices are made at many levels. There will be feedback from a variety of sources, some of which may have opposing goals. Another significant problem is egotistical conflict. When numerous individuals are given the authority to make choices and suggest amendments, there is a possibility that egos may collide if there is a dispute. This ego conflict may also hinder efficiency, which is detrimental when attempting to enact a public policy change swiftly.

D3. Most Effective Approach

The bottom-up strategy, I feel, is more successful since it is community-oriented, and the purpose of the proposed policy change is to assure a greater standard of quality care for all local residents. This will assist in guaranteeing that all members of the community who are provided with care achieve good outcomes and are content with the healthcare institution, guaranteeing its long-term sustainability Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

 

 

References

Ahmed, A., Ali, H.S., & Mahmoud, M. A. (2020). Prioritizing Well-being of Patients through Consideration of Ethical Principles in Healthcare Settings: Concepts and Practices. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 11(5), 643-648. https://www.bibliomed.org/mnsfulltext/196/196-1595850317.pdf?1622193856

AHRQ. (2021). Nursing and patient safety. PSNet. https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primer/nursing-and-patient-safety

American Nurses Association. (2015). Code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements. Nursesbooks.org. https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/nursing-excellence/ethics/code-of-ethics-for-nurses/coe-view-only

American Nurses Association. (n.d). Nurse staffing advocacy. https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/nurse-staffing/nurse-staffing-advocacy/

Callon, W., Beach, M. C., Links, A. R., Wasserman, C., & Boss, E. F. (2018). An expanded framework to define and measure shared decision-making in dialogue: A ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approach. Patient Education and Counseling, 101(8), 1368-1377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2018.03.014

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019, June 3). Healthcare-associated infections | HAI | CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/hai/

Collins, S. E., Clifasefi, S. L., Stanton, J., The LEAP Advisory Board, Straits, K. J., Gil-Kashiwabara, E., Rodriguez Espinosa, P., Nicasio, A. V., Andrasik, M. P., Hawes, S. M., Miller, K. A., Nelson, L. A., Orfaly, V. E., Duran, B. M., & Wallerstein, N. (2018). Community-based participatory research (CBPR): Towards equitable involvement of community in psychology research. American Psychologist, 73(7), 884-898. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000167

Harrington, C., Dellefield, M. E., Halifax, E., Fleming, M. L., & Bakerjian, D. (2020). Appropriate nurse staffing levels for U.S. nursing homes. Health Services Insights, 13, 117863292093478. https://doi.org/10.1177/1178632920934785

National Nurses United. (n.d.). Montana. https://www.nationalnursesunited.org/state/montana

Nauman, J., Soteriades, E. S., Hashim, M., Govender, R., Al Darmaki, R. S., Al Falasi, R. J., Ojha, S. K., Masood-Husain, S., Javaid, S. F., & Khan, M. A. (2020). Global incidence and mortality trends due to adverse effects of medical treatment, 1990–2017: A systematic analysis from the global burden of diseases, injuries and risk factors study. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7265

Saefullah, K. (2018). Sustainable community development in rural and urban areas. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 145, 012106. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/145/1/012106

Alicia Hicks Ask for Help Print UUT2 — UUT TASK 1 POLICY, POLITICS, AND GLOBAL HEALTH TRENDS — C159 PRFA — UUT2 TASK OVERVIEWSUBMISSIONSEVALUATION REPORT COMPETENCIES INTRODUCTION REQUIREMENTS RUBRIC COMPETENCIES 7007.1.1 : Organization and Financing Healthcare The graduate analyzes the organization of healthcare delivery and financing systems in the United States and other nations. 7007.1.2 : Policy Process The graduate analyzes the historical, economic, and political factors that affect healthcare policy development and the impact of those policies on healthcare cost, quality, and access. 7007.1.3 : Effects of Legal and Regulatory Policies The graduate analyzes the effect of major legal and regulatory policies on nursing practice, healthcare delivery, and health outcomes for individual, families, and communities. 7007.1.4 : Ethical Theories Applied to Nurses’ Policy Positions The graduate analyzes the values that drive policies. 7007.1.5 : Advocate for Policies That Improve the Health of the Public and the Profession of Nursing The graduate analyzes strategies that healthcare advocates use to affect policies with the goal of improving the public health and the profession of nursing. INTRODUCTION For this assessment, you will be required to develop and thoroughly analyze a public policy in order to advocate for one that improves the health of the public and/or the nursing profession globally (local, state, national, or international). To do this, you will reflect on several aspects of being a policy maker within the nursing position. A few things to consider are: • Why did you select the health or nursing profession policy issue? • How does this issue affect nursing practice, healthcare delivery, and health outcomes for individual, families, and/or communities? • What are the values and the ethical positions that underpin your perspectives? • What are the criteria you will use to evaluate the success (outcomes) of your proposed policy change? By using both a top-down and a bottom-up approach, you will analyze and bring the nursing perspective to policy makers and stakeholders. Identifying the values and ethical perspectives that underpin your position, you will develop criteria to evaluate the success of your work Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper.

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

This will lead to a created a policy brief that can be sent to decision makers and created a plan to work with an organization/community to promote policy change at the local level. To guide you to your conclusion, using nursing research to support your position is vital. This should include principles of community-based participatory research (CBPR). REQUIREMENTS Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. An originality report is provided when you submit your task that can be used as a guide. Professional Communications is a required aspect to pass this task. Completion of a spell check and grammar check prior to submitting your final work is strongly recommended. You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course. Note: Your submission may take the form of an essay, multimedia presentation, etc. Be sure to cover each prompt in sufficient detail and support no matter what form you use. A. Prepare your reflection essay (suggested length of no more than of 3 pages) of the values and ethics of a public policy issue by doing the following: 1. Analyze a health or nursing profession public policy issue that impacts a group of people and requires a policy change. a. Discuss why you selected this public policy issue. Note: If you select a local policy, be sure your discussion reflects how the policy will affect more than a single unit, department, or organization. b. Discuss the relevance of the public policy issue to the health or the nursing profession, using two pieces of academically appropriate literature from the last five years. c. Describe the financial impact of the public policy on an organization or on a community. 2. Analyze how your values impact your position on the public policy issue. a. Discuss the ethical principle (e.g., autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice) or theory that underpins your perspective. B. Develop a policy brief (suggested length of no more than 6 pages) for the public policy issue discussed in part A in which you do the following: 1. Identify the decision maker (name and title) who will receive the policy brief. a. Explain why the public policy issue requires the decision maker’s attention, using relevant nursing research from the last five years to support your position. 2. Discuss the main challenges of addressing the selected public policy issue. 3. Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper

Discuss the primary options and/or interventions for the decision maker, including why they are tangible. 4. Propose a persuasive course of action for the decision maker, including ways to avoid the challenges identified in part B2. 5. Discuss how you will evaluate the success of your policy brief (top-down approach). C. Create a plan (suggested length of no more than 3 pages) for working with an organization or a community to address the public policy issue analyzed in part A by doing the following: 1. Identify an organization or community that has expressed interest in your selected health or nursing profession public policy issue. a. Summarize evidence supporting why the organization or community has expressed interest in the selected public policy issue. 2. Identify three CBPR principles you could use to work with the organization or community to address a policy change for the public policy issue. a. Explain how you could approach and collaborate with the organization or community. b. Discuss how the goal of the community or organization aligns with your goal for the selected public policy issue. c. Discuss the action steps that need to be taken to achieve your goal from part C2b. d. Discuss the possible roles/responsibilities of the community or organization members, including problem-solving and capacity-building roles. e. Discuss key elements of developing a collaborative evaluation plan, using CBPR principles. f. Discuss how you will evaluate the success of your community or organization plan (bottom-up approach). D. Analyze (suggested length of 1 page) the strengths and challenges of the top-down and bottom-up approaches in achieving policy change(s) to support your selected public policy issue by doing the following: 1. Discuss the strengths of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. 2. Discuss the challenges of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. 3. Discuss which approach you would recommend as the most effective to address the selected public policy issue. E. When you use sources, include all in-text citations and references in APA format. Note: When using sources to support ideas and elements in an assessment, the submission MUST include APA formatted in-text citations with a corresponding reference list for any direct quotes or paraphrasing. It is not necessary to list sources that were consulted if they have not been quoted or paraphrased in the text of the assessment. File Restrictions File name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! – _ . * ‘ ( ) File size limit: 200 MB File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z RUBRIC ARTICULATION OF RESPONSE (CLARITY, ORGANIZATION, MECHANICS) UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate provides unsatisfactory articulation of response. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides weak articulation of response. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides limited articulation of response. COMPETENT The candidate provides adequate articulation of response. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides substantial articulation of response. A1:PUBLIC POLICY ISSUE UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a plausible analysis of a health or nursing profession public policy issue that impacts a group of people and requires a policy change. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a plausible analysis, with no detail, of a health or nursing profession public policy issue that impacts a group of people and requires a policy change. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a plausible analysis, with limited detail, of a health or nursing profession public policy issue that impacts a group of people and requires a policy change. COMPETENT The candidate provides a plausible analysis, with adequate detail, of a health or nursing profession public policy issue that impacts a group of people and requires a policy change. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a plausible analysis, with substantial detail, of a health or nursing profession public policy issue that impacts a group of people and requires a policy change. A1A:ISSUE SELECTION UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper

The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of why the public policy issue was selected. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of why the public policy issue was selected. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of why the public policy issue was selected. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of why the public policy issue was selected. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of why the public policy issue was selected. A1B:ISSUE RELEVANCE UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the relevance of this public policy issue to health or the nursing profession, using 2 pieces of academically appropriate literature from the last five years. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no support, of the relevance of this public policy issue to health or the nursing profession, using 2 pieces of academically appropriate literature from the last five years. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited support, of the relevance of this public policy issue to health or the nursing profession, using 2 pieces of academically appropriate literature from the last five years. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate support, of the relevance of this public policy issue to health or the nursing profession, using 2 pieces of academically appropriate literature from the last five years. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial support, of the relevance of this public policy issue to health or the nursing profession, using 2 pieces of academically appropriate literature from the last five years. A1C:FINANCIAL IMPACT UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide an accurate description of the financial impact of the public policy on an organization or on a community. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides an accurate description, with no detail, of the financial impact of the public policy on an organization or on a community. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides an accurate description, with limited detail, of the financial impact of the public policy on an organization or on a community. COMPETENT The candidate provides an accurate description, with adequate detail, of the financial impact of the public policy on an organization or on a community. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides an accurate description, with substantial detail, of the financial impact of the public policy on an organization or on a community. A2:PERSONAL VALUES UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a plausible analysis of how the candidate’s values impact the candidate’s position on the public policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a plausible analysis, with no detail, of how the candidate’s values impact the candidate’s position on the public policy issue. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a plausible analysis, with limited detail, of how the candidate’s values impact the candidate’s position on the public policy issue. COMPETENT The candidate provides a plausible analysis, with adequate detail, of how the candidate’s values impact the candidate’s position on the public policy issue. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a plausible analysis, with substantial detail, of how the candidate’s values impact the candidate’s position on the public policy issue. A2A:ETHICAL PRINCIPLE OR THEORY UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the ethical principle or theory that underpins the candidate’s perspective. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the ethical principle or theory that underpins the candidate’s perspective. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the ethical principle or theory that underpins the candidate’s perspective. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the ethical principle or theory that underpins the candidate’s perspective. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the ethical principle or theory that underpins the candidate’s perspective. B1:DECISION MAKER UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not identify the appropriate decision maker (name and title) who will receive the policy brief. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD Not applicable. MINIMALLY COMPETENT Not applicable. COMPETENT Not applicable. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate identifies the appropriate decision maker (name and title) who will receive the policy brief. B1A:EXPLANATION UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of why the public policy requires the decision maker’s attention, using relevant nursing research from the last five years to support the position. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of why the public policy requires the decision maker’s attention, using no relevant nursing research from the last five years to support the position. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of why the public policy requires the decision maker’s attention, using limited relevant nursing research from the last five years to support the position. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of why the public policy requires the decision maker’s attention, using adequate relevant nursing research from the last five years to support the position. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of why the public policy requires the decision maker’s attention, using substantial relevant nursing research from the last five years to support the position. B2:CHALLENGES UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the main challenges of addressing the selected public policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the main challenges of addressing the selected public policy issue. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the main challenges of addressing the selected public policy issue. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the main challenges of addressing the selected public policy issue. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the main challenges of addressing the selected public policy issue. Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

B3:OPTIONS/INTERVENTIONS UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the primary options and/or interventions for the decision maker, including why they are tangible. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the primary options and/or interventions for the decision maker, including why they are tangible. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the primary options and/or interventions for the decision maker, including why they are tangible. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the primary options and/or interventions for the decision maker, including why they are tangible. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the primary options and/or interventions for the decision maker, including why they are tangible. B4:COURSE OF ACTION UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide an appropriate proposal for a persuasive course of action for the decision maker, including ways to avoid the challenges identified in part B2. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides an appropriate proposal, with no support, for a persuasive course of action for the decision maker, including ways to avoid the challenges identified in part B2. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides an appropriate proposal, with limited support, for a persuasive course of action for the decision maker, including ways to avoid the challenges identified in part B2. COMPETENT The candidate provides an appropriate proposal, with adequate support, for a persuasive course of action for the decision maker, including ways to avoid the challenges identified in part B2. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides an appropriate proposal, with substantial support, for a persuasive course of action for the decision maker, including ways to avoid the challenges identified in part B2. B5:SUCCESS OF POLICY BRIEF UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how the candidate will evaluate the success of the policy brief (a top-down approach). DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of how the candidate will evaluate the success of the policy brief (a top-down approach). MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of how the candidate will evaluate the success of the policy brief (a top-down approach). COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of how the candidate will evaluate the success of the policy brief (a top-down approach). HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of how the candidate will evaluate the success of the policy brief (a top-down approach). C1:IDENTIFIED ORGANIZATION OR COMMUNITY UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not identify an organization or community that has expressed interest in the selected health or nursing profession public policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD Not applicable MINIMALLY COMPETENT Not applicable COMPETENT Not applicable HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate identifies an organization or community that has expressed interest in the selected health or nursing profession public policy issue. C1A:SUMMARY OF EXPRESSED INTEREST UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical summary of evidence supporting why the organization or community has expressed interest in the selected public policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical summary, with no detail, of evidence supporting why the organization or community has expressed interest in the selected public policy issue. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical summary, with limited detail, of evidence supporting why the organization or community has expressed interest in the selected public policy issue. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical summary, with adequate detail, of evidence supporting why the organization or community has expressed interest in the selected public policy issue. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical summary, with substantial detail, of evidence supporting why the organization or community has expressed interest in the selected public policy issue. C2:CBPR PRINCIPLES UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not identify 3 CBPR principles the candidate could use to work with the organization or community to address a policy change for the public policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD Not applicable. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate accurately identifies 1-2 CBPR principles the candidate could use to work with the organization or community to address a policy change for the public policy issue. COMPETENT Not applicable HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate accurately identifies 3 CBPR principles the candidate could use to work with the organization or community to address a policy change for the public policy issue. C2A:APPROACH AND COLLABORATION UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how the candidate could approach and collaborate with the organization or community. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of how the candidate could approach and collaborate with the organization or community. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of how the candidate could approach and collaborate with the organization or community. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of how the candidate could approach and collaborate with the organization or community. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of how the candidate could approach and collaborate with the organization or community. C2B:GOAL ALIGNMENT UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how the goal of the community or organization aligns with the candidate’s goal for the selected public policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of how the goal of the community or organization aligns with the candidate’s goal for the selected public policy issue. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of how the goal of the community or organization aligns with the candidate’s goal for the selected public policy issue. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of how the goal of the community or organization aligns with the candidate’s goal for the selected public policy issue. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of how the goal of the community or organization aligns with the candidate’s goal for the selected public policy issue. C2C:ACTION STEPS UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the action steps that need to be taken to achieve the candidate’s goal from part C2b. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the action steps that need to be taken to achieve the candidate’s goal from part C2b. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the action steps that need to be taken to achieve the candidate’s goal from part C2b. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the action steps that need to be taken to achieve the candidate’s goal from part C2b. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the action steps that need to be taken to achieve the candidate’s goal from part C2b. C2D:ROLES/RESPONSIBILITIES UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the possible roles/responsibilities of community or organization members, including problem-solving and capacity-building roles. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the possible roles/responsibilities of community or organization members, including problem-solving and capacity-building roles. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the possible roles/responsibilities of community or organization members, including problem-solving and capacity-building roles. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the possible roles/responsibilities of community or organization members, including problem-solving and capacity-building roles. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the possible roles/responsibilities of community or organization members, including problem-solving and capacity-building roles. C2E:KEY ELEMENTS OF EVALUATION PLAN UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of key elements of developing a collaborative evaluation plan, using CBPR principles. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of key elements of developing a collaborative evaluation plan, using CBPR principles. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of key elements of developing a collaborative evaluation plan, using CBPR principles. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of key elements of developing a collaborative evaluation plan, using CBPR principles. HIGHLY COMPETENT Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of key elements of developing a collaborative evaluation plan, using CBPR principles. C2F:COMMUNITY/ORGANIZATION PLAN UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how the success of the community or organization plan will be evaluated (bottom-up approach). DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of how the success the community or organization plan will be evaluated (bottom-up approach). MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of how the success of the community or organization plan will be evaluated (bottom-up approach). COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of how the success of the community or organization plan will be evaluated (bottom-up approach). HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of how the success of the community or organization plan will be evaluated (bottom-up approach). D1:STRENGTHS OF EACH APPROACH UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the strengths of each approach to implement change for the selected policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the strengths of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the strengths of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the strengths ofeach approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the strengths of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. D2:CHALLENGES OF EACH APPROACH UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the challenges of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the challenges of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the challenges of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the challenges of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the challenges of each approach to implement change for the selected public policy issue. D3:MOST EFFECTIVE APPROACH UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of which approach the candidate would recommend as the most effective to address the selected public policy issue. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of which approach the candidate would recommend as the most effective to address the selected public policy issue. MINIMALLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of which approach the candidate would recommend as the most effective to address the selected public policy issue. COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of which approach the candidate would recommend as the most effective to address the selected public policy issue. HIGHLY COMPETENT The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of which approach the candidate would recommend as the most effective to address the selected public policy issue. E:SOURCES UNSATISFACTORY / NOT PRESENT When the candidate uses sources, the candidate does not provide in-text citations and references. DOES NOT MEET STANDARD When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides only some in-text citations and references. MINIMALLY COMPETENT When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with major deviations from APA style. COMPETENT When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with minor deviations from APA style. HIGHLY COMPETENT When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with no readily detectable deviations from APA style, OR the candidate does not use sources. Policy, Politics & Global Health Trends Essay Discussion Paper