Assignment 2: Health Policy Proposal Analysis (Policy Brief) NURS 8100

Assignment 2: Health Policy Proposal Analysis (Policy Brief) NURS 8100

Assignment 2: Health Policy Proposal Analysis (Policy Brief) NURS 8100

https://topnursingpapers.com/assignment-2-health-policy-proposal-analysis-policy-brief-nurs-8100/

By Day 7 of Week 7

Read Also: Discussion: Nursing and Health Policy in Other Nations

Nurses engaged in the policy arena often are asked to provide information on a health
care topic of interest to policy makers. This is frequently accomplished through
developing a policy brief. A policy brief advocates for a particular recommendation (prior
to the enactment of a policy). Learning how to write a policy brief in a clear, succinct,
scholarly, and professional manner is an essential skill for advanced practice nurses.
For this Assignment, you will assess one of the recommendations from the Institute of
Medicine’s The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health: Report
Recommendations. You will then develop a policy brief to advocate for this
recommendation (the written policy brief is due in Week 7).
To prepare:
 Review the Lavis et al. article on preparing and writing policy briefs provided in the
Learning Resources.
 Select one of the recommendations within the IOM The Future of Nursing: Leading
Change, Advancing Health: Report Recommendations to focus on for this assignment.
 Research the history of the problem behind the recommendation and what has been
done to try to solve the problem.
 What does the recommendation say should be done? Are there any groups, nursing
and others, currently supporting work to implement the recommendation (e.g., Kaiser
Family Foundation, professional organizations)? Does the recommendation suggest
specific groups that should be involved in the implementation? Think critically about how
the recommendation should be implemented – did the IOM get it right? What other
strategies are possible to consider?
By Day 7 of Week 7
To complete:

Top nursing paper writers on hand to assist you with assignment : Assignment 2: Health Policy Proposal Analysis (Policy Brief) NURS 8100

 Develop a scholarly and professionally written 2- to 3-page single-spaced policy brief on
the recommendation you selected from the IOM report following the format presented in
the Lavis et al. article. Include the following:
o Short introduction with statement of the problem.
o The selected recommendation (from the IOM Report)
o Background
o Current characteristics
o The impact of the recommendation from the perspective of consumers, nurses, other
health professionals, and additional stakeholders
o Current solutions
o Current status in the health policy arena
o Final conclusions
o Resources used to create the policy brief
Due by Day 7 of Week 7. Complete instructions for submitting your Assignment are
provided in the Week 7 Assignment area.
Note: You will post a summary of your policy brief in the Week 7 Discussion.

Week in Review

This week, you developed strategies for raising clinical practice issues to an
organizations agenda and also developed a scholarly and professionally written policy
brief. You also analyzed a health policy proposal from the perspective of consumers,
nurses, and other health professionals and stakeholders.
Next week, you will examine policy process and discover how frameworks from nursing
and other disciplines can work together to inform policy analysis.
Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Name: NURS_8100_Week3_Discussion_Rubric

Exit

 Grid View
 List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO
DISCUSSION QUESTION
Discussion post minimum
requirements:
*The original posting must be
completed by Wednesday, Day 3,

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses
exceed the requirements of the
Discussion instructions. They:
Respond to the question being
asked or the prompt provided; – Go
beyond what is required in some
meaningful way (e.g., the post

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses
meet the requirements of the
Discussion instructions. They: –
Respond to the question being
asked or the prompt provided; -Are
substantive, reflective, with critical
analysis and synthesis

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses
are minimally responsive to the
requirements of the Discussion
instructions. They: – do not clearly
address the objectives of the
discussion or the question or
prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses
are unresponsive to the
requirements of the Discussion
instructions. They: – do not clearly
address the objectives of the
discussion or the question or
prompt; and/or – Lack in substance,

at 11:59pm MST. Two response
postings to two different peer
original posts, on two different
days, are required by Saturday,
Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty
member inquiries require
responses, which are not
included in the minimum number
of posts. Your Discussion Board
postings should be written in
standard edited English and
follow APA style for format and
grammar as closely as possible
given the constraints of the
online platform. Be sure to
support the postings with specific
citations from this week's
Learning Resources as well as
resources available through the
Walden University online
databases. Refer to the Essential
Guide to APA Style for Walden
Students to ensure your in-text
citations and reference list are
correct.

contributes a new dimension,
unearths something unanticipated);
-Are substantive, reflective, with
critical analysis and synthesis
representative of knowledge gained
from the course readings and
current credible evidence. –
Demonstrate significant ability to
generalize and extend thinking and
evaluate theories or concepts within
the topic or context of the
discussion. -Demonstrate that the
student has read, viewed, and
considered the Learning -Resources
as well as additional resources and
has read, viewed, or considered a
sampling of colleagues' postings; –
Exceed the minimum requirements
for discussion posts*.

representative of knowledge gained
from the course readings and
current credible evidence.re –
Demonstrate ability to generalize
and extend thinking and evaluate
theories or concepts within the topic
or context of the discussion. –
Demonstrate that the student has
read, viewed, and considered the
Learning Resources and has read,
viewed, or considered a sampling of
colleagues' postings -Meet the
minimum requirements for
discussion posts*.

depth, reflection, analysis, or
synthesis but rely more on
anecdotal than scholarly evidence;
and/or -Do not adequately
demonstrate that the student has
read, viewed, and considered the
Learning -Resources and/or a
sampling of colleagues' postings;
and/or has posted by the due date
at least in part. – Lack ability to
generalize and extend thinking and
evaluate theories or concepts within
the topic or context of the
discussion. -Do not meet the
minimum requirements for
discussion posts*.

reflection, analysis, or synthesis but
rely more on anecdotal than
scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to
generalize and extend thinking and
evaluate theories or concepts within
the topic or context of the
discussion. -Do not demonstrate
that the student has read, viewed,
and considered the Learning
Resources and/or a sampling of
colleagues’ postings; and/or does
not meet the minimum requirements
for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses:
-demonstrate in-depth
understanding and application of
concepts and issues presented in
the course (e.g., insightful
interpretations including analysis,
synthesis and/or evaluation of topic;
– are well supported by pertinent
research/evidence from a variety of
and multiple peer- reviewed books
and journals, where appropriate; –
Demonstrate significant mastery
and thoughtful/accurate application
of content, applicable skills or
strategies presented in the course.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses:
-demonstrate understanding and
application of the concepts and
issues presented in the course,
presented with some understanding
and application of concepts and
issues presented in the course (e.g.,
insightful interpretations including
analysis, synthesis and/or
evaluation of topic; -are supported
by research/evidence from peer-
reviewed books and journals, where
appropriate; and · demonstrate
some mastery and application of
content, applicable skills, or
strategies presented in the course.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses:
– demonstrate minimal
understanding of concepts and
issues presented in the course, and,
although generally accurate, display
some omissions and/or errors; –lack
support by research/evidence
and/or the research/evidence is
inappropriate or marginal in quality;
and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or
evaluation of topic – demonstrate
minimal content, skills or strategies
presented in the course. ——-
Contain numerous errors when
using the skills or strategies
presented in the course

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses
demonstrate: -A lack of
understanding of the concepts and
issues presented in the course;
and/or are inaccurate, contain many
omissions and/or errors; and/or are
not supported by
research/evidence; and/or lack of
analysis, synthesis or evaluation of
topic -Many critical errors when
discussing content, applicable skills
or strategies presented in the
course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

DISCUSSION Discussion postings and responses
significantly contribute to the quality
of the discussion/interaction and
thinking and learning by: -providing
Rich and relevant examples;
discerning and thought-provoking
ideas; and stimulating thoughts and
probes; – -demonstrating original
thinking, new perspectives, and
extensive synthesis of ideas
supported by the literature.

Discussion postings and responses
contribute to the quality of the
discussion/interaction and thinking
and learning by -providing relevant
examples; thought-provoking ideas –
Demonstrating synthesis of ideas
supported by the literature

Discussion postings and responses
minimally contribute to the quality of
discussion/interaction and thinking
and learning by: – providing few
and/or irrelevant examples; and/or –
providing few if any thought-
provoking ideas; and/or -.
Information that is restated from the
literature with no/little demonstration
of critical thinking or synthesis of
ideas.

Discussion postings and responses
do not contribute to the quality of
interaction/discussion and thinking
and learning as they do not: –
Provide examples (or examples are
irrelevant); and/or -Include
interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or
– Demonstrate of critical thinking or
synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses
exceed doctoral -level writing
expectations. They: · Use grammar
and syntax that is clear, concise,
and appropriate to doctoral level
writing; · Make few if any errors in
spelling, grammar, and syntax; ·
Use original language and refrain
from directly quoting original source
materials; -provide correct APA ·
Are positive, courteous, and
respectful when offering
suggestions, constructive feedback,
or opposing viewpoints.

5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses
meet doctoral -level writing
expectations. They: ·Use grammar
and syntax that is clear and
appropriate to doctoral level writing;
; · Make a few errors in spelling,
grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase
but refrain from directly quoting
original source materials; Provide
correct APA format · Are courteous
and respectful when offering
suggestions, constructive feedback,
or opposing viewpoints;.

GET PAPER HELP. PLACE AN ORDER FOR A CUSTOM-WRITTEN, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER Assignment 2: Health Policy Proposal Analysis (Policy Brief) NURS 8100

 

Learning Resources

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the
Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
Required Readings
Hyder, A., Syed, S., Puvanachandra, P., Bloom, G., Sundaram, S., Mahmood, S., …
Peters, D. (2010). Stakeholder analysis for health research: case studies from low- and
middle-income countries. Public Health, 124(3), 159–166.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

This study demonstrates how the engagement of stakeholders in research and policy
making can assist in the successful implementation of policy proposals. The authors
propose that by engaging stakeholders, researchers and policy makers are provided
with multiple perspectives on proposed policies, which can lead to greater success with
policy adoption and implementation.
Lavis, J. N., Permanand, G., Oxman, A. D., Lewin, S., & Fretheim, A. (2009).
SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 13: Preparing and
using policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking. Health Research Policy
& Systems, 71–79. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-7-S1-S13
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

The purpose of a policy brief is to communicate an issue clearly and definitively to policy
makers. The authors of this article propose an outline for policy briefs and also stress
the importance of using research when creating a policy brief.

Lowery, B. (2009). Obesity, bariatric nursing, and the policy process: The connecting
points for patient advocacy. Bariatric Nursing & Surgical Patient Care, 4(2), 133–138.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

This article provides an example of nurse involvement in policy making by examining a
bariatric nursing issue. The author stresses that nurses, in their patient-advocacy role,
have a responsibility to be involved in the health care policy process.
Moore, K. (2006). How can basic research on children and families be useful for the
policy process? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 52(2), 365–375.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Institute of Medicine. (2010). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health:
Report recommendations. Retrieved
from http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2010/The-
Future-of-Nursing/Future%20of%20Nursing%202010%20Recommendations.pdf

Introduced in Week 2, this IOM report highlights four key recommendations in its
proposal for the future directions of the nursing profession. These recommendations
focus on nursing practice, education and training, partnerships with other healthcare
professionals, and workforce planning and policymaking.
National Center for Policy Analysis (2010). Ideas changing the world: Free-market
health care policy. Retrieved from http://www.ncpathinktank.org/healthcare

The NCPA is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that promotes private sector
solutions to public policy issues.
Required Media
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2011). Healthcare policy and advocacy:
Agenda setting and the policy process. Baltimore: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 17 minutes.

Dr. Kathleen White and Dr. Joan Stanley share their insights into agenda setting and
how issues are moved forward into the policy process.

Accessible player
Optional Resources
Barnes, M., Hanson, C., Novilla, L., Meacham, A., McIntyre, E., & Erickson, B. (2008).
Analysis of media agenda setting during and after Hurricane Katrina: Implications for
emergency preparedness, disaster response, and disaster policy. American Journal of
Public Health, 98(4), 604–610.
Jennings, C. (2002). The power of the policy brief. Policy, Politics & Nursing Practice,
3(3), 261–263. doi: 10.1177/152715440200300310

Neumann, P. J., Palmer, J. A., Daniels, N., Quigley, K., Gold, M. R., & Chao, S. (2008).
A strategic plan for integrating cost-effectiveness analysis into the US health care
system. American Journal of Managed Care, 14(4), 185-188.
Plan, Policy, Procedure Relationship Diagram. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.informationsecurityintel.com/docs/Fig.%204.3.pdf