Global Health : Final Project Two Submission: Policy Analysis and Testimony Transcript

AssignmentinstructionsRubric.docx

Home >Applied Sciences homework help >Global Health : Final Project Two Submission: Policy Analysis and Testimony Transcript

For this project, you will select a state, national, or international policy in which the United States is involved to critically analyze, interview a stakeholder of the policy, perform substantial research on the impacted populations, evaluate the policy for ethical adherence, and ultimately advocate for or against the policy using research to support your claims. You are expected to communicate with a stakeholder through an interview, which you will complete during the course. Pieces of this interview should be used to guide your research and should be cited as support in your final analysis paper. The final submission should be in the form of a research-backed, persuasively written paper. Attach a transcript of a testimony you would give to an appropriate policymaking body, which should be a complete, but concise, synthesis of your recommendations.

** SELECTED POLICY : One vital health policy is the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP). The HRRP was established in 2012 under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). **

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

I. Introduction

1. Summarize the policy that is the focus of your evaluation. Include in your summary the purpose of the policy, its scope and main points, its stakeholders and constituents, and its relation to other policies (if applicable).

2. Explain the development of the policy, considering policymakers and their political standing, timelines, and budget restrictions.

3. Explain your rationale for choosing the policy, using your research as support for your choice.

II. Evaluation

1. Determine the policy’s strengths and weaknesses in its ability to provide positive and/or negative change for its target population. Support your response with examples.

2. Assess the extent to which the policy meets the needs of its target population, using data to support your claims.

3. Explain any unintended impacts as a result of the policy. Consider populations, economics, and social or cultural factors in your response.

III. Recommendations

1. Evaluate the efficacy of the policy in addressing population needs without negatively impacting the target population or other populations.

2. Justify key areas of improvement that could better the policy, supported with evidence.

3. Recommend an appropriate policy improvement supported by your research.

4. Advocate for or against the policy in a concise, supported statement.

IV. Testimony: Draft a testimony transcript advocating for or against the policy, including any recommendations to improve the policy. Be sure to direct the testimony toward an appropriate policymaking body (e.g., a Senate committee).

Guidelines for Submission: Your final submission should be 8 to 10 pages in length (not including title, reference, or appendix pages) with a 3- to 5-page testimony attached as an appendix. Use 12-point Times New Roman font, double spacing, and the most recent APA standards for formatting and referencing.

Critical Elements	Exemplary (100%)	Proficient (90%)	Needs Improvement (70%)	Not Evident (0%)	Value
Introduction: Policy	Meets “Proficient” criteria and summary demonstrates keen insight into the main points of the policy and its purpose	Summarizes the policy that is the focus of the evaluation, including the purpose of the policy, its scope and main points, its stakeholders and constituents, and its relation to other policies (if applicable)	Summarizes the policy that is the focus of the evaluation, including the purpose of the policy, its scope and main points, its stakeholders and constituents, and its relation to other policies (if applicable), but summary is missing key elements, is cursory, or contains inaccuracies	Does not summarize the policy that is the focus of the evaluation	8.77
Introduction: Development	Meets “Proficient” criteria and explanation demonstrates advanced knowledge of policy development	Explains the development of the policy, considering policymakers and their political standing, timelines, and budget restrictions	Explains the development of the policy, considering policymakers and their political standing, timelines, and budget restrictions, but explanation is missing key elements, is cursory, or contains inaccuracies	Does not explain the development of the policy	8.77
Introduction: Rationale	Meets “Proficient” criteria and support used in explanation demonstrates keen insight into reasoning behind the policy choice	Explains the rationale for choosing the policy, using research as support for the choice	Explains the rationale for choosing the policy, but explanation is cursory, illogical, or unsupported or contains inaccuracies	Does not explain the rationale for choosing the policy	8.77
Evaluation: Strengths and Weaknesses	Meets “Proficient” criteria and determination demonstrates keen insight into the relationship between the strengths and weaknesses of the policy and its ability to effect change	Determines the policy’s strengths and weaknesses in its ability to provide positive and/or negative change for its target population, supported with examples	Determines the policy’s strengths and weaknesses in its ability to provide positive and/or negative change for its target population, but determination is cursory, illogical, or unsupported or contains inaccuracies	Does not determine the policy’s strengths and weaknesses in its ability to provide positive and/or negative change for its target population	8.77

Evaluation: Needs	Meets “Proficient” criteria and the assessment uses data that demonstrates an advanced ability to support claims based on the needs of the population affected by the policy	Assesses the extent to which the policy meets the needs of its target population, using data to support claims	Assesses the extent to which the policy meets the needs of the target population, but assessment is illogical, contains inaccuracies, or uses insufficient data to support claims	Does not assess the extent to which the policy meets the identified needs of its target population	5.85
Evaluation: Unintended Impacts	Meets “Proficient” criteria and explanation provides a sophisticated awareness of the impacts of the policy	Explains any unintended impacts as a result of the policy, considering populations, economics, and social or cultural factors	Explains any unintended impacts as a result of the policy, but explanation is cursory, illogical, or incomplete or contains inaccuracies	Does not explain any unintended impacts as a result of the policy	7.02
Recommendations: Efficacy	Meets “Proficient” criteria and evaluation demonstrates advanced knowledge of the relationship of the policy’s efficacy to the impact it has on populations	Evaluates the efficacy of the policy in addressing population needs without negatively impacting the population or other populations	Evaluates the efficacy of the policy in addressing population needs without negatively impacting the population or other populations, but evaluation is cursory or illogical or contains inaccuracies	Does not evaluate the efficacy of the policy in addressing population needs without negatively impacting the population or other populations	8.77
Recommendations: Improvement	Meets “Proficient” criteria and justification demonstrates keen insight into areas of improvement specific to the policy	Justifies key areas of improvement that could better the policy, supported with evidence	Justifies areas of improvement that could better the policy, but justification is unfocused or illogical, lacks supporting evidence, or contains inaccuracies	Does not justify areas of improvement that could better the policy	5.85
Recommendations: Recommend	Meets “Proficient” criteria and recommendation demonstrates expert knowledge of how the policy could be improved	Recommends a policy improvement supported by research	Recommends a policy improvement, but recommendation is illogical, contains inaccuracies, or has insufficient supporting research	Does not recommend a policy improvement	11.70
Recommendations: Advocate	Meets “Proficient” criteria and the statement demonstrates keen insight into how the policy can be advocated for or against	Advocates for or against the policy in a concise, supported statement	Advocates for or against the policy, but statement is long- winded, lacks support, is illogical, or contains inaccuracies	Does not advocate for or against the policy	11.70

Testimony	Meets “Proficient” criteria and the transcript masterfully represents advocacy for or against the policy and demonstrates keen insight into the audience to which it is directed	Drafts a testimony transcript advocating for or against the policy, including any recommendations to improve the policy, directed toward an appropriate policymaking body	Drafts a testimony transcript advocating for or against the policy, directed toward a policymaking body, but testimony is an inappropriate length, is illogical, does not recommend any improvements, is directed toward an inappropriate audience, or contains inaccuracies	Does not draft a testimony transcript advocating for or against the policy	11.70
Articulation of Response	Submission is free of errors related to APA citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format	Submission has no major errors related to APA citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization	Submission has major errors related to APA citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas	Submission has critical errors related to APA citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas	2.33
Total	100%