Global Final Project Two Milestone Three: Policy Recommendations

IHP 501 Final Project Two Milestone Three Guidelines and Rubric Policy Recommendations

Overview: It is not uncommon for health professionals to testify on policies in front of committees or policymaking bodies, like the United States Senate. In order to participate in this type of advocacy, you must be able to speak for vulnerable populations by demonstrating your understanding of population needs and how policy measures can help or further harm a situation. You must also be able to make recommendations for developing, revising, or eliminating policy.

Prompt: In this assignment, you will evaluate the efficacy of the policy you analyzed and propose recommendations for or against the policy. Concentrate on how to improve the chosen policy in order to limit negative impact to the target population or other populations while increasing the positive impact. Take a stand on the policy and advocate for or against it; make sure to support your position with research. When thinking about your recommendations, think about how the policy affects the population’s well-being and health. How could you decrease inequalities and improve health outcomes by modifying the policy?

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

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.

Rubric

Guidelines for Submission: Your paper should be submitted as a 2- to 3-page Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, and at least three sources cited in APA format.

Critical Elements	Proficient (100%)	Needs Improvement (75%)	Not Evident (0%)	Value
Recommendations: Efficacy	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	25
Recommendations: Improvement	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	20
Recommendations: Recommend	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	20
Recommendations: Advocate	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	25
Articulation of Response	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	10