Kibata

Sign In

Our Services

Get 15% Discount on your First Order

Order Now
[rank_math_breadcrumb]

Healthcare Policy and Analysis

  

Healthcare Policy and Analysis

Week 4 discussion Due December 16

Healthcare Policy and Analysis

Contextual Factors 

What is the impact of contextual factors on advocacy and policy? Contextual factors can range from internal (the organization, the practice, the environment, the culture, etc.) to external (laws, policies, politics, regulations, etc.). However, whether originating internally or externally, contextual factors have the capability of advancing or hindering an advocacy priority. 

For this Discussion, you will consider how contextual factors impact policy making, focusing specifically on how these factors might impact your advocacy priority. Consider what contextual factors might promote getting your priority on the agenda, as well as those that might work against it.

Resources



Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources. 


WEEKLY RESOURCES

Learning Resources

Required Resources

Readings

  • Dawes, D. E. (2020). 
    The political determinants of health. Johns Hopkins University Press.

    • Chapter 4, “How the Game is Played: Successful Employment of the Political Determinants of Health” (pp.78–111)

  • Porche, Demetrius J. (2023).
     Health policy: Applications for nurses and other health professionals (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

    • Chapter 9, “Policy Formulation and Implementation” (pp.101-112)

    • Chapter 10, “Policy Analysis” (pp.113-140)

Media

The following media resources address the contextual factors impacting the answer to the following question, “How did we get here?” regarding the current state of healthcare in the U.S.

Please select at least two from the following to view.

To Prepare:

  • Review resources about contextual factors.

  • Consider how contextual factors will impact your advocacy priority. 

By Day 3 of Week 4

Post a response detailing the following: 

  • Which contextual factors will promote getting your advocacy priority on the agenda? 

  • Which contextual factors might work against it?

  • Assignment Rubric Details

    Close

  • Rubric

  • NURS_8100_Week4_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8100_Week4_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 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 library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)

30 to >29.0 pts

Excellent

Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

29 to >23.0 pts

Good

Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

23 to >18.0 pts

Fair

Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence.

18 to >0 pts

Poor

Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)

10 to >9.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

9 to >8.0 pts

Good

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

8 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

10 pts

Total Points: 100

Share This Post

Email
WhatsApp
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest
Reddit

Order a Similar Paper and get 15% Discount on your First Order

Order Now

Related Questions

Cardiovascular Disorders

 In this exercise, you will complete a MindMap to gauge your understanding of this week’s content. Select one of the possible topics provided to complete your MindMap. myocardial infarction congenital heart disease (may select ASD, VSD, or PDA) peripheral arterial disease peripheral vascular disease valvular heart disease cardiomyopathy (may select

unit 10 discussion

see attached Ethical Considerations Discuss ethical considerations and equality in the pediatric population. Instructions: 1. Research ethics and equality in the pediatric psychiatric population using scholarly articles. 2. Choose a pediatric psychiatric diagnosis and discuss the following topics in your discussion a. Discuss the specific diagnosis. b. Discuss symptoms/ screening

HIT 2100 MOD 2 ASSN

INFO ATTACHED Has your last name changed or have you mispelled your name? Click  here to request an update to the name on your account. Email: [email protected] Username: KHemphill01 Password- 1$Torm87

nur

I need your expertise  Telehealth Medicine For this assignment, answer the following questions: · What are the Pros and Cons to telehealth? · How will you approach and perform a telehealth assessment? · What are the limits to telehealth? · What is the difference between the provider’s need for a

Nursing HOMEWORK

FOCUSED SOAP NOTE FOR ANXIETY, PTSD, AND OCD PREPARE: · Review this week’s Learning Resources. Consider the insights they provide about assessing and diagnosing anxiety, obsessive compulsive, and trauma-related disorders. · Review the Focused SOAP Note template, which you will use to complete this Assignment. There is also a Focused

Quin assessment 3

Quin assessment 3 Practicum Focus Sheet, Assessment 3 1 Practicum Focus Sheet Assessment 3 Note: Expect to spend at least 2 hours with the patient, family, or group you’ll be working with during this portion of your practicum, exploring issues of technology, care coordination, and community resources associated with the

Quin assessment 2

quin assessment 2 Practicum Focus Sheet, Assessment 2 1 Practicum Focus Sheet Assessment 2 Note: Expect to spend at least 2 hours with the patient, family, or group you’ll be working with during this portion of your practicum, exploring issues of patient safety, quality, and costs associated with the health

Quin assessment 1

Quin assessment 1 Practicum Focus Sheet, Assessment 1 1 Practicum Focus Sheet Assessment 1 Note: Expect to spend at least 2 hours with the patient, family, or group you’ll be working with during this portion of your practicum, assessing the health problem you’ve defined from a leadership, collaboration, communication, change

Roch week 2 ppt

Roch week 2 ppt  Instructions For this assignment you are going to identify a complex healthcare ethical dilemma facing the professional nurse in our multi-dimensional healthcare environment. This ethical dilemma can be one that you have observed in your current practice setting or one that you have observed in the

WK5 ASSIGNMENT HP-216

COMPLETE WITH INFO PROVIDED WK5 ASSIGNMENT HP-216  Instructions 1. Using Medical Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms on the Job As we have determined, there are many terms, abbreviations, and acronyms that health care professionals need to know and understand as part of their job responsibilities. It is important for you to

WK5 ASSIGNMENT HP-214

COMPLETE WITH ALL INFO PROVIDED Reimbursement Methodologies – Week 5 Lecture 2   Clean vs. Dirty CMS1500/UB04 Claims   A clean claim is a submitted claim without any errors or other issues, including incomplete documentation that delays timely payment. There are several required elements for a clean claim, and medical

Chapter 8 – Change in Organization

Change in an Organization This chapter involves change and the response to change in an organization. If you feel uncomfortable already you probably are in the majority. Let’s read the scenario below and try to understand why change is so difficult.  Scenario: Imagine the days before COVID when we were

nursing

Respond to any questions you may have been asked by your peers in your assigned group area . Note what you have learned and/or any insights you have gained as a result of reading the comments your peers made.

peds CJP

Initials – D.G DOB 10/17/2017 Age 7  brought to the hospital with inpetigo and fever, skin lesions/ warm and dry blisters on hands (bumps with pus) – pending labs,blood culture Contact precautions for staphylococcus no allergies  history – Coartraction of aorta, horsesechoe kidney, asthma, trach that was removed 4/2025  IV

Nursing Mod 4 Assignment WH

Gynecological Health Care for Lesbian, Bisexual & Transgender Individuals The purpose of this assingment is to better understand gynecological health care for lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals. Define and describe for lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals. Gender and sexuality concepts. Social and political context. Social determinants of health affecting lesbian,

NUR 509CL Module 3 discussion

Module 3 Discussion   Weekly Clinical Experience 3 Describe your clinical experience for this week. · Did you face any challenges, any success? If so, what were they? (Learning how to prescribing) · Describe the assessment of a patient, detailing the signs and symptoms (S&S), assessment, plan of care, and

NUR 509 Discussion 3

Module 3 Discussion   The House Painter Patient Evaluation & Management Plan A 52-year-old male patient who is a house painter presents to the office reporting chronic fatigue and “mild” chest pain. When he is painting, chest pain is relieved after taking a break. He reports that the pain usually