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

NUR 640

NUR 640 Weekly Discussion FYI Remember… I am a Black Haitian American Female live in USA, FL Submission Instructions: • Your initial post should be at least 500 words, formatted, and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources.  Your initial post is worth 8 points. Week

Hello can this be helped with by tomorrow ?

Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity: · Textbook: Chapter 3 · Lesson Instructions Click the tab below to review the description of the course project.  Course Project Overview Week 2 Assignment:  This week, you will choose one of the following topics for your project.  Step 1: Pick

Nursing Module 7 assignment

PowerPoint presentation with a realistic case study and include appropriate and pertinent clinical information that will be covering the following Subjective data Objective data:  Assessment: Plan:  Other: 

ethical issues related to wearable technologies

What are the ethical issues related to dexcom blood glucose monitoring Week 5 Assignment Part 2: Ethical Issues with Wearable Technologies Template Directions: Use the wearable technology selected in the Week 3 Part 1: Examining Wearable Technologies assignment. Use this template to complete the Part 2: Ethical Issues with Wearable

Bj week 5

Bj week 5 Enhancing Referral Follow-Through for Veterans in Outpatient Mental Health Care

Asssigment part 2 part one attached

Module 3:  Selecting a Topic and Designing a Clinical Question using PICOT Taxonomy Instructions:   Create an essay of a minimum of five pages explaining the PICOT format and what is the importance of following the PICOT format when formulating the clinical question? 1. What is the PICOT Format? 2. What

Mm week 4 gap analysis

Mm week 4 gap  1 Gap Analysis – Fall Risk Prevention and Assessment Nurse-Led. Michelle Murray Herzing University NU801 Dr. Stephanie Turner Jan 30, 2026 2 Gap Analysis – Fall Risk Prevention and Assessment Nurse-Led. Background: Older adults in adult day care settings experience falls, which is a severe patient

Healthcare laws

see file 1. Policy Application: Find a policy, set of guidelines, or government regulations and apply it to the organization’s work on the chosen topic: PREVENTING WORKPLACE VIOLANCE. 2. You may choose a policy you have access to from your organization. Other sources of policies include those published online from a

help with home work

Discussion 5: Topic: Influencing Healthcare Policy Nurs: 507 Why is it important that health professionals share a common understanding of safety standards and practice for all stakeholders? What are policy implications within an institution related to federal and state regulations? Format/Style/APA/ Citations (20%) 2-3 paragraph

Lorem, ipsum

U 700 Unit 5-KTA Part 1: Alternate Intervention Paper 1. You are going to construct an APA-formatted paper for the assignment. 2. Provide an APA-formatted title page. 3. Develop an introduction section that discusses the professional nurses’ role for the implementation of an improvement project. 4. Provide a review of

NUR 640

Reply from Eliset Campos Rivas Module 4 Discussion: Automatic Thoughts Completing automatic thought records is a common cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) homework assignment, but it can be particularly difficult for patients with depression. Depression is often described as being in the “darkest of dark” places, where even the simplest tasks

nursing

Purpose The student will review the current NCLEX-RN test plan and reflect on areas for improvement and strategies to support the student’s transition to practice. The student will assess clinical learning against the activity statements outlined in the test plan and determine next steps to explore new opportunities in future

Hello can this be helped with by tomorrow ?

The arguments against marijuana are just wrong and shouldn’t even be discussed.          I use it, and I’m just fine, so I don’t see how it could be harmful. I don’t see those people who are fighting to outlaw marijuana also out there fighting to outlaw alcohol.

Dh assessment 1 revise

Dh assessment 1 revise 2 Capella University Darren Holton January 30, 2026 Communication Styles and Professional Effectiveness Understanding Key Communication Styles Communication style influences how individuals convey ideas, handle disagreement, and interact with others in professional environments. In workplace communication, four commonly recognized styles are passive, aggressive, passive-aggressive, and assertive.

nonmaleficence

 In healthcare, the principle of nonmaleficence—”do no harm”—is foundational to ethical decision-making. However, many medical interventions carry inherent risks of harm, even when intended to benefit the patient. How should healthcare professionals balance the principle of nonmaleficence with the potential benefits of a treatment or procedure? Are there situations where

nur

I need help with your expertise Psychiatric SOAP Note Template Encounter date: ________________________ Patient Initials: ______ Gender: M/F/Transgender ____ Age: _____ Race: _____ Ethnicity ____ Reason for Seeking Health Care: ______________________________________________ HPI:_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SI/HI: _______________________________________________________________________________ Sleep:  _________________________________________         Appetite:  ________________________ Allergies(Drug/Food/Latex/Environmental/Herbal): ___________________________________ Current perception of Health: Excellent Good