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

DISCUSSION-NRNP-6531

Career Goals: Strengths and Challenges Related to Nursing Practice Competencies An advanced practice nurse collaborates and communicates with patients, families, doctors, nurses, and specialists to ensure patients receive the care they need. As they diagnose, treat, manage, and educate patients, they are responsible for ensuring patient safety and maintaining ethical

Nursing Signature assignment first part

Introduction -Brief overview of the health of the population chosen -Introduce the global burden of disease OR risk factor chosen -Importance of improving the condition and its impact on quality of life Global Burden of Disease Condition/Risk Factor -Describe the disease OR risk factor chosen -What signs/symptoms are identified in

Nursing Role in the Community

  Discussion Prompts: Explain the role of nursing in achieving one objective published in the current Healthy People 2030 agenda (CO 5,6). Use the reading and your current/past nursing practice as a framework for your analysis (CO 5,6). Instructions:  You must cite and reference the course materials in your initial

Patient Centered Care

 Consider the importance of patient and family centered care as it relates to care coordination (think of engaging the patient and family in developing and understanding the plan of care [i.e who will deliver care? When? What is their role?]. Choose one patient from the scenario assigned to your group to discuss

schizo7

 Schizophrenia Spectrum Case   Remember to answer these questions from your textbooks and clinical guidelines to create your evidence-based treatment plan. At all times, explain your answers.  Summarize the clinical case including the significant subjective and objective data. Generate a primary and two differential diagnoses. Use the DSM5 to support the

mental Health

Activities Select a Movie for the APA Paper Assignment from the list below: · 28 Days · A Beautiful Mind · As Good as it Gets · Girl Interrupted · Iris · Mr. Jones · The Best Little Girl in the World · The Three Faces of Eve · Days

4k35 safety n quality assess 4

Assessment 4 Improvement Plan Tool Kit For this assessment, you will develop a Word document or an online resource repository of at least 12 annotated professional or scholarly resources that you consider critical for the audience of your safety improvement plan to understand or implement to ensure the success of

PMHNP-6675

  Review practice agreements in your state. FLORIDA Identify whether your state requires physician collaboration or supervision for nurse practitioners, and if so, what those requirements are. Research the following: How do you get certified and licensed as an Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) in your state? What is the

leadership

Use the uploaded files for the work with all instructions included. SECTION A & B.($25 each) multiply by 7. NUR 402 Leadership and Management in Nursing-2017 Rubric/Grade Allocation and Instructions for Assignment Instructions: This assignment has two sections, section A and section B. Both are to be turned in together

Theoretical and Scientific Foundation

Please see attached. Theoretical and Scientific Foundation DQ Explain your initial thinking about your personal philosophy of nursing practice. Be specific and provide examples. Include descriptions of the following: Your professional experiences Your area(s) of interest and expertise Your personal beliefs about nursing practice Your goals and plans for expanding

HIT 1550 MOD 5 ASSN

 INSTRUCTIONS ATTACHED 1. See the AHIMA Vlab Encoder announcement for 3M for access code information, as needed.  Review the 3M FAQS and Vlab Login Credentials in 3M. 2. Go to AHIMA Vlab 3M Encoder and complete Activity #1 Login, and Activities #2 and #3 Clinical Coding and Reimbursement.  If you have

HIT 1550 MOD 5 DB

  Instructions: This discussion will be completed in two parts and will give you an opportunity to reflect upon this week’s content and to interact with your classmates. Part 1 – Post your initial response to the discussion questions by Thursday at 11:59 pm Part 2 – Post substantive feedback

SOAP NOTE: Abdominal Pain (PEDIATRIC PATIENT)

SOAP NOTE TEMPLATE Review the Rubric for more Guidance Demographics Chief Complaint (Reason for seeking health care) History of Present Illness (HPI) Allergies Review of Systems (ROS) General: HEENT: Neck: Lungs: Cardio Breast: GI: M/F genital: GU: Neuro Musculo: Activity: Psychosocial: Derm: Nutrition: Sleep/Rest: LMP: STI Hx: Vital Signs Labs

4k35 safety n quality assess 3

Assessment 3 Improvement plan In-Service Presentation For this assessment, you will develop an 8–14 slide PowerPoint presentation with thorough speaker’s notes designed for a hypothetical in-service session related to the improvement plan you developed in Assessment 2. Expand All Introduction As a practicing professional, you are likely to present educational

Nursing Homework question222

In Nursing 500, you completed a reflection assignment on your professional identity in nursing (PIN). In  Professional Identity in Nursing Download Professional Identity in Nursing  Download Professional Identity in Nursing Download Professional Identity in Nursing , Dr. Mazyck describes how PIN is applied at a leadership level. The first step for advance practice registered

Asssigment

Decision-Making Process Paper  My topic The Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Clinical Decision-Making and Its Impact on Nursing Practice Instructions In this assignment, you will be writing a 6–8-page paper identifying, comparing and contrasting at least 3 different decision-making approaches of care from a multidisciplinary perspective using a pertinent and significant