Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment]

In previous Discussions and Assignments, you have examined various aspects of the policy process: exploring the unintended consequences of policies, agenda setting, and analyzing policy recommendations. In this Assignment, you will have the opportunity to further develop your analysis skills by working through the policy analysis process. To be an effective agent for social change, you must be able to logically and critically analyze policy from multiple perspectives and contexts and then present your insights in a succinct and professional manner. This exercise will afford such an experience.

For this Assignment, you will examine a particular policy of interest to you (perhaps the one you selected for this week’s Discussion), and apply a policy analysis framework to understand the impact associated with the implementation of the policy. You will then develop a policy analysis paper, which is due the end of Week 11. This paper will also serve as your Major Assessment for this course.

To prepare:

Select a health care policy and a policy analysis framework to utilize for this Assignment. You may use the policy and framework you identified in this week’s Discussion or change your selection.

To complete:

Write an 8- to 10-page analysis paper (including references) in which you succinctly address the following:

Part 1: Define the policy issue.
How is the issue affecting the policy arena?
What are the current politics of the issue?
At what level in the policy making process is the issue?
Part 2: Apply a policy analysis framework to explore the issue using the following contexts:
Social
Ethical
Legal
Historical
Financial/economic
Theoretical underpinnings of the policy
Include in this section:
Who are the stakeholders of interest?
Is there a nursing policy/position statement on this health care issue? If so, who developed it?
Part 3: Policy options/solutions
What are the policy options/solutions for addressing the issue? Include at least three levels of options/solutions: no change; partial change; radical change or maximum change.
What are the theoretical underpinnings of the policy options/solutions?
What are the health advocacy aspects and leadership requirements of each option?
How does each option/solution provide an opportunity or need for inter-professional collaboration?
What are the pros and cons of each suggested change? Include the cost benefits, effectiveness, and efficiency of each option along with the utility and feasibility of each option.
Part 4: Building Consensus
Outline a plan for building consensus around your recommended option/solution for solving the policy issue.
Part 5: References
Limit your references so this section is no more than 2 pages.

Your written assignments must follow APA guidelines. Be sure to support your work with specific citations from appropriate Learning Resources and additional scholarly sources as appropriate. Refer to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association to ensure that your in- text citations and reference list are correct.

Healthcare Policy Analysis Paper

Governments are interested in promoting the health and wellbeing of their populations. They therefore embrace policies that regulate the practices that can have adverse effect on the safety of the public. They also evaluate the sustainability of the policies in promoting the health and wellbeing of the diverse populations in the long-term. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act is an example of a policy that was adopted in the US to promote public health and safety. It regulates the production, sale, and distribution of tobacco products in the state. Therefore, this essay examines this policy with a focus on aspects that include the factors that led to its development, its benefits to healthcare, costs, impacts on stakeholder satisfaction and clinical outcomes.

Factors that Led to the Development of the Policy

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act was implemented into the law on 9 June 2009. The policy was adopted to regulate the production, sale, and marketing of tobacco-related products (US Food & Drug Administration, 2018). It sought to restrict the marketing of tobacco to the youths, warning labels on smokeless tobacco products, modification of risk claims to be backed by evidence, preserve the tribal authority of the state and promote disclosure concerning the ingredients used in the manufacture of tobacco products (US Food & Drug Administration, 2018). The adoption of the Tobacco Control Act was influenced by a number of factors. One of them was to regulate the use of tobacco products by the youths. Often, the youths are vulnerable to tobacco use due the influence of factors such as peer pressure, abuse of other drugs, and escape from social stigmatization. Use of tobacco products in the youthful stage increases the risk of dependence on tobacco products and vulnerability to health problems associated with its use (American Cancer Society, 2018). Therefore, there was a need to safeguard the health of the vulnerable youth through the adoption of the policy.

Moreover, the need for the adoption of the Tobacco Control Act was driven by increasing incidences of health problems associated with tobacco use in the US. According to Benowitz and Henningfield (2018), tobacco smoking is associated with significant health problems. It increases the risk of dependence among the users. It also predisposes its users to cancers of the respiratory system and the mouth. Further, individuals who smoke are also highly vulnerable to health problems such as atherosclerosis, hypertension, and kidney failure (DeCicca, Kenkel, Liu, & Wang, 2017). Therefore, the association of tobacco use with these health problems necessitated the formulation of policies that would regulate its availability in different states in the United States of America.

There is also the aspect of the need for the protection of the health of the public. Generally, production, marketing, and sale companies are required to protect the health and safety of the public by keeping them informed about their products (Halabi, 2016). They need to share all the information that would guide the use of the different tobacco products. However, revealing this information was a challenge experienced in the US from tobacco companies. The lack of full disclosure meant that some of the users of tobacco products were not aware of the products’ health effects (American Cancer Society, 2018). Therefore, it gave rise to the need for a policy that would raise accountability, transparency, and responsibility in major stakeholders in the tobacco industry.

Benefits to Healthcare

The adoption of the Tobacco Control Act or the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Act has significant benefits to healthcare. Firstly, the adoption of the policy resulted in a significant decrease in the burden of health problems associated with tobacco use. A cost benefit analysis performed by Chaloupka et al. (2015) in their research showed that the adoption of the policy would result in substantial decline in the number of smokers by 213 000 people by 2013. The analysis also revealed that the policy would reduce the disease burden associated with tobacco use. In this case, it would lower prevalence of cancers, respiratory diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and other diseases related to tobacco use (Chaloupka et al., 2015). Thus, there will be a drop in the number of people requiring care due to these conditions, hence, the benefit to healthcare.

The adoption the policy is also expected to result in decline in the costs incurred in healthcare. Generally, an increase in the burden of diseases associated with tobacco use raises the costs used by the affected individuals to seek healthcare services (Dai & Hao, 2018). They need to access high quality care that would promote their health and wellbeing. Similarly, healthcare institutions and governments incur significant costs in purchasing the healthcare services that the affected need. As a result, there is decline in the overall productivity of the system due to increased spending on healthcare instead of other projects that promote socioeconomic development (DeCicca et al., 2017). There is also evidence that the policy increased awareness among consumers on the negative effects of tobacco use. As a consequence, the consumers are now aware of the ingredients of tobacco products, hence, making informed decisions on its consumption (American Cancer Society, 2018). Consequently, consumers are empowered to take responsibility for their actions.

Costs Related to the Policy

There are costs associated with the implementation of the Tobacco Control Act. The first one is time. Successful implementation of the policy demands ongoing discussions on the modifications on the act. There is also a need for significant public participation before the provisions of the regulations are to be implemented. Some of the provisions related to the policy might also be subjected to legal challenges (Stratton et al., 2018). Cumulatively, these events demand too much time, which slows down the implementation process.

There is also the cost of challenges brought by unforeseen events. Several organizations are also involved in the adoption of interventions needed to regulate tobacco use in America. For instance, nonprofit organizations and federal agencies might resort to use other mechanisms that hinder the implementation process of the act (Joshua, 2017). These agencies can utilize methods such as political activism to influence policies on tobacco use, hence, derailing the implementation of this act.

Further, manpower is needed for the implementation of the policy. The key personnel involved in its implementation should be trained on the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation procedures concerning the policy (DeCicca et al., 2017). They should also be remunerated for their efforts. There is also the aspect of financial resources needed for successful implementation of the policy. Accordingly, awareness creation campaigns have to be used in its implementation. Public engagement is also needed to understand the manner in which the policy objectives can be achieved with ease (Stratton et al., 2018). Therefore, these processes make it evident that the implementation of the policy is a costly process.

Impact on Client Satisfaction

The Tobacco Control Act has different impacts on client satisfaction. The users of tobacco products are now informed about its health effects. The public is also informed about the consequences of tobacco use, thereby, promoting their empowerment (Halabi, 2016). Stakeholders in the healthcare industry are also satisfied with the policy. It promotes the protection of the health of the public as well as its empowerment. This implies that consumers can adopt positive behavioral modifications that influence their health with the adoption of the intervention (Stratton et al., 2018). The public is also satisfied with the fact that the government is interested in promoting the health of its citizens. This can be seen in the interventions that include disclosure of ingredients used in tobacco products and warning messages on the tobacco packages.

While the above evidence points towards stakeholder satisfaction with the policy, some stakeholder segments have been affected adversely by it. The manufacturers, tobacco farmers, distributors, and retailers are against the provisions of the policy (Chaloupka et al., 2015). These stakeholders are profit-oriented in nature. As a result, the policy threatens the viability of their businesses, which has forced them to embrace interventions that curtail the application of the policy. For instance, evidence has shown that they have collaborated with industries such as the hospitality industry to lobby against comprehensive clean indoor air policies (Joshua, 2017). They have also collaborated with the banking industry to heighten the public policy of the tobacco industry.

Impact of Clinical Outcomes

The act has also significantly impacted clinical outcomes. Firstly, there has been a reduction in the cost of healthcare utilized in the treatment of diseases associated with smoking. The reduction in disease burden has affected clinical outcomes that include the number of hospitalizations, drug use, home healthcare, and physician visits (DeCicca et al., 2017). The policy has also been projected to reduce the number of population using tobacco products. This implies that the population will be healthier with the adoption of the policy. These outcomes are also expected to result in evidence-based practice in nursing in the long-term. Research is currently being undertaken to determine the sustainability and healthcare impacts of the policy (Joshua, 2017). Therefore, they will inform whether additional interventions should be embraced to promote the effectiveness of policy in improving clinical outcomes.

Conclusion

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act/policy has promoted the health and wellbeing of the Americans. It has created awareness on the health effects of tobacco use, hence, informed decision-making. It has also improved clinical outcomes as evidenced by the reduction in disease burden and number of smokers in the state. The implementation of the policy requires significant resources such as financial support, costs, and time. Therefore, states should collaborate in ensuring that strategies that promote efficient adoption of the policy be embraced in the US.

References

American Cancer Society. (2018). The American Cancer Society’s principles of oncology: Prevention to survivorship. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Benowitz, N. L., & Henningfield, J. E. (2018). Nicotine reduction strategy: state of the science and challenges to tobacco control policy and FDA tobacco product regulation. Preventive medicine, 117, 5-7.

Chaloupka, F. J., Warner, K. E., Acemoğlu, D., Gruber, J., Laux, F., Max, W., … & Sindelar, J. (2015). An evaluation of the FDA’s analysis of the costs and benefits of the graphic warning label regulation. Tobacco Control, 24(2), 112-119.

Dai, H., & Hao, J. (2018). The effects of tobacco control policies on retailer sales to minors in the USA, 2015. Tobacco control, 27(3), 258-260.

DeCicca, P., Kenkel, D., Liu, F., & Wang, H. (2017). Behavioral Welfare Economics and FDA Tobacco Regulations’, Human Capital and Health Behavior (Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research, Volume 25) (pp. 143-179). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Halabi, S. F. (2016). The Scope of Preemption under the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Food & Drug LJ, 71, 300.

Joshua, J. (2017). The economics of addictive behaviours. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.

Stratton, K. R., Kwan, L. Y., Eaton, D. L., & National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (U.S.). (2018). Public health consequences of e-cigarettes. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

US Food and Drug Administration. (2018, June 17). Family smoking prevention and tobacco control act – FDA. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/rules-regulations-and-guidance/family-smoking-prevention-and-tobacco-control-act-overview

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment]

By Day 7 of Week 11

This Assignment is due.

Assignment 3: Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment]

Continue to work on this Assignment, assigned in Week 4. You will need to incorporate any related topics addressed this week. Your policy analysis paper is due by Day 7 of this week.

By Day 7

Submit this Assignment.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK11Assgn3+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
Click the Week 11 Assignment 3 Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
Click the Week 11 Assignment 3 link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK11Assgn3+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 11 Assignment 3 Rubric

Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity

To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:

Submit your Week 11 Assignment 3 draft and review the originality report.

Submit Your Assignment by Day 7

To submit your Assignment:

Week 11 Assignment 3

Assignment 3: Policy Analysis Paper

Program LOs: 4, 5

4: Professions/Collaborators

5: Effective Communicators

DNP Essentials: 5, 6

5: Healthcare Policy for Advocacy in Healthcare

6: Interprofessional collaboration for Improving Patient and Population Health Outcomes

(Scroll down for table)

ASSIGNMENT PROMPT

Target

5 points

Acceptable

3 points

Unacceptable

1 point

Score/Level

Policy analysis paper

Part 1: Definition of policy issue

Program LO: 4, 5

DNP Essential: 5, 6

Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment; how the issue affects the policy arena; current politics of the issue; level in the policy making process using advanced critical thinking skills; does not summarize or paraphrase the content of the literature review; instead, demonstrates content mastery using examples of and/or personalized reflections about the content of the literature review; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area. Excels in meeting expectations for graduate level work.

Fully meets expectations for LOs 4 and 5.

Fully meets expectations for Essentials 5 and 6.

Well-developed good quality work.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses at least 80% of the major subsections in the assignment using adequate critical thinking skills; includes some summarizing or paraphrasing of literature review; demonstration of content mastery using examples of and/or personalized reflections about the content of the literature review; demonstration of an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area. It fully meets expectations for graduate level work.

Meets expectations for LOs 4, 5.

Meets expectations for Essentials 5, 6.

Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.

Content needs substantial revision for it to be of a professional portfolio quality; addresses less than 50% of the major subsections in the assignment using weak critical thinking skills; consists primarily of a summary of main ideas from the literature review; does not demonstrate an applied level of understanding. Lags behind expectations for graduate level work.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LOs 4, 5.

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essentials 5, 6.

Part 2: Application of a policy analysis framework

Program LO: 4, 5

DNP Essential: 5, 6.

Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment; social, ethical, legal, historical, economic, and theoretical contexts explored; stakeholders and position statements discussed using advanced critical thinking skills; does not summarize or paraphrase the content of the literature review; instead, demonstrates content mastery using examples of and/or personalized reflections about the content of the literature review; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area. Excels in meeting expectations for graduate level work.

Fully meets expectations for LOs 4 and 5.

Fully meets expectations for Essentials 5 and 6.

Well-developed good quality work.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses about 80% of the major subsections in the assignment using adequate critical thinking skills; includes some summarizing or paraphrasing of literature review; demonstration of content mastery using examples of and/or personalized reflections about the content of the literature review; demonstration of an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area. It meets expectations for graduate level work.

Meets expectations for LOs 4, 5.

Meets expectations for Essentials 5, 6.

Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LOs 4, 5.

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essentials 5, 6.

Part 3: Presentation of policy options and/or solutions

Program LOs: 4, 5.

DNP Essential: 5, 6.

Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment; discussion of 3 policy options, including theoretical, advocacy and collaborative elements; pros and cons of each using advanced critical thinking skills; does not summarize or paraphrase the content of the literature review; instead, demonstrates content mastery using examples of and/or personalized reflections about the content of the literature review; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area. Excels in meeting expectations for graduate level work. Fully meets expectations for LOs 4 and 5.

Fully meets expectations for Essentials 5 and 6.

Well-developed good quality work.

Meets expectations for LOs 4, 5.

Meets expectations for Essentials 5, 6.

Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LOs 4, 5.

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essentials 5, 6.

Part 4: Plan for building consensus

Program LOs: 4, 5.

DNP Essential: 5, 6.Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment; discussion of 3 policy options, including and includes strategies for how to persuade others and / or build consensus using advanced critical thinking skills; does not summarize or paraphrase the content of the literature review; instead, demonstrates content mastery using examples of and/or personalized reflections about the content of the literature review; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area. Excels in meeting expectations for graduate level work.

Fully meets expectations for LOs 4 and 5.

Fully meets expectations for Essentials 5 and 6.

Well-developed good quality work.

Meets expectations for LOs 4, 5.

Meets expectations for Essentials 5, 6.

Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LOs 4, 5.

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essentials 5, 6.

Part 5: References and page requirements

The majority of references are from scholarly journals, supports the topic well, and are current. Paper stays within page requirements. APA format used correctly throughout.

Excels in meeting expectations for graduate level work.

Most references are from scholarly journals and support the topic. Most references are fairly current. The paper stays within requirements. APA format used with minimal errors.

Meets expectations for graduate level work.

References are not sufficient or are mostly from the lay literature or out of date. The paper is either too long or too short. Weak writing quality and/or little evidence of correctness of APA format.

Work lags behind expectations for graduate level work.

Grammar and APA formatting

Up to 5 points (20%) may be deducted for errors in grammar and/or APA style.

Assignment:Write an 8–10-page analysis paper (including references) in which you succinctly address the following:

Part 1: Define the policy issue. (5 points)
How is the issue affecting the policy arena?
What are the current politics of the issue?
At what level in the policy making process is the issue?
Part 2: Apply a policy analysis framework to explore the issue using the following contexts (5 points):
Social
Ethical
Legal
Historical
Financial / economic
Theoretical underpinnings of the policy
Include in this section:
Who are the stakeholders of interest?
Is there a nursing policy / position statement on this health care issue? If so, who developed it?
Part 3: Policy options / solutions (5 points)
What are the policy options / solutions for addressing the issue? Include at least three levels of options / solutions: no change; partial change; radical change or maximum change.
What are the theoretical underpinnings of the policy options / solutions?
What are the health advocacy aspects and leadership requirements of each option?
How does each option / solution provide an opportunity or need for interprofessional collaboration?
What are the pros and cons of each suggested change? Include the cost benefits, effectiveness, and efficiency of each option along with the utility and feasibility of each option.
Part 4: Building Consensus (5 points)
Outline a plan for building consensus around your recommended option / solution for solving the policy issue.
Part 5: References (5 points)
Limit your references so this section is no more than 2 pages.

*Note: Up to 5 points (20%) may be deducted for errors in grammar and/or APA style.

OLD NEW
Target Worthy of a professional portfolio; addresses every major subsection in the assignment; Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment;
Acceptable Needs revision to be worthy of a professional portfolio; addresses about 75% of the major subsections in the assignment Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses about 80% of the major subsections in the assignment
Unacceptable Needs substantial revision to be worthy of a professional portfolio; addresses less than 50% of the major subsections in the assignment Content needs substantial revision for it to be of a professional portfolio quality; addresses less than 50% of the major subsections in the assignment