Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment]
Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment]
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.
![Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment]](https://nursingassignmentgurus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Policy-Analysis-Paper-Major-Assessment-300x93.png "Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment] 1")
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.
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 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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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 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