+1 (208) 254-6996 essayswallet@gmail.com
  

It may seem to you that healthcare has been a national topic of debate among political leaders for as long as you can remember.

Healthcare has been a policy item and a topic of debate not only in recent times but as far back as the administration of the second U.S. president, John Adams. In 1798, Adams signed legislation requiring that 20 cents per month of a sailor’s paycheck be set aside for covering their medical bills. This represented the first major piece of U.S. healthcare legislation, and the topic of healthcare has been woven into presidential agendas and political debate ever since.

As a healthcare professional, you may be called upon to provide expertise, guidance and/or opinions on healthcare matters as they are debated for inclusion into new policy. You may also be involved in planning new organizational policy and responses to changes in legislation. For all of these reasons you should be prepared to speak to national healthcare issues making the news.

In this Assignment, you will analyze recent presidential healthcare agendas. You also will prepare a fact sheet to communicate the importance of a healthcare issue and the impact on this issue of recent or proposed policy.

To Prepare:

  • Review the agenda priorities of the current/sitting U.S. president and the two previous presidential administrations.
  • Select an issue related to healthcare that was addressed by each of the last three U.S. presidential administrations.
  • Reflect on the focus of their respective agendas, including the allocation of financial resources for addressing the healthcare issue you selected.
  • Consider how you would communicate the importance of a healthcare issue to a legislator/policymaker or a member of their staff for inclusion on an agenda.

The Assignment: (1- to 2-page Comparison Grid, 1-Page Analysis, and 1-page Fact Sheet)

Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid

Use the Agenda Comparison Grid Template found in the Learning Resources and complete the Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid based on the current/sitting U.S. president and the two previous presidential administrations and their agendas related to the public health concern you selected. Be sure to address the following:

  • Identify and provide a brief description of the population health concern you selected and the factors that contribute to it.
  • Describe the administrative agenda focus related to the issue you selected.
  • Identify the allocations of financial and other resources that the current and two previous presidents dedicated to this issue.
  • Explain how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue.

Part 2: Agenda Comparison Grid Analysis

Using the information you recorded in Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid on the template, complete the Part 2: Agenda Comparison Grid Analysis portion of the template, by addressing the following:

  • Which administrative agency would most likely be responsible for helping you address the healthcare issue you selected?
  • How do you think your selected healthcare issue might get on the agenda for the current and two previous presidents? How does it stay there?
  • Who would you choose to be the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue you selected for the current and two previous presidents?

Part 3: Fact Sheet or Talking Points Brief

Using the information recorded on the template in Parts 1 and 2, develop a 1-page narrative that you could use to communicate with a policymaker/legislator or a member of their staff for this healthcare issue. Be sure to address the following:

  • Summarize why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation.
  • Justify the role of the nurse in agenda-setting for healthcare issues.

Part 2:    

  • Which administrative agency would most likely be responsible for helping you address the healthcare issue you selected?
  • How do you think your selected healthcare issue might get on the agenda for the current and two previous presidents? How does it stay there?
  • Who would you choose to be the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue you selected for the current and two previous presidents?

Please be specific in this section.

Part 3: Talking Points Brief

Develop a 1-page Fact Sheet or Talking Points Brief that you could use to communicate with a policymaker/legislator or a member of their staff for this healthcare issue. You can use Microsoft Word or PowerPoint to create your Fact Sheet or Talking Point Brief. Be sure to address the following:

  • Summarize why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation.
  • Justify the role of the nurse in agenda-setting for healthcare issues.

   You need to read the DeMarco and Tufts (2014) article.

  • It must be formatted with an      Executive Summary, Background and Significance, and a Position Statement.
  • The bullets in the syllabus are included in the DeMarco and Adams format.  i.e. why this health care issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation. 
  • Justify the role of the nurse in agenda-setting for health care issues (this is straight out of your book).

Remember in this section you are talking to your legislators.  Please do not use I, We, etc. 

PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AS INDICATED BELOW:

1). ZERO (0) PLAGIARISM

2). 5 REFERENCES, NO MORE THAN 5 YEARS

3). PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING ATTACHED: RUBRIC, THE PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL AGENDAS GRID TEMPLATE YOU DID EARLIER, DeMarco and Tufts (2014) Article to complete part of the assignment.

4).   PLEASE WRITE PART 3 AS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AS INDICATED IN THE ASSIGNMENT.

PLEASE NOTE: THIS PARTICULAR ASSIGNMENT STARTS FROM PART 2 OF THE AGENDA COMPARISON GRID TEMPLATE, AND YOU HAVE DONE MOST OF IT EARLIER. PLEASE FOLLOW THROUGH.  

Thank you so much. 


Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name: NURS_6050_Module01_Week02_Assignment_Rubric

 ExcellentGoodFairPoor
Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid–Identify a population health concern-Describe the Population Health concern you selected and the factors that contribute to it.Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) The response clearly and accurately identifies and describes a population health concern. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) The response vaguely identifies and describes a population health concern. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) The response inaccurately identifies and describes a population health concern. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Identification and description of a population health concern is missing or incomplete. Feedback:
Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid– Describe the administrative agenda focus related to this issue for the current and two previous presidents.- Identify the allocations of financial and other resources that the current and two previous presidents dedicated to this issue.- Explain how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue.Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) The response clearly and accurately describes the presidential administrations’ focus related to the concern, the financial and resource allocation dedicated to the concern, and explains how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue. At least 3 resources are used. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) The response vaguely describes the presidential administrations’ focus related to the concern, the financial and resource allocation dedicated to the concern, and explains how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue. Only 2 resources are used. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response inaccurately describes the presidential administrations’ focus related to the concern, the financial and resource allocation dedicated to the concern, and how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue. Only 1 resource is used. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) The description of the presidential administrations’ focus related to the concern, financial and resource allocation dedicated to the concern, and explanation for how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue is missing. No resources are used. Feedback:
Part 2: Agenda Comparison Grid Analysis- Address the following:-Which administrative agency would most likely be responsible for helping you address the healthcare issue you selected?-How do you think your selected healthcare issue might get on the agenda? How does it stay there?-Who would you choose to be the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue you selected for the current and two previous presidents?Points: Points Range: 23 (23%) – 25 (25%) -The response clearly and accurately identifies an administrative agency most likely to be responsible for addressing the selected healthcare issue. -Response clearly and accurately explains how the healthcare issue gets on the agenda and remains there. – The response clearly and accurately identifies the entrepreneur/champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue selected. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 20 (20%) – 22 (22%) -The response vaguely identifies an administrative agency which may be responsible for addressing the selected healthcare issue. -Response adequately explains how the healthcare issue gets on the agenda and remains there. -Identification of the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue selected is vague. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) – 19 (19%) -Identification of an administrative agency responsible for addressing the selected health care issue is inaccurate. -Explanation of how the healthcare issue gets on the agenda and remains there is vague or inaccurate. -Identification of the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue selected is inaccurate or does not align with the healthcare issue. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 17 (17%) -Identification of an administrative agency responsible for addressing the selected healthcare issue is missing. -Explanation of how the healthcare issue gets on the agenda and remains there is vague and inaccurate or is missing. -Identification of the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue selected is vague and inaccurate or is missing. Feedback:
Narrative:Based on your Agenda Comparison Grid for the healthcare issue you selected, develop a 1-2-page narrative that you could use to communicate with a policy-maker/legislator or a member of their staff for this healthcare issue.-Summarize why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation.-Justify the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issuesPoints: Points Range: 32 (32%) – 35 (35%) Creates a well-developed, accurate, and narrative.The response provides a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources reviewed on why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation. The response fully integrates at least 2 outside resources and 2-3 course specific resources that fully supports the summary provided.Responses accurately and thoroughly justify in detail the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues.Feedback:Points: Points Range: 28 (28%) – 31 (31%) Creates an accurate and thorough narrative.The response provides an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource reviewed on why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation. The response integrates at least 1 outside resource and 2-3 course specific resources that may support the summary provided.Responses accurately justify the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues.Feedback:Points: Points Range: 25 (25%) – 27 (27%) Creates a narrative that is partially accurate or incomplete.The response provides a vague or inaccurate summary of outside resources reviewed on why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the summary provided.The responses partially justifies the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues.Feedback:Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 24 (24%)The response provides a vague and inaccurate summary of no outside resources reviewed on why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation, or is missing. The response fails to integrate any resources to support the summary provided.Responses justifying the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues is inaccurate and incomplete or is missing.Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.Feedback:Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.Feedback:Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.Feedback:Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuationPoints: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Feedback:Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid-

-Identify a population health concern

-Describe the Population Health concern you selected and the factors that contribute to it.– Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) The response clearly and accurately identifies and describes a population health concern. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) The response vaguely identifies and describes a population health concern. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) The response inaccurately identifies and describes a population health concern. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Identification and description of a population health concern is missing or incomplete. Feedback:

Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid-

– Describe the administrative agenda focus related to this issue for the current and two previous presidents.

– Identify the allocations of financial and other resources that the current and two previous presidents dedicated to this issue.

– Explain how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue.– Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) The response clearly and accurately describes the presidential administrations’ focus related to the concern, the financial and resource allocation dedicated to the concern, and explains how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue. At least 3 resources are used. Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) The response vaguely describes the presidential administrations’ focus related to the concern, the financial and resource allocation dedicated to the concern, and explains how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue. Only 2 resources are used. Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response inaccurately describes the presidential administrations’ focus related to the concern, the financial and resource allocation dedicated to the concern, and how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue. Only 1 resource is used. Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) The description of the presidential administrations’ focus related to the concern, financial and resource allocation dedicated to the concern, and explanation for how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue is missing. No resources are used. Feedback:

Part 2: Agenda Comparison Grid Analysis- Address the following:

-Which administrative agency would most likely be responsible for helping you address the healthcare issue you selected?

-How do you think your selected healthcare issue might get on the agenda? How does it stay there?

-Who would you choose to be the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue you selected for the current and two previous presidents?– Levels of Achievement: Excellent 23 (23%) – 25 (25%) -The response clearly and accurately identifies an administrative agency most likely to be responsible for addressing the selected healthcare issue. -Response clearly and accurately explains how the healthcare issue gets on the agenda and remains there. – The response clearly and accurately identifies the entrepreneur/champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue selected. Good 20 (20%) – 22 (22%) -The response vaguely identifies an administrative agency which may be responsible for addressing the selected healthcare issue. -Response adequately explains how the healthcare issue gets on the agenda and remains there. -Identification of the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue selected is vague. Fair 18 (18%) – 19 (19%) -Identification of an administrative agency responsible for addressing the selected health care issue is inaccurate. -Explanation of how the healthcare issue gets on the agenda and remains there is vague or inaccurate. -Identification of the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue selected is inaccurate or does not align with the healthcare issue. Poor 0 (0%) – 17 (17%) -Identification of an administrative agency responsible for addressing the selected healthcare issue is missing. -Explanation of how the healthcare issue gets on the agenda and remains there is vague and inaccurate or is missing. -Identification of the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue selected is vague and inaccurate or is missing. Feedback:

Narrative:

Based on your Agenda Comparison Grid for the healthcare issue you selected, develop a 1-2-page narrative that you could use to communicate with a policy-maker/legislator or a member of their staff for this healthcare issue.

-Summarize why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation.

-Justify the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues– Levels of Achievement: Excellent 32 (32%) – 35 (35%) Creates a well-developed, accurate, and narrative.

The response provides a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources reviewed on why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation. The response fully integrates at least 2 outside resources and 2-3 course specific resources that fully supports the summary provided.

Responses accurately and thoroughly justify in detail the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues.Good 28 (28%) – 31 (31%) Creates an accurate and thorough narrative.

The response provides an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource reviewed on why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation. The response integrates at least 1 outside resource and 2-3 course specific resources that may support the summary provided.

Responses accurately justify the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues.Fair 25 (25%) – 27 (27%) Creates a narrative that is partially accurate or incomplete.

The response provides a vague or inaccurate summary of outside resources reviewed on why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the summary provided.

The responses partially justifies the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues.Poor 0 (0%) – 24 (24%)

The response provides a vague and inaccurate summary of no outside resources reviewed on why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation, or is missing. The response fails to integrate any resources to support the summary provided.

Responses justifying the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues is inaccurate and incomplete or is missing.Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:

Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.– Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:

Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation– Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_6050_Module01_Week02_Assignment_Rubric

American Academy of Nursing on Policy

The mechanics of writing a policy brief Rosanna DeMarco, PhD, RN, PHCNS-BC, APHN-BC, ACRN, FAANa,*,

Kimberly Adams Tufts, DNP, WHNP-BC, FAANb aDepartment of Nursing, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA

bCommunity and Global Initiatives, School of Nursing, College of Health Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA

According to Nannini and Houde (2010), reports addressing the interests and needs of policy makers are frequently referred to as policy briefs. These reports are intended to be short and easy to use, containing information that can be reviewed quickly by policy makers. The contents of these reports are based on systematic reviews of the literature addressing refereed, rigorously evaluated science to advance pol- icy making based on the best evidence. In a very important way, policy briefs give policymakers context to the issues that are intended to be addressed in their roles. Policy brief writers typically used this genre of communicating ideas and opinions when they argue a specific solution to a problem while addressing the audience outside of their organization or common worldview. Today, policy briefs have become popular tools for corporations and professional organizations, especially on the Internet but also in other readily accessible written formats, in that they promote the mission and vision of organizations through public sharing of ideas based on compelling evidence (Colby, Quinn, Williams, Bilhelmer, & Goodell, 2008).

Typically, the purpose of a policy brief is to create a short document providing findings and recommenda- tions to an audience who may not be experts in an area of interest. The brief serves as a vehicle for providing policy advice; it advocates for the desired solution to a particular problem or challenge. The audience for a pol- icy brief can be the general public or particular entities of interest that seek solutions to problems or needs or who may require to be convinced of a different way of looking at an area of interest (i.e., exposure to a new paradigm). In order to persuade the targeted audience, the brief must focus on their needs. If the brief addresses prob- lems that readers want to solve, they will read the policy brief looking for a newway to view a solution. Otherwise, the policy brief may not be read and may even be ignored. It is important to emphasize the readers’ in- terests rather than those of the writer when composing this type of document while supplying credible evidence to support change in policy (Pick, 2008).

Students in policy courses, professional organiza- tions, policy institutes (i.e., “think tanks”), and

* Corresponding author: Rosanna DeMarco, 100 Morrissey Boulevard, ton, Boston, MA 02135.

E-mail address: rosanna.demarco@umb.edu (R. DeMarco).

0029-6554/$ – see front matter � 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

legislators are among those who most often write policy briefs for the purpose of giving succinct evidence to support actions that ideally should be taken to address an issue. The main purpose of giving the evi- dence in a succinct form is to make a convincing argument to inform policy making while considering all the salient aspects of an issue from a position of expertise. Policy briefs are written to inform others of a specific viewpoint, to frame discussions, and to show credibility and expertise on a certain subject matter (Chaffee, 2007).

There are many examples of policy briefs. We focus on one policy brief that was produced by the American Academy of Nursing’s expert panel addressing emerging and infectious diseases (DeMarco, Bradley Springer, Gallagher, Jones, & Visk, 2012) (Figure 1). Other examples are readily available outside of the American Academy of Nursing and can be accessed for comparison, such as a policy brief on the consolidation of school districts that was written by the National Education and Policy Center (Howley, Johnson, & Petrie, 2011) and a policy brief that was generated as the end product of a funded research project addressing rural considerations related to globalization (DERREG, 2011). Each of these policy briefs shows the structure of a typical brief with some key variations that will be addressed and explained. What is often lacking in the literature is guidance on how one creates effective pol- icy briefs (i.e., the structure and mechanics of devel- oping the brief itself) and how there may be differences in the physical presentation across business and pro- fessional groups aswell as national versus international approaches. This article highlights the overall frame- work for crafting an effective policy brief by using the three briefs mentioned previously as examples.

Step 1: Considerations before Writing a Policy Brief

The informed writer of a policy brief gives attention to two major considerations before drafting the brief:

301-22 Science Center Building, University of Massachusetts Bos-

.mailto:rosanna.demarco@umb.eduhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

Figure 1 e Excerpts from Executive Summary, Background and Significance, and Position Statement (DeMarco et al., 2012).

Nur s Out l o o k 6 2 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 2 1 9e 2 2 4220

(1) the interests and expertise of the target audience and (2) the timing of delivery for the brief. Consider- ationmust be given to the target audience for the brief so that the level of writing, explanations, and exam- ples will be geared to the needs of that group. For example, a policy brief focusing on infectious disease transmission that is directed to a nonscientific group interested in volunteerism will require more expla- nation of terms than would be the case with a scien- tific research group. Do research to determine how knowledgeable the group is about the topic. This research is highly significant because if readers are highly knowledgeable, simplified concepts may be interpreted as patronizing. The writer must consider how much persuasion is needed in order to convince the reader of the policy brief to take the endorsed approach and/or action. The readermay bemore open

to the message and the message viewed as more ur- gent during times of crisis (e.g., gun control when an episode of gun violence has made national news). At other times, the writer may need to provide more evidence and more carefully consider alternative perspectives.

This approach is highlighted in the examples pre- sented in this article. In Figure 1, the authors discuss HIV testing at a critical point wherein the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had recently released information about transmission trends and related those trends to individuals who did not know their status and therefore might be transmitting infectious diseases unknowingly. Thus, there was a perceived immediate need to protect individuals from height- ened vulnerability and to decrease the prospective health and personal costs related to chronic diseasehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

Figure 1 e (continued).

Nur s Ou t l o o k 6 2 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 2 1 9e 2 2 4 221

care through policy change. Finally, a balanced brief shows both sides of a complex issue. Including the benefits and advantages or barriers and facilitators to a solution is very important as can be seen in Figure 1. It underscores the position but also embodies a sense of fairness in putting forth that position.

Step 2: Four Sections to a Policy Brief

Generally, there are four sections to a policy brief: (1) an executive summary; (2) background and significance; (3) a position statement highlighting the actions the reader should take; and (4) a timely, reputable refer- ence list. One of the challenging issues of writing a policy brief is that it should be brief. A policy brief should be a “stand-alone” document focused on a single topic that is no more than two to four pages in length or 1,500 words (International Development

Research Center, 2013) (Figure 2). The example in Figure 1 (DeMarco et al., 2012) is a good example of how to achieve brevity.

Executive Summary

This section represents the distillation of the policy brief. It provides an overview for busy readers and should be written last. The executive summary is similar to an abstract. It should be a paragraph or two and only take up half of a double-spaced page. It should stand alone and help the reader to understand the background, significance, and position taken in a short brief statement. The executive summary should answer the following question: What is the policy brief really about? In Figure 1, in the case of universal testing for HIV, the authors include statements that summarize the need for testing from the perspective of not knowing one’s testing status and how dangerous this is while explaining the difficulty inhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

Figure 1 e (continued).

Nur s Out l o o k 6 2 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 2 1 9e 2 2 4222

harnessing real data regarding the incidence and prevalence of infection and coinfections (DeMarco et al., 2012).

Background and Significance

This section creates curiosity for the rest of the brief. It explains the importance and urgency of the issue and answers “why?” In addition, it describes issues and context and should not be overly technical. The rule of thumb is to progress from the general to the specific.

The purpose and/or focus of the policy brief must immediately be apparent to the reader. This is essen- tial to crafting an effective and persuasive brief. Therefore, limiting the supporting evidence to one or two paragraphs is critical as shown in Figure 1.

If available, it is also important to include references from lay publications with a wide sphere of influence (e.g., The New York Times, The Washington Post, and so on). The use of such references informs the reader that the topic is current and in the public purview. Using current references defines the challenge and facilitateshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

Figure 2 e Key elements of a policy brief.

Nur s Ou t l o o k 6 2 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 2 1 9e 2 2 4 223

an understanding of the extent of the challenge. Cur- rent references also elucidate why this challenge is perhaps more important than other challenges. Using statistics from respected published sources that are current, reputable, and peer reviewed is an effective way to accomplish this. Statistics are frequently used in the examples in Figure 1. These data highlight that many people are affected or potentially affected by these infections, and particular health care costs are either mentioned or identified by naming states that have instituted changes in these areas of interest. In the examples, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the European Commission are quoted as foundational national and international authorities. After presenting the context and background in the opening paragraphs, the writer can then move on to “bring home the point” by highlighting the key con- cerns surrounding the issue in the next section of the document.

Highlight the key concerns via bulleted points (Figure 1). This is the place to illustrate the broad impact of the issue to focus attention on multifaceted

aspects. The impact of an issue, whether it be positive or negative, is rarely limited to one facet. The ramifi- cations are frequently multifaceted, with health, the economy, professional autonomy of providers, human rights of care recipients, environmental consider- ations, and social implications being among them. Consider the case for promoting universal testing for HIV infection. Although universal testing for HIV will result in increased numbers of persons being aware they are infected, lead to decreased community levels of HIV because of decreased transmission, and facili- tate earlier enrollment in HIV care and treatment (DeMarco et al., 2012; Figure 1), there are also other implications in addition to the impact on health out- comes. A more persuasive argument might also include information about increased labor productivity and quality of life. A well-written policy brief presents a variety of consequences related to the issue at hand. Hence, clearly explicated key concerns are easily linked to the writer’s recommendations for addressing the issue (i.e., position statement). The position state- ment constitutes the third section of the policy brief.

Position Statement Directing Policy

This section expresses ideas that are balanced and defensible but with strong assertions. One of the key approaches is to let the reader know what could happen if something does not change. In every case, this section needs to be supported by evidence and be replete with referenced sources. The position state- ment sectionmust also be clear and concise and is best written without inflammatory language (Chaffee, 2007). The writer should use the active voice. Active language can be quite persuasive, giving the impres- sion that this issue is important. Keeping the focus of the statement narrow also facilitates its effectiveness by avoiding a potential dilution of the issue (Foley, 2007). Parsimony is a must; white space and bullets are very useful techniques.

The position statement section of a policy brief highlights the writer’s recommendations using clear, concise, appropriate, and directly actionable language. If writing a policy brief that is directed to a policymaker (e.g., a congressman, city council member, and so on), speak their language. Use policy-related language when drafting recommendations for action. For example, “write new guidelines to oversee the practice of advanced practice nurses” might be more effectively written as “promulgate new rules to regulate the practice of advanced practice nurses.” For recommen- dations that are directly actionable (Longest, 2010), one might write, “Ensure that all FDA [Food and Drug Administration]-approved prescription medications must be available on all insurance company formulary lists.” The term ensure leaves a lot to interpretation. How might the availability of medications be ensured? Will the availability be ensured by asserting pressure on employers who provide insurance coverage, by enlisting the assistance of consumers, or viahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

Nur s Out l o o k 6 2 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 2 1 9e 2 2 4224

authoritative agency oversight? A clearer and more directive recommendationmight read, “Draft new CMS [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services] regulations mandating that all FDA-approved prescription medi- cations be made available on all insurance company formulary lists.”

Reference List

The formatting and style of references should also be considered. The use of superscripts saves room in the text of a policy brief, and sequential numeric refer- encing in the reference list allows for an easy review of the references as the reader examines the contents of the brief. Figure 1 gives examples of the use of super- scripts with sequential referencing to maximize space.

In addition to a reference list that encompasses cited sources, an effective position statement should be accompanied by an extensive bibliography. This is where the writer of the statement is able to show his or her in-depth grasp of the background for, context of, and trends related to the issue. The bibliography should be comprised of entries from journals, news- papers, and books in addition to online sources. Including this section goes a long way in creating goodwill with staffers and agency personnel. A diverse and comprehensive bibliography is especially helpful if the recipient of the policy brief decides to investigate the issue and potentially take action.

Design Choices

As has been discussed earlier, the use of bullets to emphasize key sections of the policy brief, such as specific policy suggestions made in the position state- ment section, enables the reader to focus. However, the bullets must express a complete thought and not be so abbreviated that it is difficult to understand the point being made (Figure 1). Using subtitles to break up text or bold, underlined, or shaded/color-highlighted font enhancements is also helpful. Boxing in areas to emphasize examples or issues can create a focus in the document as will using graphs and figures if they are easy to read and labeled accurately. All verbs need to be dynamic and allow the reader to feel propelled to do something or think in a different way (Figure 1).

Conclusion

A well-written policy brief is a very effective advocacy tool. Nurses are credible and respected authorities

who enjoy the public’s trust and confidence. Har- nessing that expertise and using it to draft policy briefs is a fantastic strategy for impacting health care policy and health outcomes. Essentially, a well-crafted policy brief takes a position, backs up that position with solid evidence, is clear and succinct, and speaks to potential objections before they surface (Chaffee, 2007). Hence, the policy brief is an excellent tool for exerting influence in the increasingly complex health policy arena.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge themembers of the American Academy of Nursing Emerging & Infectious Diseases Expert Panel for their guidance and assistance.

r e f e r e n c e s

Chaffee, M. W. (2007). Communication skills for political success. In D. M. Mason, J. K. Leavitt, & M. W. Chaffee (Eds.), Policy & politics in nursing and health care (pp. 121e134). St. Louis, MO: Saunders Elsevier.

Colby, D. C., Quinn, B. C., Williams, C. H., Bilhelmer, L. T., & Goodell, S. (2008). Research glut and information famine: Making research evidence more useful for policymakers. Health affairs, 27, 1177e1182.

DeMarco, R. F., Bradley Springer, L., Gallagher, D., Jones, S. G., & Visk, J. (2012). Recommendations and reality: Perceived patient, provider, and policy barriers to implementing routine HIV-screening and proposed solutions. Nursing Outlook, 60, 72e80.

DERREG (Developing Europe’s Rural Regions in the Era of Globalization). (2011). European Commission, European Research Area, Social Sciences and Humanities. Retrieved from http://www.derreg.eu/.

Foley, M. (2007). Lobbying policymakers: Individual and collective strategies. In D. M. Mason, J. K. Leavitt, & M. W. Chaffee (Eds.), Policy & politics in nursing and health care (pp. 747e759). St Louis, MO: Saunders Elsevier.

Howley, C., Johnson, J., & Petrie, J. (2011). Consolidation of schools and districts: What the research says and what it means. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved from http://nepc. colorado.edu/publication/consolidation-schools-districts.

International Development Research Center (IDRC). (2013). Toolkit for researchers: How to write a policy brief. Retrieved from http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Tools_and_Training/ Documents/how-to-write-a-policy-brief.pdf.

Longest, B. B. (2010). Health policymaking in the United States (5th ed.) Chicago: Health Administration Press.

Nannini, A., & Houde, S. C. (2010). Translating evidence from systematic reviews for policy makers. Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 36, 22e26.

Pick, W. (2008). Lack of evidence hampers human-resources policy making. Lancet, 371, 629e630.http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref1http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref1http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref2http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref2http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref2http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref2http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref3http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref3http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref3http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref3http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref3http://www.derreg.eu/http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref4http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref4http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/consolidation-schools-districtshttp://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/consolidation-schools-districtshttp://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Tools_and_Training/Documents/how-to-write-a-policy-brief.pdfhttp://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Tools_and_Training/Documents/how-to-write-a-policy-brief.pdfhttp://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref6http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref6http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref7http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref7http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref7http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref8http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/sref8http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

  • The mechanics of writing a policy brief
    • Step 1: Considerations before Writing a Policy Brief
    • Step 2: Four Sections to a Policy Brief
      • Executive Summary
      • Background and Significance
      • Position Statement Directing Policy
      • Reference List
    • Design Choices
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgments
    • References

Agenda Comparison Grid Template

Title:

First Name Last Name

Walden University

Policy and Advocacy for Improving Population Health

NURS 6050

Date

Title of Paper

Introduction

Regardless of political affiliations, all citizens have a right to take part in healthcare policy-making. Over the years, the issue of abortion has always been significant in the healthcare industry and the U.S. department of care. Most recently, abortion has become a huge topic of discussion and controversy in the healthcare sector in the United States. Factors that lead to the urge for abortion include effects on birthrates, the economic influence, and sexual behavior changes amongst teens. As such, Fix et al. (2020) argue that 81% of people are likely to develop and experience different mental health disorders like depression, anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse, suicidal attempts, and stress after aborting. This shows that some studies encourage the legalization of abortion in the United States, while others oppose it.

Agenda Comparison Grid and Fact Sheet or Talking Points Brief Assignment Template for Part 1 and Part 2Part 1: Agenda Comparison GridIdentify the Population Health concern you selected.Over the years, the issue of abortion has always been significant in the healthcare industry and the U.S. department of care. Most recently, abortion has become a huge topic of discussion and controversy in the healthcare sector in the United States.Describe the Population Health concern you selected and the factors that contribute to it.Factors that lead to the urge for abortion include effects on birthrates, the economic influence, and sexual behavior changes amongst teens. As such, Fix et al. (2020) argue that 81% of people are likely to develop and experience different mental health disorders like depression, anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse, suicidal attempts, and stress after aborting.Administration (President Name)President TrumpPresident ObamaPresident BushDescribe the administrative agenda focus related to this issue for the current and two previous presidents.In the annual Match for Life event in January 2018, President Trump spoke to the participants that included opponents of abortion, and ensured them that his administration is devoted to defending the first right in the Declaration of Independence, namely the right to life. He is an opponent of abortion and believes that there is no moral and legal basis for terminating the life of an innocent baby. The current president also believes in the protection of the sanctity of life and the family as the core foundation of the society.Obama was pro-choice and supported safe abortion procedures since he believed it was the right of women to terminate pregnancies for any reason. He was among the key American leaders that prioritized the needs of the public without violating their needs. He also preserved women’s rights to affordable and free abortion without judgment and discrimination as promoted by tax-subsidized providers, such as Planned Parenthood (Annas, 2009).Bush was in support of the constitutional amendment that made the procedure illegal. However, he partially supported abortion in cases of incest, rape, and instances when the life of a woman was in jeopardy. He also believed that Americans did not support his directive, and thus, there was no need to pursue it (Pro-life profiles).Identify the allocations of financial and other resources that the current and two previous presidents dedicated to this issue.He recently signed the executive order to reinstate the abortion ban that was removed by Barack Obama and withdrew the federal family planning funding that is deemed to provide abortion care (Freiburger, 2019).The Obama administration reinstated the policy to fund legal family planning and safe abortion during his reign.President Bush reinstated the ‘Mexico City Policy’ requiring NGPS that received federal funding to refrain from performance or promotion abortion services.Explain how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue.President Trump claimed that his administration is devoted to defending the first right in the Declaration of Independence, namely the right to life. As such, he does not promote funding for safe abortion and believes in pro-life decisions.Obama was pro-choice and supported safe abortion procedures since he believed it was the right of women to terminate pregnancies for any reason. He was among the key American leaders that prioritized the needs of the public without violating their needs. He also preserved women’s rights to affordable and free abortion without judgment and discrimination as promoted by tax-subsidized providers, such as Planned Parenthood (Annas, 2009).He is the president that was probably the most sensitive on the subject of abortion when compared to the other two presidents. Bush was in support of the constitutional amendment that made the procedure illegal. However, he partially supported abortion in cases of incest, rape, and instances when the life of a woman was in jeopardy.Part 2: Agenda Comparison Grid AnalysisUsing the information you recorded in Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid, complete the following to document information about the population health/healthcare issue your selectedAdministration (President Name)President TrumpPresident ObamaPresident BushWhich administrative agency would most likely be responsible for helping you address the healthcare issue you selected?I would rely on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which I the current government agency in charge of US abortion data.Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would also be applicable when discussion the significant approval strategies for the use of medical abortions in the US.The Department of Health and Human services would be incredible in addressing federal policies for abortions.How do you think your selected healthcare issue might get on the agenda for the current and two previous presidents? How does it stay there?President Trump always addressed abortion often during his bid for president. He has also addressed the issue in his administration.Obama made it clear that he would support abortion during his campaigns and maintained the same goal during his administration. It was his priority to overturn the Mexico City Policy and fund legal family planning.Abortion would be an agenda for George W Bush since he reinstated the Mexico City Policy to address the issue. Using this approach, Bush signed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, in 2002 to extend legal protection of prematurely born babies.Who would you choose to be the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor of the healthcare issue you selected for the current and two previous presidents?President Obama does not appear to perceive safe abortion as ethical even as a result of rape, hence he would not champion for healthcare.President Obama’s firm stand on the legality of abortion does not value abortion as a choice of both partners, but the woman alone regardless of the reason.I would choose President Bush based on his personal and sympathetic approach to abortion laws. He was very realistic and followed moral standards in his views and opinions.Narrative with the FactsPresident George W. Bush – he is the president that was probably the most sensitive leaders on the subject of abortion when compared to the other two presidents. Bush was in support of the constitutional amendment that made the procedure illegal. However, he partially supported abortion in cases of incest, rape, and instances when the life of a woman was in jeopardy. He also believed that Americans did not support his directive, and thus, there was no need to pursue it (Pro-life profiles). Additionally, he added that his Supreme Court nominees were not allowed to pass an anti-abortion policy. Bush was for the idea that babies could not die intentionally, but women have some rights to terminate pregnancies. However, since he was ant-abortion, he took away funding of the procedure and encouraged partial abortion for critical conditions.President Barack Obama – Obama was pro-choice and supported safe abortion procedures since he believed it was the right of women to terminate pregnancies for any reason. He was among the key American leaders that prioritized the needs of the public without violating their needs. He also preserved women’s rights to affordable and free abortion without judgment and discrimination as promoted by tax-subsidized providers, such as Planned Parenthood (Annas, 2009). Obama felt that abortion was a moral issue and did not see it as a political issue of concern. As such, he enacted the freedom of choice Act to codify women’s rights to abort in 2008 (Bilger, 2018). He removed all federal and state-level restrictions on abortion.Donald Trump – in the annual Match for Life event in January 2018, President Trump spoke to the participants that included opponents of abortion, and ensured them that his administration is devoted to defending the first right in the Declaration of Independence, namely the right to life. He is an opponent of abortion and believes that there is no moral and legal basis for terminating the life of an innocent baby. The current president also believes in the protection of the sanctity of life and the family as the core foundation of the society. He recently signed the executive order to reinstate the abortion ban that was removed by Barack Obama and withdrew the federal family planning funding that is deemed to provide abortion care (Freiburger, 2019).ConclusionConclusively, if I were in a position to make a decision regarding the legalization of abortion, I would support what President Bush did. I am pro-life, but I believe that there should be reason for the termination of pregnancy. This is because of the family planning concerns and birthrates, as well as the critical conditions that might increase the need to abort. Therefore, I would pro-choice decisions and partially encourage abortion when it must happen. I would also encourage safe, legal abortion to save lives.ReferencesAnnas, G. J. (2009). Abortion politics and health insurance reform. New England Journal of Medicine361(27), 2589-2591. DOI: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0911513.Bilger, M. (2018, December 13). Barack Obama, The Abortion President, Receives Human Rights Award. https://www.lifenews.com/2018/12/13/barack-obama-the-abortion-president-receives-human-rights-award/Fix, L., Seymour, J. W., Grossman, D., Johnson, D. M., Aiken, A. R., Gomperts, R., & Grindlay, K. (2020). Abortion need among U.S. servicewomen: evidence from an internet service. Women’s Health Issues30(3), 161-166.Freiburger, C. (2019, February 22). Trump admin cuts $60 million from Planned Parenthood. https://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Donald_Trump_Abortion.htmPro-life profiles. George W. Bush Former President of the U.S. (R) Tier 4 – Personhood Never. http://prolifeprofiles.com/george-w-bush-abortion© 2020 Walden University 1