Healthcare is a field dominated by complex regulation, limited resources, highly charged debates, changing reimbursement, expensive education barriers to entry, and knowledge imbalances. Healthcare decision-makers often have to review information about an issue, analyze the applicable law, and make a decision. Those decisions are often not founded on clearly right or clearly wrong “answers.” Nonetheless, after decision makers conduct or review a policy analysis and a legal analysis and arrive at a conclusion, they must be able to support and defend that decision. Stakeholder values are often in conflict; decision makers working in the field of healthcare and health law have many opportunities to defend their decisions!
The final project for this course will give you an opportunity to build policy and legal analysis skills. You will choose from one of three issue prompts at the beginning of the course. Throughout the course, you will draft a memo containing an overview and analysis of your selected issue, as well as a series of recommendations for a healthcare executive. You will experience some of the challenges of reconciling competing values, demands for resources, and
organizational needs. Each issue prompt is based on “real world” scenarios, so take this opportunity to practice developing health law and policy analysis skills. This final project addresses your mastery with regard to the following course outcomes:
You will write a policy memorandum, with recommendations, paper in which you will analyze a health law and policy issue and make a series of recommendations to a healthcare executive. At the beginning of this course, you chose one of three issue scenarios. Now, you will create each section of the policy memorandum using the tools and strategies you developed in this course. You have developed those tools and strategies in a stepwise fashion in each module. Remember that the purpose of the policy memorandum is to analyze the issue scenario, make thoughtful arguments about the issue, and make recommendations based on your analysis.
Your policy memorandum with recommendations paper must contain the following critical elements. Most of the critical elements align with a particular course outcome (shown in brackets).
Milestone One: Executive Summary
In Module Two, you will select one of the three possible issue prompts and prepare a draft of your executive summary that identifies your chosen issue prompt and includes a summary of the facts, analysis of key stakeholders and considerations, and recommendation. This submission will be graded with the Milestone One Rubric.
In Module Three, you will submit a draft of your factual overview of the issue. This submission will be graded with the Milestone Two Rubric.
In Module Five, you will submit an outline of your analysis of the key elements surrounding your issue. This submission will be graded with the Milestone Three Rubric.
In Module Seven, you will submit a draft of your full analysis of the issue, including your analysis of the key impacted stakeholders, application of current healthcare laws, assessment of potential conflicts, and consideration of any legal risks. This submission will be graded with the Milestone Four Rubric.
In Module Nine, you will revise your previous milestones based on instructor feedback, compile these components, and add your fully developed recommendation to submit your final policy memorandum. It should be a complete, polished artifact containing all of the critical elements of the final product. It should reflect the incorporation of feedback gained throughout the course. This submission will be graded with the Final Project Rubric.
Milestone | Deliverable | Module Due | Grading |
One | Executive Summary | Two | Graded separately; Milestone One Rubric |
Two | Factual Overview | Three | Graded separately; Milestone Two Rubric |
Three | Analysis Outline | Five | Graded separately; Milestone Three Rubric |
Four | Full Analysis | Seven | Graded separately; Milestone Four Rubric |
Policy Memorandum | Nine | Graded separately; Final Project Rubric (below) |
Guidelines for Submission: Your policy memorandum with recommendations paper should not exceed 12 pages, including a one-page executive summary. It should be formatted in 12-point Times New Roman font, double-spaced, with one-inch margins. All citations and references should be formatted according to current APA guidelines.
Critical Elements | Exemplary (100%) | Proficient (90%) | Needs Improvement (70%) | Not Evident (0%) | Value |
Executive Summary | Meets “Proficient” criteria, and articulation is exceptionally clear and consumable | Provides a comprehensive executive summary, avoiding the use of healthcare jargon | Provides an executive summary, but with gaps in required detail or uses
healthcare jargon |
Does not provide an executive summary | 3 |
Overview: Importance [IHP-610-02] | Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the importance of the issue to
the organization |
Logically describes the importance of the issue to the healthcare organization | Describes the importance of the issue to the healthcare organization, but with gaps in
logic or required detail |
Does not describe the importance of the issue to the healthcare organization | 6.07 |
Overview: Stakeholders [IHP-610-01] | Meets “Proficient” criteria and expands identification to include external stakeholders who may be impacted by the
issue |
Accurately identifies key organizational stakeholders involved in the issue | Identifies key organizational stakeholders involved in the issue, but with gaps in accuracy or detail | Does not identify key organizational stakeholders involved in the issue | 6.07 |
Overview: Role
[IHP-610-05] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates exceptional insight into the impact stakeholders can have in shaping health law and policy
issues |
Logically explains how identified stakeholders played a role in shaping the health law and policy issue in the selected scenario | Explains how identified stakeholders played a role in shaping the health law and policy issue in the selected scenario, but with gaps in logic
or detail |
Does not explain how identified stakeholders played a role in shaping the health law and policy issue in the selected scenario | 6.07 |
Overview: Legal Risks and Malpractice Issues [IHP-610-03] | Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into legal risks and malpractice issues | Accurately identifies potential legal risks and malpractice issues, providing evidence or examples to support response | Identifies potential legal risks and malpractice issues, providing evidence or examples to support response, but with gaps in accuracy, detail, or
relevant support |
Does not identify potential legal risks and malpractice issues and does not provide evidence or examples to support response | 6.07 |
Overview: Value Conflicts
[IHP-610-04] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the types of value conflicts among healthcare stakeholders | Accurately identifies potential value conflicts among stakeholders, providing evidence or examples to support response | Identifies potential value conflicts among stakeholders, providing evidence or examples to support response, but with gaps in accuracy, detail, or
relevant support |
Does not identify potential value conflicts among stakeholders and does not provide evidence or examples to support response | 4.55 |
Analysis: Needs and Interests
[IHP-610-01] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and draws nuanced connections between stakeholder needs and
organizational decision-making |
Logically analyzes needs and interests of identified stakeholders, providing specific
examples |
Analyzes needs and interests of identified stakeholders, but with gaps in logic, detail, or
specificity of examples |
Does not analyze needs and interests of identified stakeholders and does not
provide specific examples |
6.07 |
Analysis: Laws
[IHP-610-02] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates superior insight into current healthcare laws, policies, and financing practices | Accurately applies current healthcare laws, policies, and financing practices to the issue, highlighting any potential financial ramifications associated with the issue | Applies current healthcare laws, policies, and financing practices to the issue, highlighting any potential financial ramifications associated with the issue, but with gaps in accuracy or
required detail |
Does not apply current healthcare laws, policies, and financing practices to the issue, highlighting any potential financial ramifications associated with the issue | 6.07 |
Analysis: Conflicts
[IHP-610-04] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into value conflicts among healthcare stakeholders | Logically explains why stakeholder value conflicts may exist in the environment, justifying reasoning | Explains why stakeholder value conflicts may exist in the environment, justifying reasoning, but with gaps in logic, required detail, or
justification |
Does not explain why stakeholder value conflicts may exist in the environment and does not justify reasoning | 4.55 |
Analysis: Legal Risks and Malpractice Issues
[IHP-610-03] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and draws nuanced connections among legal risks, malpractice issues, and policy-making | Logically evaluates identified legal risks and malpractice issues, analyzing how conflicting values may impact potential legal risks | Evaluates identified legal risks and malpractice issues, analyzing how conflicting values may impact potential legal risks, but with gaps in logic or
required detail |
Does not evaluate identified legal risks and malpractice issues and does not analyze how conflicting values may impact potential legal risks | 6.07 |
Recommendations: Course of Action [IHP-610-04] | Meets “Proficient” criteria, and recommended course of action is aligned with industry-specific
best practices |
Recommends a course of action to healthcare executive that is supported by analysis | Recommends a course of action to healthcare executive that is not supported by analysis | Does not recommend a course of action to healthcare executive | 4.55 |
Recommendations:
Reconcile [IHP-610-01] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and draws nuanced connections between stakeholder needs and
decision-making |
Proposes a logical plan to reconcile divergent stakeholder needs and interests | Proposes a plan to reconcile divergent stakeholder needs and interests, but with gaps in
logic or required detail |
Does not propose a plan to reconcile divergent stakeholder needs and interests | 6.06 |
Recommendations: Legal Risks and Potential Malpractice Issues [IHP-610-03] | Meets “Proficient” criteria and draws nuanced connections among legal risks, malpractice issues, and policy-making | Logically assesses the extent to which legal risks and malpractice issues shaped decision, explaining reasoning | Assesses the extent to which legal risks and malpractice issues shaped decision, explaining reasoning, but with gaps in logic, required detail, or
relevant reasoning |
Does not assess the extent to which legal risks and malpractice issues shaped decision, explaining reasoning | 6.06 |
Get Communication Trends Report Help!!
Recommendations: Financing Practices [IHP-610-02] | Meets “Proficient” criteria and draws nuanced connections between financing practices and decision-making | Logically assesses the extent to which recommended course of action addresses financing practices that impact key stakeholders, explaining reasoning | Assesses the extent to which recommended course of action addresses financing practices that impact key stakeholders, explaining reasoning, but with gaps in logic, required detail, or
relevant reasoning |
Does not assess the extent to which recommended course of action addresses financing practices that impact key stakeholders and does not explain reasoning | 6.06 |
Recommendations: Potential Conflicts [IHP-610-04] | Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates superior judgment in determining how to employ risk management strategies to resolve conflicts fairly | Proposes a logical plan to resolve identified potential conflicts, identifying risk management strategies to be employed | Proposes a plan to resolve identified potential conflicts, identifying risk management strategies to be employed, but plan is not logical for its intended purpose or response
has gaps in required detail |
Does not propose a plan to resolve identified potential conflicts and does not identify risk management strategies to be employed | 4.55 |
Recommendations:
Influence [IHP-610-05] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates exceptional insight into the impact stakeholders can have in shaping health law and policy
issues |
Proposes an appropriate strategy for key stakeholders to influence healthcare
executive’s decision |
Proposes a strategy for key stakeholders to influence healthcare executive’s decision, but strategy is inappropriate for its intended purpose | Does not propose a strategy for key stakeholders to influence healthcare executive’s decision | 6.07 |
Recommendations:
Improve [IHP-610-05] |
Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates exceptional insight into the impact stakeholders can have in shaping health law and policy issues to improve population
outcomes |
Logically discusses how strategy for key stakeholders may improve population health outcomes, explaining reasoning | Discusses how strategy for key stakeholders may improve population health outcomes, explaining reasoning, but with gaps in logic, required detail, or relevant reasoning | Does not discuss how strategy for key stakeholders may improve population health outcomes and does not explain reasoning | 6.06 |
Recommendations: Summarize | Meets “Proficient” criteria and expertly balances brevity with required detail | Summarizes analysis and recommendations in a brief concluding paragraph | Summarizes analysis and recommendations, but response is verbose or has gaps
in required detail |
Does not summarize analysis and recommendations | 3 |
Articulation of Response | Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read
format |
Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization | Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of
main ideas |
Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas | 3 |
Total | 100% |
Why Choose Us
Quality Papers
We value our clients. For this reason, we ensure that each paper is written carefully as per the instructions provided by the client. Our editing team also checks all the papers to ensure that they have been completed as per the expectations.
Professional Academic Writers
Over the years, our Acme Homework has managed to secure the most qualified, reliable and experienced team of writers. The company has also ensured continued training and development of the team members to ensure that it keep up with the rising Academic Trends.
Affordable Prices
Our prices are fairly priced in such a way that ensures affordability. Additionally, you can get a free price quotation by clicking on the "Place Order" button.
On-Time delivery
We pay strict attention on deadlines. For this reason, we ensure that all papers are submitted earlier, even before the deadline indicated by the customer. For this reason, the client can go through the work and review everything.
100% Originality
At Grade One Essays, all papers are plagiarism-free as they are written from scratch. We have taken strict measures to ensure that there is no similarity on all papers and that citations are included as per the standards set.
Customer Support 24/7
Our support team is readily available to provide any guidance/help on our platform at any time of the day/night. Feel free to contact us via the Chat window or support email: support@gradeoneessays.com.
Try it now!
How it works?
Follow these simple steps to get your paper done
Place your order
Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.
Proceed with the payment
Choose the payment system that suits you most.
Receive the final file
Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.
Our Services
Grade One Essays has stood as the world’s leading custom essay writing services providers. Once you enter all the details in the order form under the place order button, the rest is up to us.
Essays
At Grade One Essays, we prioritize on all aspects that bring about a good grade such as impeccable grammar, proper structure, zero-plagiarism and conformance to guidelines. Our experienced team of writers will help you completed your essays and other assignments.
Admissions
Admission and Business Papers
Be assured that you’ll definitely get accepted to the Master’s level program at any university once you enter all the details in the order form. We won’t leave you here; we will also help you secure a good position in your aspired workplace by creating an outstanding resume or portfolio once you place an order.
Editing
Editing and Proofreading
Our skilled editing and writing team will help you restructure you paper, paraphrase, correct grammar and replace plagiarized sections on your paper just on time. The service is geared toward eliminating any mistakes and rather enhancing better quality.
Coursework
Technical papers
We have writers in almost all fields including the most technical fields. You don’t have to worry about the complexity of your paper. Simply enter as much details as possible in the place order section.