NURS 8100 WEEK 4 Policy Model

NURS 8100 WEEK 4 Policy Model

Policy Model

The chosen policymaking framework is the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF). This framework serves as an essential instrument for nurses promoting policy in intricate domains of healthcare delivery. It facilitates the navigation of the policy process by emphasizing alliances, convictions, and temporal learning. The ACF is structured to address the intricacies of healthcare policy by examining the interactions among many stakeholders over prolonged durations (Pierce et al., 2020). Nurses often need collaboration with other healthcare professionals, patient advocacy organizations, and lawmakers, highlighting the necessity of establishing coalitions with shared values and objectives. The ACF emphasizes the belief systems of various stakeholders, which may serve as a significant impetus for coalition formation and policy modification (Mattaini et al., 2020). The ACF can assist nurses in navigating the complex policy-making environment and advocating for their unique policy priorities.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
NURS 8100 WEEK 4 Policy Model
Just from $7/Page
Order Essay

By allowing the identification of colleagues and opponents in policy advocacy, the Advocacy Coalition Framework effectively delineates my strategy for accomplishing my advocacy aim inside the policymaking process. This is accomplished by facilitating the identification of policy advocates. It makes strategic framing easier by understanding the belief systems held by different coalitions, making it possible to prioritize policies in the interests of significant stakeholders and decision-makers (Mattaini et al., 2020). Through the facilitation of continuing conversation and feedback systems, the ACF highlights the relevance of temporal learning, allowing for the refinement of strategies according to their potential effectiveness. Principal components of the ACF include a concentration on subsystems, the categorization of perspectives into deep core and policy core beliefs, subsidiary aspects, an understanding of coalition dynamics, and policy-oriented learning.

To utilize the ACF for advocacy, it is essential to identify and comprehend the policy subsystem, delineate belief systems, establish coalitions with stakeholders who share core policy beliefs, participate in policy-oriented learning, and articulate policy priorities in a manner that resonates with the belief systems of pivotal stakeholders (Kim, 2022). This methodology is especially pertinent in healthcare, as new evidence and procedures continually arise. In conclusion, the ACF is essential for finding friends, establishing coalitions, facilitating policy-oriented learning, and successfully formulating policy goals. By adhering to these measures, advocates may proficiently promote their policy concerns and guarantee their message resonates with essential stakeholders and decision-makers.

References

Kim, Y. (2022). The role of Science in the Policy Subsystem: An application of the Advocacy Coalition Framework to nanotechnology regulation policies. International Journal of Public Administration, 47(6), 397–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2123504

Mattaini, M. A., Esquierdo-Leal, J. L., Sánchez, J. G. A., Richling, S. M., & Ethridge, A. N. (2020). Public Policy Advocacy in Culturo-Behavior Science. In Springer eBooks (pp. 385–412). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45421-0_16

Pierce, J. J., Giordono, L. S., Peterson, H. L., & Hicks, K. C. (2020). Common approaches for studying advocacy: Review of methods and model practices of the Advocacy Coalition Framework. The Social Science Journal, 59(1), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2019.06.005

Wiley, K., Searing, E. A., & Young, S. (2020). Utility of the advocacy coalition framework in a regional budget crisis. Public Policy and Administration, 36(3), 401–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076720905007

CLICK HERE TO ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER

Policy Model

Policy models provide the framework for moving policy forward. However, not all policy models will be effective for all priorities. Therefore, it is important to appraise policy models with the specific advocacy priority in mind.

For this Assignment, you will choose from three policymaking frameworks, the one that best fits your advocacy priority. You will construct a written response, with evidence, explaining the selected framework, providing specific detail regarding how it is the best fit and will move the priority forward.

Resources

 

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Week 4: Learning Resources

Learning Resources

Required Resources

Readings

  • Dawes, D. E. (2020). The political determinants of health. Johns Hopkins University Press.
    • Chapter 4, “How the Game is Played: Successful Employment of the Political Determinants of Health” (pp.78–111)
  • Porche, Demetrius J. (2023). Health policy: Applications for nurses and other health professionals (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
    • Chapter 9, “Policy Formulation and Implementation” (pp.101-112)
    • Chapter 10, “Policy Analysis” (pp.113-140)

Media

The following media resources address the contextual factors impacting the answer to the following question, “How did we get here?” regarding the current state of healthcare in the U.S.

Please select at least two from the following to view.

 

To Prepare

  • Review the twelve policy models outlined in Health Policy: Applications for Nurses and Other Health Professionals (Chapter 9, pp. 119-125)
  • Consider which of the twelve policy models might best fit your priority determined in Week 2.
  • You are encouraged to search the literature for examples of how the selected policymaking model has been used in the past.

The Assignment: (2 pages)

Submit a 2-page written response detailing your selection of one policymaking framework that best supports your priority—particularly, getting your priority on the agenda.

In your response, explain why the framework best describes how you might proceed in effectively moving your advocacy priority forward in the policymaking process.

Support your response with evidence.

Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Walden Writing Center Sample Paper provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632Links to an external site.). All papers submitted must use this formatting.

By Day 7 of Week 4

Submit your Assignment.

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

  1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK4Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial
  2. Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
  3. Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

 

Rubric

NURS_8100_Week4_Assignment_Rubric

NURS_8100_Week4_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSelect one policy model that best fits your priority, particularly getting your priority on the agenda.
40 to >35.0 ptsExcellent

The response comprehensively and clearly explains the policy model selected. … The response clearly indicates how the policy model will get the priority on the agenda.

35 to >31.0 ptsGood

The response clearly explains the policy model selected. … The response indicates how the policy model will get the priority on the agenda.

31 to >27.0 ptsFair

The response vaguely explains the policy model selected. … The response vaguely indicates how the policy model will get the priority on the agenda.

27 to >0 ptsPoor

The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not explain the policy model selected, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately or vaguely indicates how the policy model will get the priority on the agenda, or it is missing.

40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSupport the selection of the policy model and explain how the model will help move the advocacy priority forward.
45 to >40.0 ptsExcellent

The response comprehensively and clearly supports the policy model selected. … The response is persuasive and includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the selection.

40 to >35.0 ptsGood

The response clearly supports the policy model selected. … The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the selection.

35 to >31.0 ptsFair

The response inaccurately or vaguely supports the policy model selected. … The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the selection.

31 to >0 ptsPoor

The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the policy model selected, or it is missing. … The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support reflection, or it is selection.

45 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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.
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent

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.

4 to >3.5 ptsGood

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.

3.5 to >3.0 ptsFair

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.

3 to >0 ptsPoor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.5 ptsGood

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 to >3.0 ptsFair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 ptsPoor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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.
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.5 ptsGood

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3.5 to >3.0 ptsFair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3 to >0 ptsPoor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts
Total Points: 100

 


Good News ! We now help with PROCTORED EXAMS. Chat with a support agent for more information

X
Open chat
Dr.Nursingpapers
Hello
Can we help you?