The Final Policy Paper Is Cumulative And Covers Chapters 1 ✓ Solved

The final policy paper is cumulative and covers Chapters 1

The final policy paper is cumulative and covers Chapters 1 - 16 of McLaughlin and McLaughlin (2014) textbook. To complete the final assignment you are required to use at least eight peer-reviewed sources with at least two from Ashford University Library. Choose four policy analysis processes and apply each one to a policy case or choose from the following options:

  • Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement
  • Policy response to the problem of suicide in Australia
  • Cross-national analysis of expenditure changes in 27 European nations 1995–2011
  • Proposition 63: Should Other States Follow California’s Lead?

Provide details on the other policy processes that were not utilized in your research. How could they be applied? Why would they be applicable? All applicable information from previous weeks must be included. A conclusion MUST be included at the end of the paper summarizing the key aspects of health policy.

The Final Paper must adhere to the following guidelines:

  1. Must be 10 to 15 double-spaced pages in length, and formatted according to APA style.
  2. Must include a title page with: a. Title of paper b. Student’s name c. Course name and number d. Instructor’s name e. Date submitted
  3. Must begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement.
  4. Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.
  5. Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.
  6. Must use at least eight scholarly sources in addition to the text.
  7. Must document all sources in APA style.
  8. Must include a separate reference page, formatted according to APA style.

Paper For Above Instructions

The purpose of this final policy research paper is to conduct an in-depth analysis of selected health policies through the application of various policy analysis processes. For this assignment, the policy areas examined will include the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, the policy response to the problem of suicide in Australia, cross-national expenditure changes in European nations from 1995-2011, and the implications of Proposition 63 regarding the mental health services in California and other states. Each selected policy case will be analyzed through four distinct policy processes: identification and definition, health technology assessment, evaluation of political feasibility, and evaluation of economic viability.

Identifying and Defining Policies

Identification and definition processes are crucial for understanding the underlying issues that health policies aim to address. Each of the selected policies highlights specific health challenges faced by different populations. The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, for example, was intended to promote trade and economic growth among member countries, impacting public health by potentially modifying health regulations associated with exported goods. This necessitates a careful evaluation of trade-offs between economic benefits and public health concerns, a consideration that can potentially be applied to other trade agreements.

Health Technology Assessment

Health technology assessment (HTA) is another important analysis process that evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of health technologies in achieving desired health outcomes. Applying HTA to the policy response to suicide in Australia can help in understanding the effectiveness of various interventions, such as mental health services and crisis management resources. Research indicates that evidence-based interventions in mental health can significantly reduce suicide rates, underscoring the importance of utilizing HTA to guide policy decisions in this domain (National Mental Health Commission, 2017).

Evaluation of Political Feasibility

Analyzing the political feasibility of health policies can reveal the willingness of stakeholders and policymakers to support various health interventions. Policy measures like Proposition 63, which aims to improve mental health services and funding in California, serve as a case study for evaluating political feasibility. This analysis involves assessing public opinion, political climate, and the influence of advocacy groups within the landscape of mental health policy (López et al., 2018). By examining these factors, it becomes feasible to predict whether similar measures could gain traction in other states.

Evaluation of Economic Viability

The economic viability of health policies is equally critical to their success. In the cross-national analysis of expenditure changes in Europe, understanding the shifts in health funding among 27 nations provides insights into how economic constraints and priorities shape health policy development. By evaluating the economic viability of health interventions, policymakers can make informed decisions regarding resource allocation and potential cost-effectiveness of interventions. Research shows that properly funded health systems lead to better health outcomes and increased economic efficiency (Dreger et al., 2016).

Applying Other Policy Analysis Processes

In addition to the four processes highlighted above, other policy analysis processes such as evidence-based medicine and analysis of values also hold relevance in evaluating health policies. Evidence-based medicine emphasizes the integration of clinical expertise with the best available research, promoting the use of effective interventions in practice (Sackett et al., 1996). On the other hand, an analysis of values can unveil the ethical considerations underlying health policies, allowing for a more comprehensive understanding of the implications of policy choices on various populations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the final policy research paper serves as a powerful tool in synthesizing essential policy analysis processes and applying them to real-world case studies in health policy. Through a careful analysis of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, suicide prevention efforts in Australia, cross-national expenditure evaluations, and Proposition 63, the paper illustrates how different policy processes can provide insightful frameworks for understanding and improving health systems. A body of evidence supports that integrating multiple analysis methodologies can enhance policy productivity and align health policies with societal needs. Ultimately, the culmination of these insights reinforces the vital role that health policy plays in shaping health outcomes across diverse populations.

References

  • Dreger, C., et al. (2016). Health Expenditure and Health Outcomes: A Review. Health Economics.
  • López, A., et al. (2018). The Mental Health Policy Context in California: The Path Forward. The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics.
  • McLaughlin, C. P., & McLaughlin, L. (2014). Healthcare Operations Management. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
  • National Mental Health Commission. (2017). The National Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Plan. Australian Government.
  • Sackett, D. L., et al. (1996). Evidence Based Medicine: What It Is and What It Isn't. BMJ.
  • Thorpe, K. E., et al. (2015). Economic Incentives and Health Outcomes: Evidence from the United States. Health Affairs.
  • Starfield, B. (2011). Global Health Systems: Comparing Strategies for Delivering Health Services. Health Services Research.
  • World Health Organization. (2019). Health Policy and System Research. WHO Publications.
  • Institute of Medicine. (2010). The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. National Academies Press.
  • OECD. (2017). Health at a Glance: European Union 2017. OECD Publishing.

Related Assignments