Write Section 1 Of Your Policy Analysis In Two Pages ✓ Solved

Write Section 1 of your Policy Analysis in a two-page APA-fo

Write Section 1 of your Policy Analysis in a two-page APA-formatted document, labeling each part (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3). Part 1: Identify a social welfare issue of interest, explain why you chose it, share personal stories if comfortable, and research facts and statistics about the issue; discuss current perceptions of the issue. Part 2: Research various social welfare policies associated with the issue. Browse bills in the U.S. Congress at GovTrack: Social Welfare website. You can narrow your focus by drilling down into five subcategories (disability assistance, national and community service, poverty and welfare assistance, social security and elderly assistance, and social work/volunteer service/charitable organizations). Part 3: Identify a specific current social welfare policy associated with the issue that you will research throughout the course. Explain how knowing more about this specific social welfare policy relates directly to the NASW Code of Ethics. Use APA format for organization, style, and source credits, including: 12-point, double-spaced Times New Roman font; One-inch margins on all sides; Normal character spacing; In-text citations; Title page and reference page; Properly formatted headings (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3).

Use APA format for organization, style, and source credits, including: 12-point, double-spaced Times New Roman font; One-inch margins on all sides; Normal character spacing; In-text citations; Title page and reference page; Properly formatted headings (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3).

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction and overview. This Section 1 assignment centers on affordable housing and rental assistance as a core social welfare issue affecting low-income families. The issue is timely, well-documented, and amenable to policy analysis given the array of federal, state, and local interventions designed to expand housing stability and reduce housing cost burdens. In this section, I identify the issue, summarize what is known about it, and outline the policy avenues that will be analyzed in Part 2 and Part 3. The focus on housing affordability aligns with longstanding social welfare goals of ensuring dignity, safety, and the ability to participate fully in society, which are echoed in professional ethics and policy guidance (National Association of Social Workers [NASW], 2021).

Part 1: Identify a social welfare issue, rationale, and current perceptions

The social welfare issue selected is housing affordability and access to rental assistance for low-income households. National data consistently show a mismatch between incomes and housing costs, with a substantial portion of extremely low-income renters spending more than 50 percent of income on housing and utilities. National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) reports substantial shortages of affordable rental housing for households at or below 30 percent of area median income, leading to evictions, residential instability, and associated health and educational consequences (NLIHC, 2023). This issue matters because stable housing is foundational to physical and mental health, employment stability, and educational attainment, which in turn influence long-term life outcomes (WHO, 2021). The personal dimension of this issue is illustrated by stories from families who faced evictions during economic downturns or who must choose between paying rent and affording nutritious food, healthcare, or childcare. While I cannot disclose identifying details, these narratives illustrate the lived realities behind the statistics and underscore the ethical imperative to pursue evidence-based solutions (NASW, 2021).

What is known about the issue? Empirical work highlights persistent gaps between housing need and supply, uneven geographic distribution of affordable units, and the vulnerability of marginalized groups (racial and ethnic minorities, single-parent households, people with disabilities). The current perception among the public ranges from recognizing housing as a fundamental right to viewing housing subsidies as a welfare burden. Policy discourse increasingly frames housing as a nationwide infrastructure concern with broad implications for health, education, and economic mobility (NLIHC, 2023; CBPP, 2022). These perceptions influence political will and legislative action, making it essential to ground decision-making in robust data and policy analysis frameworks (Bardach, 2012).

Part 2: Policy landscape related to the issue

Policy options and portfolios addressing housing affordability include a mix of rental assistance, public housing, tax credits, and emergency relief programs. The Housing Choice Voucher program (Section 8) remains a central tool for expanding affordable housing access, while public housing and project-based rental assistance provide additional sectors of support. The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program has been a major driver of new affordable units, though concerns exist about geographic distribution and long-term affordability. Emergency rental assistance (ERA) streams, particularly during economic shocks, demonstrate the potential for rapid funding with health and stability benefits. In analyzing these policies, it is helpful to categorize them into past and current policy trajectories, as well as potential reforms (Rossi, Lipsey, & Freeman, 2004; Bardach, 2012).

GovTrack’s framework for social welfare policy helps organize this review into subcategories such as disability assistance, national and community service, poverty and welfare assistance, social security and elderly assistance, and social work/volunteer service/charitable organizations. While housing policy spans multiple domains, the GovTrack approach provides useful anchors for examining policy histories, legislative proposals, and implementation challenges. Several sources map policy effects and distributional outcomes, including evaluation-focused methodologies that emphasize causal inference, program logic, and outcome measurement (Weiss, 1998; Rossi et al., 2004). Overall, the policy landscape shows a spectrum from direct housing subsidies to conditioning supports on work requirements or time-limited funding, with considerable variation in effectiveness by locality and population group (HUD, 2023; NLIHC, 2023; CBPP, 2022).

Part 3: A specific current policy and its ethical alignment

The policy I will study in depth is the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, with emphasis on recent and proposed expansions to increase voucher portability, funding levels, and fair accessibility for eligible families. Evaluating this policy through Bardach’s policy analysis framework (the eightfold path) will involve problem definition, evidence gathering, construction of alternative policies, and assessment of political feasibility and implementation constraints (Bardach, 2012). The NASW Code of Ethics requires social workers to pursue social justice, dignity and worth of the person, service, and integrity. Understanding how the HCV program aligns with these values is essential: expanding access to vouchers supports housing stability and health, reduces barriers for marginalized groups, and promotes equitable opportunity (NASW, 2021). Ethical principles call for advocating for policies with demonstrated benefits for vulnerable populations while ensuring fair administration, avoiding discrimination, and maintaining professional integrity in reporting findings (NASW, 2021).

Connecting policy analysis to practice: The proposed study of HCV expansion will examine outcomes such as housing stability, health indicators, school attendance, and neighborhood safety, using a logic-model framing to connect inputs (funding, administrative capacity), activities (voucher issuance, landlord recruitment), outputs (number of households assisted), and outcomes (stability, health improvements). Employing evaluation methods discussed by Patton (2008) and Rossi et al. (2004) will help determine what works, for whom, and under what conditions, while maintaining a focus on ethical reporting and transparency (Weiss, 1998). In the NASW framework, the analysis should consider barriers faced by subpopulations (e.g., families with young children, seniors, people with disabilities) and emphasize solutions that promote dignity and equal access (NASW, 2021).

Conclusion. This Section 1 sets the stage for more detailed analysis in Part 2 and Part 3, using Bardach’s framework and ethical considerations to guide the examination of housing policy. By combining evidence, policy analysis techniques, and NASW ethics, the project will contribute to evidence-based, ethically sound recommendations for improving housing stability and reducing disparities in access to affordable housing.

References

• Bardach, E. (2012). A practical guide for policy analysis: The eightfold path. CQ Press.
• National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2023). The Gap: A Shortage of Affordable Homes. NLIHC.
• Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2022). Housing policy and low-income families: An overview. CBPP.
• GovTrack.us. (2024). GovTrack: Track legislation and policy proposals. GovTrack.us. https://www.govtrack.us/
• HUD. (2023). Worst Case Housing Needs in the United States. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
• NASW. (2021). Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. NASW Press.
• NLIHC. (2023). The Gap: A Shortage of Affordable Homes. National Low Income Housing Coalition.
• Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation. Sage.
• Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Sage.
• Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying social programs and policies. Prentice-Hall.
• World Health Organization. (2021). Social determinants of health. WHO.