Benchmark Diverse Population Health Policy Analysis

Benchmark Diverse Population Health Policy Analysis

Select a current or proposed health care policy that is designed to provide equitable health care for a diverse population. Create a 12-15-slide PowerPoint presentation discussing the health care policy and how it improves a specific population’s access to quality, cost-effective health care. Create speaker notes of 100-250 words for each slide. Include additional slides for the title and references.

Include the following in your presentation:

Describe the policy selected.
Discuss the diverse population that will be affected by this policy.
Explain how the policy is designed to improve cost-effectiveness and health care equity for the diverse population.
Discuss why the policy is financially sound and explain how the policy incorporates the nursing perspective and relevant ethical, legal, and political factors. Provide rationale to support your explanation.
Describe what state, federal, global health policies, or goals the policy is related to and explain the degree to which each helps achieve equitable health care for the diverse population.
Discuss advocacy strategies for improving access, quality, and cost-effective health care for the diverse population selected.
Discuss the professional and moral obligation of master’s prepared nurses to respect human dignity and advance the common good through working to promote health and prevent disease among diverse populations from a Christian perspective.
You are required to cite eight peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” located in the Student Success Center, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

ORDER A CUSTOM-WRITTEN PAPER HERE

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:

MBA-MSN; MSN-Nursing Education; MSN Acute Care Nurse Practitioner-Adult-Gerontology; MSN Family Nurse Practitioner; MSN-Health Informatics; MSN-Health Care Quality and Patient Safety; MSN-Leadership in Health Care Systems; MSN-Public Health Nursing

2.1: Examine financially sound health care policy that incorporates the nursing perspective and relevant ethical, legal, and political factors.

2.2: Determine advocacy strategies for improving access, quality, and cost-effective health care for diverse populations.

4.2: Integrate appropriate state, federal, and global health policies and goals into the design of equitable health care for populations.

4.3: Examine the professional and moral obligation of master’s-prepared nurses to respect human dignity and advance the common good through working to promote health and prevent disease among diverse populations from a Christian perspective.

Benchmark -Evidence-Based Practice Project: Literature Review – Rubric Total 175 points
Criterion 1. Unsatisfactory
2. Less Than
Satisfactory
3. Satisfactory 4. Good 5. Excellent
Introduction
Introduction
0 points
The clinical issue or problem
and PICOT statement are
omitted.
7 points
The clinical issue or problem
and PICOT statement are
incomplete or incorrect.
7.7 points
The clinical issue or problem
and PICOT statement are
presented. Some aspects
are vague. There are minor
inaccuracies.
8.05 points
The clinical issue or problem
and PICOT statement are
adequately described.
8.75 points
The clinical issue or problem
and PICOT statement are
thoroughly described.
Search Methods
Search Methods
0 points
The search strategy and
criteria used in choosing
and searching for articles
are omitted.
14 points
The search strategy and
criteria used in choosing
and searching for articles
are only partially described.
15.4 points
The search strategy and
criteria used in choosing
and searching for articles
are summarized. More
information is needed.
16.1 points
The search strategy and
criteria used in choosing
and searching for articles
are described. Some detail
is needed for clarity or
accuracy.
17.5 points
The search strategy and
criteria used in choosing
and searching for articles is
thoroughly described.
Synthesis of Literature
Synthesis of Literature
0 points
A paragraph for one or
more article is missing.
14 points
All articles are presented,
but the synthesis of
literature is incomplete.
15.4 points
A summary for each article
is presented. The main
components (subjects,
methods, key findings) are
generally discussed. General
rationale for how each
article supports the PICOT is
provided. More information
is needed.
16.1 points
A paragraph for each article
is presented. The main
components (subjects,
methods, key findings) are
adequately discussed, and
rationale for how each
article supports the PICOT is
provided. Some detail is
needed for clarity or
accuracy.
17.5 points
A well-developed paragraph
for each article is presented.
The main components
(subjects, methods, key
findings) are thoroughly
discussed, and substantial
rationale for how each
article supports the PICOT is
clearly provided.
Comparison of Articles
Comparison of Articles
0 points
One or more article is
missing in the comparison.
14 points
All articles are presented,
but the comparison is
incomplete.
15.4 points
A general comparison of the
similarities, differences,
themes, methods,
conclusions, limitations, and
controversies among the
articles is presented. Some
aspects are unclear. More
information is needed.
16.1 points
A comparison of the
similarities, differences,
themes, methods,
conclusions, limitations, and
controversies among the
articles is adequately
presented. Some detail is
needed for clarity or
accuracy.
17.5 points
A detailed comparison of
the similarities, differences,
themes, methods,
conclusions, limitations, and
controversies among the
articles is thoroughly
presented.
Suggestions for Future
Research
Suggestions for Future
Research
0 points
Identified gaps and areas
requiring further research
are omitted.
14 points
Identified gaps and areas
requiring further research
are only partially presented.
15.4 points
Some identified gaps and
areas requiring further
research are generally
discussed. The narrative is
generally based on the
analysis of the literature.
More information is needed.
16.1 points
Identified gaps and areas
requiring further research
are adequately discussed.
The narrative is based on
the analysis of the
literature. Some detail is
needed for clarity or
accuracy.
17.5 points
Identified gaps and areas
requiring further research
are thoroughly discussed
and clearly based on the
analysis of the literature.
The narrative is insightful
and demonstrates an
understanding of research
analysis necessary for future
study.
Conclusion
Conclusion
0 points
The conclusion is omitted.
7 points
A conclusion is presented
but fails to present a
summary statement of what
was found in the literature.
7.7 points
The conclusion presents a
vague summary statement
of was found in the
literature. There are
inaccuracies.
8.05 points
The conclusion presents an
adequate summary
statement of what was
found in the literature.
8.75 points
The conclusion is welldeveloped and presents a
clear and accurate summary
statement of what was
found in the literature.
Ability to Analyze (B)
Ability to Analyze (C3.2)
0 points
The literature review
presented does not
demonstrate an ability to
analyze appropriate
research from databases
and other information
sources to improve health
care practices and
processes.
14 points
The literature review
presented does not
consistently demonstrate an
ability to analyze
appropriate research from
databases and other
information sources to
improve health care
practices and processes.
15.4 points
The literature review
presented demonstrates a
general ability to analyze
appropriate research from
databases and other
information sources to
improve health care
practices and processes.
16.1 points
The literature review
presented demonstrates an
adequate ability to analyze
appropriate research from
databases and other
information sources to
improve health care
practices and processes.
17.5 points
The literature review
presented demonstrates a
strong ability to analyze
appropriate research from
databases and other
information sources to
improve health care
practices and processes.
Criterion 1. Unsatisfactory
2. Less Than
Satisfactory
3. Satisfactory 4. Good 5. Excellent
Appendix
Appendix
0 points
The appendix and required
resources are omitted.
7 points
The APA Writing Checklist is
attached, but an appendix
has not been created. The
paper does not reflect the
use of the APA Writing
Checklist during
development
7.7 points
The APA Writing Checklist is
attached and in the
appendix. The APA Writing
Checklist was generally used
in development of the
paper, but some aspects are
inconsistent with the paper
format or quality.
8.05 points
The APA Writing Checklist is
attached in the appendix. It
is apparent that the APA
Writing Checklist was used
in development of the
paper.
8.75 points
The APA Writing Checklist is
attached in the appendix. It
is clearly evident by the
quality of the paper that the
APA Writing Checklist was
used in development.
Required Sources
Required Sources
0 points
Sources are not included.
7 points
Number of required sources
is only partially met.
7.7 points
Number of required sources
is met, but sources are
outdated or inappropriate.
8.05 points
Number of required sources
is met. Sources are current,
but not all sources are
appropriate for the
assignment criteria and
nursing content.
8.75 points
Number of required
resources is met. Sources
are current and appropriate
for the assignment criteria
and nursing content.
Thesis Development and
Purpose
Thesis Development and
Purpose
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible
overall purpose or
organizing claim.
9.8 points
Thesis is insufficiently
developed or vague.
Purpose is not clear.
10.78 points
Thesis is apparent and
appropriate to purpose.
11.27 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts
the development of the
paper. Thesis is descriptive
and reflective of the
arguments and appropriate
to the purpose.
12.25 points
Thesis is comprehensive
and contains the essence of
the paper. Thesis statement
makes the purpose of the
paper clear.
Argument Logic and
Construction
Argument Logic and
Construction
0 points
Statement of purpose is not
justified by the conclusion.
The conclusion does not
support the claim made.
Argument is incoherent and
uses noncredible sources.
11.2 points
Sufficient justification of
claims is lacking. Argument
lacks consistent unity. There
are obvious flaws in the
logic. Some sources have
questionable credibility.
12.32 points
Argument is orderly but may
have a few inconsistencies.
The argument presents
minimal justification of
claims. Argument logically,
but not thoroughly,
supports the purpose.
Sources used are credible.
Introduction and conclusion
bracket the thesis.
12.88 points
Argument shows logical
progressions. Techniques of
argumentation are evident.
There is a smooth
progression of claims from
introduction to conclusion.
Most sources are
authoritative.
14 points
Clear and convincing
argument that presents a
persuasive claim in a
distinctive and compelling
manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing
Mechanics of Writing
(includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar,
language use)
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive
enough that they impede
communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice
or sentence construction is
used.
7 points
Frequent and repetitive
mechanical errors distract
the reader. Inconsistencies
in language choice (register)
or word choice are present.
Sentence structure is
correct but not varied
7.7 points
Some mechanical errors or
typos are present, but they
are not overly distracting to
the reader. Correct and
varied sentence structure
and audience-appropriate
language are employed.
8.05 points
Prose is largely free of
mechanical errors, although
a few may be present. The
writer uses a variety of
effective sentence
structures and figures of
speech.
8.75 points
Writer is clearly in command
of standard, written,
academic English.
Paper Format
Paper Format (Use of
appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
0 points
Template is not used
appropriately or
documentation format is
rarely followed correctly.
7 points
Template is used, but some
elements are missing or
mistaken; lack of control
with formatting is apparent.
7.7 points
Template is used, and
formatting is correct,
although some minor errors
may be present.
8.05 points
Template is fully used; There
are virtually no errors in
formatting style.
8.75 points
All format elements are
correct.
Documentation of Sources
Documentation of Sources
(citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography,
etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
0 points
Sources are not
documented.
7 points
Documentation of sources is
inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
7.7 points
Sources are documented, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, although some
formatting errors may be
present.
8.05 points
Sources are documented, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is
mostly correct.
8.75 points
Sources are completely and
correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is free
of error.