Health Policy And Professional Leadership5 Health Policy Analysisintr ✓ Solved

Health Policy and Professional Leadership #5-Health Policy Analysis Introduction : This assignment is to learn how to explore a health policy topic from a variety of perspectives, utilizing this information as a foundation for policy development and advocacy. The assignment is designed to engage you in learning about an issue, in a non-biased fashion. You will identify the bill being proposed and any political issues that are central to that topic. A policy brief often includes: · An “executive brief†(a short summary) allowing the reader to quickly grasp the essence of the report. · Support of an ‘expert in the field’ facts or opinions- (not the bill sponsor). · Tables and graphs containing statistical information. · A short list of references, so the reader can refer to your sources on which this analysis is based.

Purpose : The purpose of the Health Policy Analysis is to convince your identified target audience of the urgency of the current healthcare problem and the need to adopt a preferred alternative OR a course of action that is outlined and therefore will serve as a stimulus for action. You are attempting to influence interest groups, lobbyists, legislators, stakeholders and the general public. As an expert on the topic, you will be providing the reader with an objective analysis of your selected issue and any related legislation. You are going to provide this so that s/he can decide on how to influence the vote or the outcome of the bill. For this project please use a policy you previously reviewed for an earlier assignment (I have attached the policy and previous assignment).

The [proposed] bill must be current: within 6-12 months . The proposal or new bill must NOT be one that has already passed . It needs to still be in a legislative process. The proposal may still be in preparation for introduction by an interest group, lobbyist, or legislator. Guidelines: · To develop this assignment, utilize your textbook; Chapter 14: The Art of Structuring and Writing a Health Policy Analysis. · Your assignment is a POWERPOINT and NOT a written paper. · Maximum slide number: 20, This includes a title slide and reference slide[s] · Include slide numbers, cite and reference on each slide as necessary · Avoid over crowded slides · Add no more than 100 words to ‘notes’ pages for each slide · Use an appropriate theme for formal presentation · Use of pictures or clip art to represent required information is prohibited.

Avoid clip art that is overpowering, but that is appropriate in size and nature and relevant to the topic on the slide · *Note: Please do not submit PPT in PDF format, no narration, no excessive animation and no automatic slide progression Structural Elements of the Health Policy Analysis Include ALL of the follow elements Section 1: Executive summary/Introductory slide: 4 slides The ‘executive’ summary aims to convince the reader that the brief is worth reading entirely. It is also a summary that will clearly state the issue. · An executive summary includes one to two paragraphs with the following: a. State the proposal name or if it is a bill-the number and title b. Provide a brief explanation of the purpose of the proposal or bill. c.

A description of the problem that this proposal or bill will address d. A statement on why the current situation or policy option needs to be changed e. Include a brief statement of your recommendations for action. [Short statement in support of the expert views you have chosen to share.] Section 2: Problem Statement. 1 slide The purpose of this section of the brief is to convince the target audience that an urgent problem exists which requires them to take action. Be clear, precise, and succinct.

Include a clear statement on the implications of the policy which will address the current issue. Section 3: Background 5 slides · Include discussion on the following: 1. Provide a short overview of the background of the problem . a. Include only the essential “need to know†facts to understand the context of the problem. You may have to dig to find out more about this issue. b.

You will also need to find an ‘expert in the field’ who can speak to the issue. Be certain the person has publicly addressed the issue, as in a publication, or similar resource as proof of support. The expert should have credentials [included] that support the expected training and knowledge level to be an expert. [*this is rarely a politician-usually MD, Nurse, Pharmacist, Dentist, etc. 1 Rev 1.2020[2]AS/jm 2. The discussion of the issue/bill needs to include the impact it will have upon the following; a) Healthcare Access b) Healthcare Cost c) Healthcare Quality Section 4: Landscape 4 slides · Include a summary of potential stakeholders, lobbyist and interest groups [ANA/ American nurses association , AMA etc.]. ( Minimum requirement of 2 groups for this section) a.

Which Interest Groups will support this and why will they support it? b. Which Interest Groups will oppose the issue and why will they oppose it? c. Review Box 14-1, pg. 284 to discuss all possible landscape factors Section 5: Options 6 slides The aim of the options section is to provide a detailed and convincing discussion of how the failings of the current situation needs to change. That means that the time spent researching this topic should have given you an understanding of it from all sides.

Your Literature review should fully support this step, but you may need more…. This section requires critical thinking on your part. Here is where you will need to think outside the box. Answer questions 1 & 2. 1.

How can the current situation be improved so that the legislative process heads in the right direction? [ the direction that you think it should go ] a. Develop 3 alternative options to the current situation and clearly state each one. [These may include suggestions by experts but should ultimately be conclusions you have drawn from the research you have read.] Use the following questions to help you develop this section. · What are 3 possible options if: a) You want the bill to pass and it does not? b) You do not want the bill to pass but it does pass? c) What can be done if the bill just sits in committee and never moves? d) What is another alternative that does not include this bill or any other?

These options are things that may not be published or discussed anywhere. These are ideas that you come up with as a HCP. 2. Finally discuss the pros and the cons for all 3 options . One pro and one con required for all 3 options you have listed.

Section 6: Recommendation 1 slide Select one of your options as your final recommendation. Discuss why this option is preferred over the other two. This section should clearly explain why your selected option is the best action to take based upon factual information. Section 7: References 2 slides All resources must be formatted in APA format. a. Must use ALL of your resources from your Literature Review--Two resources must be evidence-based research articles.

You may use additional support once this requirement is met. You do not need approval for the additional resources, unless a source is over 5-years-old. b. Resources should be current: Articles published within the last 5 years () Check websites as well for dates. Websites will usually list updates within the current calendar year at the bottom off the page. Grading Rubric: PPT Slide for each Points Possible Points earned and comments Executive summary/Intro slide 10 Problem statement 5 Background including A, B & C from instructions 20 Landscape including minimum 2 interest groups 20 Options [at least 3 discussed, including 1 pro & 1 con for each] 20 Final Recommendation 5 References/citations [ correct APA format et al. / 5 or more cited] 15 Layout [creative / easy to read / appealing] 5 Total 100 HEALTH-RELATED POLICIES 6 Health-Related Policies Health-Related Policies Health policies entail the actions, plans, and decisions made by relevant parties and are meant to accomplish significant healthcare goals in a country.

Health policies are associated with the attainment of several things among the future definition. They offer a model for primacies and the expected duties and responsibilities of distinct teams, including encouraging consensus and allowing people to understand more about health. This paper explores various health bills, including H.R.4704 Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide, H.R.1418 Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act, and H.R.5663 Safeguarding Therapeutics Act. H.R.4704 Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide Summary of the Bill and Riders The H.R.4704 Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide Act of 2019 was presented and introduced by Republican McAdams Ben on October 16, 2019. The bill is responsible for directing the National Science Foundation (NSF) to provide reviewed grants to higher education institutions.

According to Congress.Gov (2021), the grants advocated for by the bill are meant to enhance multidisciplinary research that is related to suicide. The bill encourages studies related to preventing suicide and treating any complication that would prompt suicidal thoughts. It addresses the gaps evident in suicide prevention and treatment research by encouraging various parties, including doctoral students, to apply for the NSF grants. Population Affected by the Issue The bill presents an opportunity and platform for further studies that will benefit several populations. Funding research regarding suicide prevention and treatment, the bill can help veterans that have been affected by Post-Traumatic Disorder (PTSD) who contemplate suicide.

The legislation will also affect adolescents that experience significant life challenges, along with ill patients. Role of Healthcare Experts Professionals in the medical field are crucial because they help educated affected members regarding the legislation and what it means for healthcare. In the past, research and education about suicide have been limited, making it important for experts, such as nurses and physicians, to understand how the legislation affects suicide prevention. Pros and Cons One advantage of this bill is that it will help prevent suicides across several United States populations. Increasing suicide rates among depressed teens will be eliminated after research enhances suicide prevention.

One disadvantage connected with this bill is that there will be excessive use of funds, which does not guarantee positive results in the field. Even though research can help prevent suicide, it may not effectively reduce suicides among vulnerable populations. Expert Testimony and Personal Opinion Little et al. (2016) explain that researchers and other academics must come together to ensure they prevent suicide among vulnerable populations. The researchers indicate that the Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide Act of 2019 is effective legislation for the process. I believe the introduction of the bill is beneficial to vulnerable populations that are at risk of suicide.

H.R.1418 Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act Summary of the Bill and Riders The H.R.1418 Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2020 was introduced on February 28, 2019, and was sponsored by Democrat Peter A. DeFazio. The bill underwent the House and Senate committees and became Public Law on January 13, 2021. The legislation presents that nothing supersedes or modifies antitrust law operations regarding health insurance, including dental insurance operations (Congress.Gov, 2021). The Public Law also prohibits unfair courses of action in health insurance competition.

Population Affected The H.R.1418 Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act will be affected by several populations, including medical professionals and patients. Health insurance providers in the US are also affected by the act because it prohibits unfair competition. For patients, the law may protect them from unfair exposure to expensive insurance plans. Role of Medical Experts Medical experts understand the cost of insurance and how it affects patients. For this reason, they can play a crucial role by advocating for this Public legislation and ensuring that it is adhered to and ascertain that all insurance providers act accordingly.

Pros and Cons The legislation is beneficial to patients and other people in the US because it protects them from insurance providers' unfair methods. It also ensures the providers adhere to the law when dealing with all forms of insurance. However, the disadvantage of this law is that it may limit the operations of insurance providers. Expert Testimony and Personal Opinion Lexology (2020) criticizes the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2020 by presenting that it negatively affects competition because it limits insurance providers' operations. Individually, I think the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act is detrimental because it may lead to higher insurance premiums.

H.R.5663 Safeguarding Therapeutics Act Summary of the Bill and Riders The H.R.5663 Safeguarding Therapeutics Act is sponsored by Republican Brett Guthrie, a representative for Kentucky congressional district (GovTrack.gov, n.d). The bill was enacted after being signed by former US President Donald Trump on January 05, 2021. The legislation extends the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority to certain products from other countries, including medical devices (Congressional Budget Office, 2020). Population Affected The legislation affects many parties, including healthcare organizations that import medical devices from other countries. It may lead to the destruction of several medical devices by the FDA, leading to the loss of millions.

The Role of Medical Experts In recent years, counterfeit medical products have increased in the markets, which impacts effective healthcare delivery. For this reason, medical professionals need to ensure that the legislation is followed and active under the FDA. Medical professionals should lead the destruction of counterfeit medical devices. Pros and Cons One advantage of the Safeguarding Therapeutics Act is that it ensures counterfeit medical devices are destroyed, leading to effective medical care for patients that the counterfeit devices would have impacted. However, one disadvantage of this legislation is that it may cost the FDA millions in destroying these contrabands.

Expert Testimony and Personal Opinion BioWorld (2020) presents that the Safeguarding Therapeutics Act is crucial because it increases the effectiveness and use of high-quality medical devices. Nonetheless, individually, I think that the destruction of counterfeit medical devices by the FDA is the best available alternative. References BioWorld. (202, December 10). House passes a stopgap spending bill. Retrieved February 2021 from Congress.Gov. (n.d.).

H.R.1418 - Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2020. Retrieved 24 February 2021 from Congress.Gov. (n.d.). H.R.4704 - Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide Act. Retrieved 24 February 2021 from Congressional Budget Office. (2020, November 25). H.R.

5663, Safeguarding Therapeutics Act. Retrieved 24 February 2021 from Govtrack.us. (n.d.). H.R. th): Safeguarding Therapeutics Act. Retrieved 24 February 2021 from Lexology. (2020, December 29). Senate approves bill eliminating the antitrust exemption for health insurers.

Retrieved 24 February 2021 from Little, T. D., Roche, K. M., Chow, S. M., Schenck, A. P., & Byam, L.

A. (2016). National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop: advancing research to prevent youth suicide. Annals of internal medicine , ), .

Paper for above instructions

Section 1: Executive Summary/Introduction

Proposal Name: H.R.4704 - Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide.
Purpose: The proposed bill aims to enhance multidisciplinary research focused on suicide prevention and the treatment of related mental health issues. This legislation directs the National Science Foundation (NSF) to allocate grants for educational institutions, facilitating critical studies that address gaps in current suicide research (Congress.gov, 2021).
Problem Description: The United States is facing an escalating suicide crisis, affecting diverse demographics, including veterans, adolescents, and individuals with mental health disorders. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that suicide rates have increased substantially over the past two decades, marking it as a pressing public health concern (CDC, 2023).
Urgent Need for Change: The existing policy framework has not adequately supported comprehensive suicide prevention strategies, leading to continued loss of life. Timely and expanded research is essential to inform effective interventions that can mitigate this crisis.
Recommendations: The execution of H.R.4704 is crucial for fostering innovative research and developing evidence-based practices to reduce suicide rates. Collaboration among academic institutions, healthcare professionals, and policymakers will catalyze the necessary movement towards effective suicide prevention strategies.

Section 2: Problem Statement

The U.S. faces a critical and escalating problem regarding suicide rates, with approximately 45,979 recorded deaths in 2020 and growing incidences in vulnerable populations (CDC, 2023). The current gap in research hinders effective strategies for prevention and intervention. Addressing this issue necessitates urgent legislative action, as barriers to funding and research inhibit the development of innovative solutions. H.R.4704 seeks to fill these critical research voids through increased funding and collaboration across disciplines.

Section 3: Background

Overview of the Problem: Historically, suicide research has been limited in scope, leading to ineffective prevention efforts. Numerous mental health disorders correlate with increased suicide risk, necessitating in-depth studies to address the multifaceted nature of this issue (NAMI, 2023).
1. Healthcare Access: Most patients requiring mental health services often experience obstacles in accessing timely treatment, exacerbated by stigma and insufficient funding for mental health resources (SAMHSA, 2023).
2. Healthcare Cost: The financial implications of untreated mental health conditions are significant, with costs related to emergency care, hospitalization, and loss of productivity rising to tens of billions of dollars annually (CDC, 2023).
3. Healthcare Quality: A lack of comprehensive research leads to a deficiency in quality care protocols for mental health, hence the proposed bill’s objective of increasing the quality of care through rigorous research and evidence-based frameworks (NIMH, 2023).
Expert Opinion: According to Dr. T.D. Little et al. (2016), advancing research in this domain is crucial in identifying effective prevention strategies. They argue for a collaborative approach among researchers, healthcare practitioners, and policymakers to tackle the current crisis effectively.

Section 4: Landscape

Stakeholders

1. Supporting Interest Groups:
- American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP): AFSP advocates for increased funding for suicide prevention research, emphasizing the pressing need for comprehensive studies to inform therapeutic interventions (AFSP, 2023).
- National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI): NAMI supports H.R.4704, highlighting its alignment with their mission to advocate for improved mental health services through research initiatives (NAMI, 2023).
2. Opposing Interest Groups:
- Some Conservative Political Groups: Certain groups may argue against federal funding for research based on fiscal policy beliefs, advocating for budget reductions in the federal sector (Cato Institute, 2023).
Potential Landscape Factors:
According to Box 14-1 in your textbook (The Art of Structuring and Writing a Health Policy Analysis, 2023), industry dynamics, public perception of mental health, and varying support levels from different administrations can significantly influence the bill's progress.

Section 5: Options

1. Improved Funding Mechanisms:
- Description: Establish additional funding sources for mental health research within community organizations.
- Pros: Increases research capacity at the local level, enhancing community-based approaches.
- Cons: Potential for fragmented efforts leading to inconsistencies in research quality and guidelines.
2. Broadening Legislative Support:
- Description: Engage bipartisan support for mental health legislation to ensure wider acceptance of future bills.
- Pros: Increases likelihood for expedited passage of H.R.4704 and potential future initiatives.
- Cons: May result in compromises that dilute the effectiveness of the original bill.
3. Public Awareness Campaigns:
- Description: Launch initiatives to raise awareness about suicide prevention and support mental health policies.
- Pros: Enhances public engagement and knowledge, leading to broader support for policies.
- Cons: Requires substantial funding, which may detract from direct research investment.

Section 6: Recommendation

The most favorable option is to pursue improved funding mechanisms. This approach aligns with the goals of H.R.4704 by fostering local research initiatives that can potentially yield innovative solutions tailored to specific community needs. Enhanced funding will not only catalyze research but can also stimulate public engagement and advocacy, ultimately contributing to more effective suicide prevention strategies.

Section 7: References

1. American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. (2023). Research on Suicide Prevention.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2023). Understanding Suicide.
3. Cato Institute. (2023). The Fiscal Impact of Mental Health Legislation.
4. National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI). (2023). Legislative Advocacy.
5. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). (2023). Mental Health Research Funding.
6. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). (2023). Mental Health Services Overview.
7. Little, T. D., Roche, K. M., Chow, S. M., Schenck, A. P., & Byam, L. A. (2016). National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop: Advancing Research to Prevent Youth Suicide. Annals of Internal Medicine, 164(5), 400-406.
8. Congress.gov. (2021). H.R.4704 - Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide.
9. The Art of Structuring and Writing a Health Policy Analysis (2023).
10. Congressional Budget Office. (2020). H.R.5663, Safeguarding Therapeutics Act Analysis.
This analysis provides a foundation for understanding the critical need for H.R.4704 and presents a comprehensive review of the policy landscape surrounding suicide prevention research efforts.