PLEASE FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS BELOW AND USE THE BELOW POLICY TO REFERENCE. THIS IS PART 2 OF THE PREVIOUS PAPER.
Comparing International Healthcare Delivery Systems Description Each student will prepare a PowerPoint presentation, including detailed speaker notes in APA format, examining an international health system compared to the reformed U.S. health system. Directions: Students will prepare the presentation using PowerPoint that will provide: a discussion of the country, culture, and governance structure compared to the U.S. structure the historical background of the development of the health system including a description of the health system type, cost analysis, and funding stream compared to the reformed U.S. system a discussion of systematic and financial health policy issues that would indicate success or failure driven by politics in each country a discussion of the health system’s performance including outcomes, and a comparative analysis of costs compared to the U.S. health system The presentation will be professional and include: speaker notes that are detailed and cited with the most current information available and matching references on the reference slide no older then 2010 slides that are cited and contain no more than 40 words per slide with matching references on the reference slide graphics that are cited with a matching reference on the reference slide written permission for graphics that hold a copyright a title page slide at the beginning and a reference slide at the end in APA format 15 slides counting the title slide and reference slide Each student will post the presentation to Doc Sharing for review by peers and to the Dropbox for grading by day three of Unit 7. Each student will also post two questions in the Unit 7 Discussion topic 2 thread that will foster political debate.
THIS INCLUDES THE 2 SEPERATE QUESTIONS ALSO TO POST
Policy Change Proposal Section II
The proposed policy change is meant to improve the effectiveness of public laws and regulations and even give information on the public use of funds. Further, it will address the practices of the private sector employment that affects the ability of people to work and make their living above the poverty line and this mostly applies to the youths, unmarried dependent adults. The proposal is meant to make the public policy more inclusive, collaborative and responsive to the interests of the ordinary citizen so as to prepare them for their future life.
From the proposed amendment, there are measurable goals that will determine the level of success of the policy change proposal and this will include: First, by the end of the year we expect 60% of unmarried adult children to be independent and live an economically viable lifestyle. Second, by the end of 2018, the rate of poverty to reduce by 19% since the country will be composed of economically productive youths. Lastly, we expect the employment rate in the country to increase by 26% thereby increasing the economy of the country (Dillon, Erin & Rotherham 2009).
Policy change options
“Do nothing option” is when one does offer no initiative for change characterized by unwillingness and inability to take responsibility or work towards an achievement. Incremental change option is the step of making small adjustments to the expected end results, and mostly it does not alter or threaten the existing structure of the youthful age or alter the current methods of family management in this case of the change proposal. A major change option is the one that will alter the content, structure, the scheme of assessment and the mode of provision of the programs in question i.e. it will entail deletion, addition and replacement to a substantial part of the program or the act of law (Detixhe 2011).
Substantive funding stream is the amount of money that is existing independently of others and is in large quantity. Likelihood of ongoing funding is the amount of money that is required to fund the ongoing operation of future developments of a project that is not currently provided for in terms of cash, debt or equity. Ability to meet current and future demands of the proposal is all about sustainability of our society as per the future and the current needs and makes appropriate changes in the way we live (Center on Education Policy 2007).Political feasibility is the degree to which policy makers and officials of the government will be willing to accept and give their support to a public policy and therefore it gives the necessary backing in order for our proposed changes to be signed into law.
Pros and cons of each policy
Do nothing option
1. It will aid the continuation of the proposed changes as they are.
2. No additional funding will be required if nothing is done to the proposals.
3. Enables development of programs from the primary funding sources.
1. The state of economy is failing and is in need of productive individuals.
2. The youths are not being utilized at this time due to the inactive accessibility.
3. Generally nothing will change if nothing is done to save the economy and the dependent unmarried youths.
Incremental change option
1. It gives confidence of reaching the target goal.
2. Gives room for recommendations and improvements of the previous step.
3. Allows for the mobility of the workforce in order to make particular changes.
1. The steps are time consuming and sometimes reaching for a goal might be a distant dream.
2. There will be increased cost of living as the youths may be lazing in the steps.
3. Some of the steps are very discouraging therefore making one to withdraw (Detixhe 2011).
Major change option
1. Creates a healthier and productive country in terms of economy and health care provision
2. Fulfills economic and health disparities such as poverty, mental health, unemployment etc.
3. There is decreased cost for the effectiveness of the proposed change.
1. More focus can be based on this proposed change forgetting other areas of concern.
2. The administration may only give a primary support on the policy change.
|Do Nothing option||Incremental Change option||Major change option|
|Substantive funding stream||++||+++||+|
|Likelihood of ongoing funding||+||++||+|
|Ability to meet current and future demands||_||_||_|
|Score for each option||3||6||0|
Based on the analysis of the score card findings and the disadvantages as well as the advantages, we will use the incremental change option in the implementation of the proposed amendment since it scored plus four. The step by step process of implementation will enhance likelihood of funding as well as promote active involvement of the different stakeholders. Besides, this process will ensure that licensure, education, accreditation and certification are uniformly distributed in all the states to meet the nation’s demands of productivity (Dillon, Erin & Rotherham 2009).
Center on Education Policy, (2007).Answering the Question That Matters Most: Has Student Achievement Increased Since No Child Left Behind? Washington: Center on Education Policy.
Dillon, Erin & Rotherham, Andy. (2009). States’ Evidence: What It Means to Make ‘Adequate Yearly Progress’ Under NCLB.
Detrixhe, J (2011). U.S. Loses AAA Credit Rating as S&P Slams Debt Levels, Political Process. Bloomberg L.P.