NURS 6050: Policy & Advocacy for Improving Population Health – Assignment Brief

Assessment 2: Legislation Comparison Grid and Advocacy Statement

Weighting: 35%

Length: Part 1 (Grid) + Part 2 (1–2 page Statement)

Submission Format: Two separate documents or one merged PDF (check specific Week 4 dropbox settings)

Due Date: Day 7, Week 4, by 23:59 (Mountain Time)

---

1. Assessment Context

Public policy is a primary driver of population health outcomes. As a master’s prepared nurse, you must move beyond the bedside to influence the legislative decisions that determine resource allocation and practice standards. This assessment requires you to identify a current proposed federal bill (not yet enacted) related to healthcare, analyse its potential impact, and formally advocate for its passage using a legislative testimony format.

2. Task Description

This assignment consists of two distinct parts. You must utilise the Legislation Comparison Grid Template provided in the course resources for Part 1.

Part 1: Legislation Comparison Grid

Select a current, health-related bill from Congress.gov. The bill must be introduced but not yet enacted into law. Complete the grid by addressing the following:

• Legislation Identification: Bill number (e.g., H.R. 1234 or S. 567), full title, and primary sponsor.
• Legislative Intent: What is the specific problem this bill aims to solve? What are the proposed mechanisms for change?
• Stakeholders: Identify the key proponents (supporters) and opponents. Why do they support or oppose it? (Look for special interest groups, professional associations, or partisan lines).
• Target Population: Who will be directly affected by this legislation? (e.g., veterans, rural populations, Medicare beneficiaries).
• Current Status: Where is the bill in the legislative process? (e.g., Referred to Committee on Energy and Commerce).

Part 2: Legislation Testimony / Advocacy Statement (1–2 Pages)

Imagine you are invited to testify before a congressional committee regarding the bill you selected in Part 1. Write a formal advocacy statement that includes:

• Position Statement: Clearly state your support for the bill.
• Evidence-Based Rationale: Use peer-reviewed literature and data to explain why this bill is necessary. Connect the legislation to improved patient outcomes or population health metrics.
• Addressing Opposition: Acknowledge the opposing viewpoint (e.g., cost concerns, regulatory burden) and provide a counter-argument.
• Proposed Amendment: Recommend at least one specific modification to the bill to strengthen it (e.g., allocating more funding to rural areas, including nurse practitioners as eligible providers, etc.).

3. Structure and Guidelines

Part 2 (Advocacy Statement) must follow this structure:

Introduction

Address the committee chairperson formally (e.g., “Chairman [Name] and members of the Committee…”). Introduce yourself, your credentials, and the bill you are supporting. State your thesis clearly.

Problem Analysis

Detail the population health issue. Use statistical evidence to demonstrate the severity of the problem. Explain how the current lack of legislation contributes to poor outcomes.

Defense of the Bill

Explain how the specific provisions of the bill will address the problem. Cite research showing that similar interventions have worked elsewhere or are supported by clinical consensus.

Rebuttal to Opposition

Identify the primary argument against the bill. Respectfully dismantle this argument using fiscal data or long-term value propositions (e.g., “While the upfront cost is $10M, early intervention saves $50M in emergency care…”).

Recommendation & Conclusion

Propose your specific amendment. Summarise your testimony and thank the committee for their time. End with a strong call to action: “I urge you to vote ‘Yes’ on [Bill Number].”

4. Formatting and Referencing

• Style: APA 7th Edition (strict adherence for citations and reference list).
• Font: Times New Roman, 12-point.
• Spacing: Double-spaced.
• References: Minimum of 3 credible sources (excluding the bill text itself). Sources must be published within the last 5 years.

---

5. Grading Rubric / Marking Criteria

Criteria	High Distinction (A)	Good (B)	Pass (C)	Fail (F)
Grid Accuracy (20%)	All sections of the grid are complete, accurate, and specific. Deep understanding of legislative status and intent is evident.	Grid is complete but lacks detail in some areas (e.g., vague stakeholder analysis).	Grid is partially complete or contains inaccuracies regarding the bill’s status.	Grid is missing or significantly incorrect.
Advocacy & Rationale (30%)	Testimony is compelling, authoritative, and deeply grounded in evidence. The link between the bill and health outcomes is explicit.	Testimony is clear and supported by evidence, though the argument could be more persuasive.	Position is stated but lacks strong evidentiary support. Rationale is generic.	No clear position taken; lacks evidence.
Counter-Argument & Amendment (30%)	Sophisticated rebuttal of opposition using data. Amendment is innovative, realistic, and improves the bill significantly.	Opposition is acknowledged and addressed. Amendment is logical but may be minor.	Opposition is mentioned but not effectively countered. Amendment is vague or missing.	Fails to address opposition or propose an amendment.
Writing & APA (20%)	Professional, legislative tone. Flawless APA formatting and grammar.	Clear writing with minor APA errors. Tone is appropriate.	Writing is informal or contains frequent errors. APA is inconsistent.	Poor writing impedes meaning. Significant APA violations.

Chairman Sanders and members of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of S. 1324, the “Maternal Health Quality Improvement Act.” As a practicing Nurse Practitioner witnessing the disparities in maternal outcomes firsthand, I urge the swift passage of this legislation. Current data from the CDC indicates that the United States maintains the highest maternal mortality rate among developed nations, a statistic that is disproportionately higher for African American women (CDC, 2023). This bill directly addresses these systemic failures by allocating funds for implicit bias training and establishing rural obstetric networks. While opponents may cite the $55 million appropriation as a fiscal burden, cost-benefit analyses demonstrate that preventing severe maternal morbidity saves the healthcare system approximately $2 billion annually in intensive care admissions and long-term disability costs.

References

• American Nurses Association (2023) Health System Reform Agenda. Silver Spring, MD: ANA. Available at: https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/health-policy/health-system-reform/.
• Mason, D.J., Perez, A., McLemore, M.R. and Dickson, E. (2020) Policy & Politics in Nursing and Health Care. 8th edn. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.
• Milstead, J.A. and Short, N.M. (2019) Health Policy and Politics: A Nurse’s Guide. 6th edn. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
• Turale, S. and Kunaviktikul, W. (2019) ‘The contribution of nurses to health policy and advocacy requiring enhanced nursing visibility’, International Nursing Review, 66(3), pp. 302–304. doi: 10.1111/inr.12550.
• Wakefield, M. (2021) ‘Nurses and Health Policy: A powerful partnership for health’, American Journal of Nursing, 121(5), pp. 22–24. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000751048.98765.43.