[Solved] Public Health Systems Case Study

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

Public Health Systems Case Study
For this assignment, you will analyze the case study you selected in this week's studies.
Essential features of a case study include the following:
– **Nature of the Problem**: Statement of the issue of concern, disparities in outreach services to be addressed, and the significance of the problem.
– **Stakeholders and Stakeholder Groups**: Concerned organizations and groups. Include the dominant values and interests of stakeholders, as well as the common concerns and visions shared among them.
– **Alternative Solutions**: The primary (2–3) interventions surfacing as candidates for change. Include the strengths and weaknesses of the criteria for judging priorities.
– **Primary Optimal Solution**: Essential programmatic and practice elements that could lead to success. Is there a replication of study in other communities?
– **Reflection**: The advantages and disadvantages facing potential initiatives designed to develop, implement, or assess the proposed solution.
## **Instructions**
Develop a case study analysis that addresses issues and problems related to public health multiagency collaborative initiatives. These initiatives should improve outreach efforts addressing health equity and related issues of system efficacy, quality, and effectiveness.
Your case study analysis will be graded on how well you demonstrate the following:
– Describe alternative solutions and interventions as candidates for adoption.
– Describe performance indicators for judging priorities.
– Discuss how a mission or vision statement was (or could have been) used to empower stakeholders.
– Describe practices that foster collaboration and decision making between diverse stakeholders.
– Describe how specific systems thinking tools can be used to accomplish a public health program's goals and objectives.
– Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.
– Apply APA formatting to in-text citations and references.
## **Additional Requirements**
– **Length**: A minimum of 5–7 double-spaced pages, not including title, abstract and reference pages.
– **Font**: Times New Roman 12-point.
– **References**: At least six references that are in addition to your textbook.
– **APA**: Format your paper according to APA style. See [Evidence and APALinks to an external site.](https://lat.strategiced.com/redirect?linkid=1540 "Select this link to launch this material in a new window.").
**Note**: To fully understand how this assignment will be graded, carefully read the Public Health Systems Case Study Rubric.
**Portfolio Prompt:** You may choose to save this learning activity to your [ePortfolioLinks to an external site.](https://lat.strategiced.com/redirect?linkid=1688 "Select this link to launch this material in a new window.").
Week 9 Assignment: Public Health Systems Case Study **Week 9 Assignment: Public Health Systems Case StudyCriteriaRatingsPts** Describe alternative solutions/interventions as candidates for adoption. **32 to >27.2 ptsDISTINGUISHED** Describes alternative solutions/interventions as candidates for adoption, and impartially considers conflicting interventions and multiple perspectives. **27.2 to >22.4 ptsPROFICIENT** Describes alternative solutions/interventions as candidates for adoption. **22.4 to >0 ptsBASIC** Describes alternative solutions/interventions as candidates for adoption, but the description is unclear or incomplete. **0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCE** Does not describe alternative solutions/interventions as candidates for adoption./ 32 ptsDescribe performance indicators for judging priorities. **28 to >23.8 ptsDISTINGUISHED** Describes performance indicators for judging priorities, and identifies criteria, supported by evidence that could be used to evaluate the performance indicators. **23.8 to >19.6 ptsPROFICIENT** Describes performance indicators for judging priorities. **19.6 to >0 ptsBASIC** Describes performance indicators for judging priorities, but the description is unclear or incomplete. **0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCE** Does not describe performance indicators for judging priorities/ 28 ptsDiscuss how a mission or vision statement was (or could have been) used to empower stakeholders. **28 to >23.8 ptsDISTINGUISHED** Discusses how a mission or vision statement was (or could have been) used to empower stakeholders, and provides real-world examples of organizations with demonstrable alignment of results to mission and vision statements. **23.8 to >19.6 ptsPROFICIENT** Discusses how a mission or vision statement was (or could have been) used to empower stakeholders. **19.6 to >0 ptsBASIC** Discusses how a mission or vision statement was (or could have been) used to empower stakeholders, but the discussion is unclear or incomplete. **0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCE** Does not discuss how a mission or vision statement was (or could have been) used to empower stakeholders/ 28 ptsDescribe practices that foster collaboration and decision making between diverse stakeholders. **28 to >23.8 ptsDISTINGUISHED** Describes practices that foster collaboration and decision making between diverse stakeholders, and presents relevant evidence to support the contention that practices correlate with effective partnerships. **23.8 to >19.6 ptsPROFICIENT** Describes practices that foster collaboration and decision making between diverse stakeholders. **19.6 to >0 ptsBASIC** Describes practices that foster collaboration and decision making between diverse stakeholders, but the description is unclear or incomplete. **0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCE** Does not describe practices that foster collaboration and decision making between diverse stakeholders./ 28 ptsDescribe how specific systems thinking tools can be used to accomplish a public health program's goals and objectives. **28 to >23.8 ptsDISTINGUISHED** Describes how specific systems thinking tools can be used to accomplish a public health program's goals and objective and provides evidence-based examples of the benefits the program gained by the use of the tools. **23.8 to >19.6 ptsPROFICIENT** Describes how specific systems thinking tools can be used to accomplish a public health program's goals and objectives. **19.6 to >0 ptsBASIC** Describes how systems thinking tools can be used to accomplish a public health program's goals and objectives, but the description is not specific to any particular tool or it is unclear. **0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCE** Does not describe how systems thinking tools can be used to accomplish a public health program's goals and objectives./ 28 ptsSupport main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence. **28 to >23.8 ptsDISTINGUISHED** Supports main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant, credible, and convincing evidence. Skillfully combines virtually error-free source citations with a perceptive and coherent synthesis of the evidence. **23.8 to >19.6 ptsPROFICIENT** Supports main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence. **19.6 to >0 ptsBASIC** Sources lack relevance or credibility, or the evidence is not persuasive or explicitly supportive of main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations. **0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCE** Does not support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence./ 28 ptsApply APA formatting to in-text citations and references. **28 to >23.8 ptsDISTINGUISHED** Exhibits strict and nearly flawless adherence to APA formatting of in-text citations and references. **23.8 to >19.6 ptsPROFICIENT** Applies APA formatting to in-text citations and references. **19.6 to >0 ptsBASIC** Applies APA formatting to in-text citations and references incorrectly and/or inconsistently, detracting noticeably from good scholarship. **0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCE** Does not apply APA formatting to in-text citations and references./ 28 ptsTotal Points: 0