Great Deal! Get Instant $10 FREE in Account on First Order + 10% Cashback on Every Order Order Now

APA 7TH STYLE REFERENCINGTOPIC Post-COVID-19 health system reform in Australia Advocacy strategy: develop a policy position paper PART A: undertake a background analysis of the issue (2500 words) PART...

1 answer below »
APA 7TH STYLE REFERENCINGTOPICPost-COVID-19 health system reform in AustraliaAdvocacy strategy: develop a policy position paper

PART A: undertake a background analysis of the issue (2500 words)

PART B: write a policy position paper (1500 words)

In this assignment, you are required to develop a policy position paper for one of the public health organisations that you will be introduced to in this unit. The position paper you develop is to be used to convince the relevant Minister to adopt a preferred policy position. While submitted as one document with your background analysis, the position paper should stand alone as a paper independent of the background analysis. The objective of the position paper is to influence public policy, based on:

- an analysis of the effectiveness of existing policy/ies;

- evidence of suitable interventions/positions/solutions to address the

problem; and,

- robust public health advocacy.

Your audience is the relevant Australian Government or State/Territory Minister, and in most cases this will be the Health Minister. You need to articulate a broad problem statement, have a clear rationale and a range of options that the Minister could choose from, while at the same time making clear which option is recommended.




Students should prepare for the assessment by exploring advocacy papers of various organisations and by conducting a preliminary website and evidence search of their selected topic and organisation. Students should come to the presentations prepared with questions for the organisation representatives. External students can email their list of questions to the lecturer in advance.

Presentation

Use the Assessment Criteria as a guide.

Part A should follow normal academic writing conventions you would apply to an essay (including an introduction and conclusion).

Part B should include the following information (Title, Audience) and sub-headings (Summary, Background, Recommendations and References).

Assessment criteria:

As per the CDU grading matrix and the criteria below:

Part A) The Background Analysis should contain:

Marks

  • A broad problem statement identifying the nature, extent and impact of the problem you are addressing; who is affected by the problem, how and why they are most affected or at risk

/5

  • The social and political context surrounding this problem, including an analysis of existing policy/ies and identification of key stakeholders.

/7

  • The evidence that supports the intervention/position/solution you are advocating for

/8

  • A clear rationale based on the above for taking the suggested course of action, including a policy objective

/5

Part B) The Position Paper should include:

Marks

  • Framing of the policy objectivein order to maximise the acceptability of theintervention/position/solutionto the voting public. Include a discussion of how the issue could be presented to the electorate and who could be enrolled as allies and champions.

/5

  • A range of possibleinterventions/positions/solutionsand an analysis of the pros and cons of each option. Ensure you make clear which solution you recommend and why it is preferable.

/7

  • A persuasive strategy to convince the Government to adopt this policy position

/8

  • A logically structured argument presented in an appropriate format, which identifies and describes the organisation the position paper is written on behalf of, with correct referencing

/5

Total

/50

Answered Same Day Sep 15, 2021

Solution

Amar answered on Oct 08 2021
153 Votes
1
Running Header: Post-COVID-19 Health System Reform in Australia: Policy Position Report
2
Post-COVID-19 Health System Reform in Australia: Policy Position Report
Post-COVID-19 Health System Reform in Australia: Policy Position Report
Table of Contents
PART A – Background Analysis    3
Introduction    3
Analysis & Discussion    4
Conclusion    10
PART B – Policy Position    11
Summary    11
Background    12
Recommendations    13
Conclusion    16
References    17
PART A – Background Analysis
Introduction
The year 2020 till now can be noted to be consumed with global scale pandemic due to COVID-19 as well as its impacts of devastating nature over the systems of healthcare in Australia as well as globally. Unlike the health systems across United States, Italy, and other nations, The Australian system has not been stress tested from this pandemic (van Barneveld et al., 2020; Pennington & Stanford, 2020; Mazzucato & Kattel, 2020). However, it shall be crucial for noting that prudent and effective form of systems / policies focussed on public health shall aid in saving lives, scalable healthcare capacities as well as continue in providing care for most vulnerable of the Australians. While no system for public health can be 100% perfect, the present system in Australia holds certain critical attributes which shall make it to be robust system at a global level, and yet it is exposed to wide ranging challenges. This report shall explore the various impacts, implications and learnings from COVID-19 pandemic in the context of reforming the Australia’s health system over long term (van Barneveld et al., 2020; Pennington & Stanford, 2020; Mazzucato & Kattel, 2020).
The key implications that are discussed in this analysis report include the following: [1] poor integration, that is, in the macro level context, federal / state funding usually lead to competing as well as disconnected form of health systems. To take an example, a
itrary splitting in-between funding for hospitals and general practice. In the level of states, for example one can see in Victoria that governance of hospitals has largely been devolved for local-level health services, focussed on centralised form of planning, integration in IT infrastructure as well as bulk purchasing based procurement decisions (van Barneveld et al., 2020; Pennington & Stanford, 2020; Mazzucato & Kattel, 2020). In tertiary sector contexts, one can note specialties turning to be ever-more siloed increasingly, with highly and niche specialised clinicians who in a frequent manner work on an isolated manner from one other, instead of one other, resulting in disjointed form of care, [2] weighting of the services focussed on treating acute illness instead of promoting wellness / prevention. There has been significant set of attempts for prioritising prevention across Australia and yet actual reality has been that the disproportionate portion in health funding has been going towards acute care as well as favouring procedurals approaches instead of non-procedural approaches (van Barneveld et al., 2020; Pennington & Stanford, 2020; Mazzucato & Kattel, 2020). Funding shall often get targeted on shorter term projects instead of investment in longer-term reforms at structural level for delivering healthcare, and [3] significant inefficiency as well as wastage to utilise healthcare resources within healthcare system of Australia (van Barneveld et al., 2020; Pennington & Stanford, 2020; Mazzucato & Kattel, 2020).
Analysis & Discussion
Reforms in health systems can usually be frustrating and arduous processes having bureaucrats who are risk-averse, vested interests as well as general form of inertia leading to the prevention of rapid changes, even while changes shall appear to be sensible eminently (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020). The remarkable form of characteristic with respect to the response focussed on COVID-19 have been sheer pace in reforms, having significant changes like that of expansion in tele-health services, creating COVID-19 focussed clinical services inside existing hospitals, as well as unprecedented levels in co-operation amongst public and private hospitals, as well as between federal and state governments. Innovation can be noted to be flourishing, right from use of ventilation hoods, 3D printed medical equipment for development of vaccine, etc. (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020).
In this context, it shall be essential at present for determining the ways in which one can ca
y forward the stated form of innovative / positive attitudes on health reforms while the country emerges from this acute crisis. In actual, prevailing paradigms which entail availing of ethics and grants approval with respect to research projects shall usually stifle innovation (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020). This mandates the need to learn ways for capitalising over positive forms of consequences that are unintended during the pandemic for facilitating and reward innovation. One of the promising and new development in this regard concerns Australian Academy for Science Rapid Research Information Forum (“RRIF”) that aids in facilitating policy-focussed and rapid information sharing concerning COVID-19 in the domain of Australian research / innovation (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020).
It has to be noted that unfortunately, inflexibility gets integrated within varied set of structures concerning health system, exace
ated on account of the Australian system focussed on devolved governance, specialist / clinical siloing as well as distinct lines in accountability concerning the private as well as public health systems, in addition to the segregated forms of hospital systems and primary care (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020). The stated inflexibility can be noted to be evident in the span of decades, where reforms have been held up on account of vested interests as well as usually representing culture with hostility in-between health bureaucracy and clinicians, as well as in-between clinicians from varied craft groups. The same has hampered the capacity of government for co-ordinating agile and system-wide responses (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020). In actual, as it has been observed over the course of this on-going crisis, pandemic responses need coordinated form of response. All of the individual hospitals shall be required in playing their respective roles forming part of the larger / wider plan, in the manner of public, to take an example, by way of paving way for electronic forms of contact tracing by way of applications like “CovidSafe”, even having significant levels of community reservations with respect to privacy (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020).
The health system in Australia can be noted of having demonstrated overall flexibility with respect to rapid form of transitioning in the outpatient clinics of public hospitals to that of tele-health frameworks, yet much of the work are yet to be undertaken within this domain (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020). It is expected that there is a need in that lasting legacy from this crisis shall be to inculcate flexibility for utilising suitable communication technologies in undertaking various responses for COVID-19 in a manner that is business as usual. In case of any crises, resources shall be highly precious as compared to normal times, and concerned health leaders have complete responsibility for prioritising the resource stewardship. In this context, it is notable that laissez-faire / free market approach focussed on using the resources shall become ineffective and even dangerous during pandemic period while potential shortages shall loom with respect to personal protective equipment (“PPE”), capacities for ICU as well as laboratory / testing capabilities. With various nations scrambling for securing sufficient equipment, cu
ent COVID-19 pandemic is representing to be salient reminder in that the health resources shall indeed be finite, which shall be applicable for wealthier nations as well (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020).
It shall be true in stating that even prior to this pandemic, there has been calls for pursuing reduction with respect to environmental footprints from the provision of healthcare. In the level of day-to-day operations, questions had actually been raised with respect to the proliferation concerning single-use aspects, with increased levels of cost as well as significant levels of environmental footprints in comparison to the reusable items (Fernandez-Portillo et al., 2020; Sarkodie & Owusu, 2020; Halcomb et al., 2020). In same instance, programs like that of “Evolve & Choosing Wisely” has been seeking out both consumers as well as clinicians for being highly cognisant over not just any burgeoning waste across healthcare, but in addition potential...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here