Overview The final project for this course is the creation of a policy analysis and recommendations paper. Throughout this course we have discussed how public policy is formed, including the legislative and private sector processes of policy development, key stakeholders and their interests, and the potential impact of policy on intended beneficiaries as well as the process of assessing policy outcomes. As a human services professional, you will be directly exposed to the needs of a diverse population and will be uniquely positioned to advocate for social policies that effectively meet those needs. Your role is particularly important since the intended beneficiaries of social services often have little direct voice in the policy process, while those who are making the policies are seldom directly impacted by them. Without input from client and community advocates, even well- intentioned social welfare policies have the potential to go awry. Policy decisions also directly affect the framework under which human services professionals do their jobs, and poorly designed policies can complicate rather than strengthen effective service delivery.

For your final project, you will imagine you are employed as a human services professional in your desired area of interest. You have been asked to prepare a brief policy paper analyzing a particular piece of human services legislation and to make policy recommendations for better meeting the needs of your client base. Using a specific piece of state or federal legislation that you have identified and researched in this course, you will assess the strengths and/or weaknesses of the legislation in addressing the needs of clients, bearing in mind the cultural, social, political, historical, and economic context in which the legislation was proposed. You should also consider how other similar legislation currently before state or federal legislative bodies might impact the legislation, and any legal or ethical concerns. Based on your analysis, your paper should explain your organization’s position on the legislation being considered, propose areas for improvement, and recommend strategies for building coalitions to support your position. Your analysis and recommendations should take into account the various interest groups or stakeholders that may influence the legislation being considered, including the roles of media, lobbying groups, community groups, beneficiaries, and concerned individuals and how political, social, or economic concerns may affect implementation.

The analysis in the policy brief should be based on an evaluative, comprehensive literature review focused on the identified social problem and legislation and a background analysis conducted earlier in the course.

The project is divided into three milestones, which will be submitted at various points throughout the course to scaffold learning and ensure quality final submissions. These milestones will be submitted in Modules Three, Four, and Five. The final project will be submitted in Module Seven. In this assignment, you will demonstrate your mastery of the following course outcomes:

 HSE-330-01: Evaluate the process by which private sector and legislative agencies develop and implement new human services policies in identifying advocacy and coalition-building opportunities

 HSE-330-02: Employ audience-appropriate communications strategies that build support for desired social change

 HSE-330-03: Examine human services legislation for its potential legal and ethical impact on intended beneficiaries in advocating for policies that promote appropriate care

 HSE-330-04: Analyze the implications of social, political, and economic factors in the development and implementation of effective human services legislation

 HSE-330-05: Examine the influence of culture and diversity on human services policy in proposing legislative changes to better serve diverse populations

Prompt Remember to use language, presentation style, and communication strategies appropriate to your intended audience as you develop the paper. Because policymakers, lobbyists, and other leaders within the policy field seldom have time to read long, academic papers, your document should be brief (6–10 pages) if you want to effectively engage their support. Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

I. Cover Page and Executive Summary. Your paper should begin with a cover page or other audience-appropriate heading that identifies who you are (your name, the organization you are imagining you work for, and your imagined title within that organization), and the intended audience for the analysis (e.g., a particular policymaker, a legislative committee, leaders from a potential ally organization, leadership in your own organization, etc.). You should also include a very brief executive summary of the social problem and legislation being considered. The cover page and summary should use language and a format appropriate for your selected audience.

II. Background. In this brief introductory section, you will put the legislation under consideration in context, as a preface to explaining your organization’s position. Specifically, you should use the background analysis you have completed earlier in the course to:

a. Briefly examine how major social, political, and economic events and other legislation have set the stage for the specific legislation you are considering. Be sure to provide specific examples in your response.

b. Briefly analyze the effectiveness of previous and existing human services legislation on the selected topic. Do the policies or programs effectively address the needs of the intended beneficiaries? Why or why not? Provide evidence to support your answer.

c. Succinctly examine whether previous and existing policies address the human services challenge in ways that are sensitive to meeting the needs of a diverse clientele and explain why or why not. Provide evidence to support your answer.

d. Argue for why is it particularly urgent to address the social issue in the legislation and any related policy weaknesses now. Your reasons should use audience-specific language and be supported by evidence. Keep in mind that policymakers, lobbyists, and private sector leaders have multiple competing priorities, respond to pressures from different groups, and have limited time. Your arguments will be critical to getting and keeping their support.

III. Your Position. In this section, you will lay out your organization’s position on the specific legislation being considered. It should be evident from your analysis that you have reviewed a full copy of the legislation and have researched the related issues and debate. Specifically, you should address the following points:

a. Is your organization for or against the legislation? Why? Your answer should analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the legislation in terms of potential effectiveness, cost, public acceptance, and political feasibility. In other words, how might economic, social, or political factors (including other legislation) help or hinder the policy’s implementation and effectiveness? What specific concerns does your organization have?

b. How might cultural, socioeconomic, and other diversity issues impact the quality and equity of services provided under the selected legislation? What concerns does your organization have? Provide examples to support your position.

c. What legal or ethical matters related to the legislation is your organization concerned about, if any? Explain your answer and provide examples, if appropriate.

d. Based on your analysis, how could the legislation in question be redesigned to better address the needs of intended beneficiaries? Be sure to address the following points and provide evidence to support your recommendations.

i. How could the legislation better address diversity in meeting the needs of intended beneficiaries? ii. How could the legislation better address legal or ethical concerns in meeting beneficiaries’ needs? If there are no concerns specific to

this legislation, make suggestions for how the legislation might help prevent legal or ethical concerns in future policies. Support your suggestions with evidence.

iii. What other changes to the legislation would make it more effective in serving intended beneficiaries? Consider the cost, public acceptance, and political feasibility issues you identified above in making your suggestions.

e. Be sure to use language and communication strategies appropriate for political or organizational leaders in explaining your organization’s position and recommendations. Remember the goal is to convince your audience that your analysis is credible without burdening them with undue detail.

IV. Stakeholders and Coalition-Building. This section should cover which groups, individuals, and organizations support this legislation, which oppose it, and why. Specifically, you should address:

a. Who should be responsible for developing, implementing, and paying for the changes you propose? Why? Your reasons should take into consideration the policy development process for human services legislation and different groups’ resources.

b. Have the intended beneficiaries taken a position on the legislation being considered? If not, why not? If so, what is their position? How have they communicated it? Support your answer.

c. What other groups, organizations, or individuals have an interest in the legislation? Do they support the legislation or oppose it? Why? For example, are there lobbyists, legislative groups, governors, celebrities, or other organizations that are strongly for or against the legislation? Why do they support or oppose it? Provide evidence to support your answer.

d. What strategies would you recommend in building support for the changes you suggest? Be sure to identify potential allies as well as activities they might undertake to influence the policy process. You might want to consider how different levels of advocacy (e.g., community and grassroots campaigns, national advocacy groups, business, the media, global activism, etc.) could help build support for your position.

V. References. Select references that are of sufficient quality, relevance, and credibility to be convincing to political or organization leaders and that support your analysis and recommendations. These should be included as an annex or “selected resources” list at the end of the document.

Milestones Milestone One: Background Paper In Module Three, you will submit a background analysis paper on the piece of state or federal legislation you have identified for your final project. Visit state and federal legislative websites to explore and identify a human services specific piece of legislation/bill of interest to you. You are encouraged to use existing television interviews, previously published interviews, and websites from the sponsor of the legislation. You may reach out to a staffer or the sponsor of the piece of legislation, but this is not required. Create a timeline showing the history of the legislation you are analyzing, including relevant prior legislation and major social, political, and economic events that impacted the development of this legislation. This milestone is graded with the Milestone One Rubric.

Milestone Two: Position Paper In Module Four, you will submit a paper stating your organization’s position on the specific legislation being considered. Make sure to state your role in your organization. It should be evident from your analysis that you have reviewed a full copy of the legislation and have researched the related issues and debates. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Two Rubric. Milestone Three: Stakeholder and Coalition Building Paper In Module Five, you will submit a paper that covers the groups, individuals, and organizations that support, as well as those that oppose, the legislation that you have selected, and why. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Three Rubric. Final Submission: Policy Analysis and Recommendation Paper In Module Seven, you will submit your final project. It should be a complete, polished artifact containing all of the critical elements of the final product. It should reflect the incorporation of feedback gained throughout the course. This submission will be graded with the Final Project Rubric.

Deliverables Milestone Deliverable Module Due Grading

1 Background Paper 3 Graded separately; Milestone One Rubric

2 Position Paper 4 Graded separately; Milestone Two Rubric

3 Stakeholder and Coalition Building Paper 5 Graded separately; Milestone Three Rubric

Final Submission: Policy Analysis and Recommendation Paper

7 Graded Separately; Final Project Rubric

Final Project Rubric Guidelines for Submission: Your final project must be 6–10 pages in length (plus a cover page and references) and must be written in APA format. Use double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. Include at least five references cited in APA format.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Cover Page and Executive Summary

Meets “Proficient” criteria and does not include any extraneous details

Prefaces paper with a cover page (or other audience-appropriate heading) and brief executive summary of the social problem and legislation being considered using language and format appropriate for the intended audience

Prefaces paper with a cover page (or other audience-appropriate heading) and brief executive summary of the social problem and legislation being considered, but does not use language and format appropriate for the intended audience

Does not preface paper with a cover page (or other audience- appropriate heading) or brief executive summary of the problem and legislation

5.75

Background: Events Meets “Proficient” criteria and examples selected are relevant without providing unnecessary detail

Accurately examines how major social, political, and economic events and other legislation have impacted legislation around the social issue and provides specific examples

Examines how major, social, political, and economic events and other legislation have impacted legislation around the social issue, but analysis is inaccurate or does not provide specific examples

Does not examine major social, political, and economic events and other legislation around the social issue

5.75

Background: Effectiveness

Meets “Proficient” criteria and analysis is supported by evidence that would be particularly relevant and credible to the intended audience

Accurately analyzes whether previous and existing policies effectively address the needs of intended beneficiaries and supports answer with evidence

Analyzes whether previous and existing policies effectively address the needs of intended beneficiaries, but assessment is inaccurate or is not supported with evidence

Does not analyze whether previous and existing policies effectively address the needs of intended beneficiaries

5.75

Background: Diverse Clientele

Meets “Proficient” criteria and assessment is supported by examples and evidence that would be particularly relevant and credible to the intended audience

Accurately examines whether previous and existing policies are sensitive to meeting the needs of a diverse clientele and supports answer with evidence

Examines whether previous and existing policies are sensitive to meeting the needs of a diverse clientele, but analysis is inaccurate or is not supported with evidence

Does not examine whether previous and existing policies are sensitive to meeting the needs of a diverse clientele

5.75

Background: Urgent Meets “Proficient” criteria and arguments are particularly convincing given the intended audience

Provides well-supported arguments for urgent action using reasons and language appropriate for the intended audience

Provides well-supported arguments for urgent action, but reasons and language are inappropriate for the intended audience

Does not provide well-supported arguments for urgent action

5.75

Your Position: Meets “Proficient” criteria and Analyzes the legislation’s Analyzes the legislation’s Does not analyze the legislation’s 5.75

Advantages and Disadvantages

analysis shows particularly keen insight into how political, economic, and social events impact human services legislation and the effective delivery of care

advantages and disadvantages in terms of potential effectiveness, cost, public acceptance, and political feasibility in presenting the organization’s position

advantages and disadvantages, but does not address all elements (effectiveness, cost, public acceptance, political feasibility) or does not connect analysis to the organization’s position

advantages and disadvantages

Your Position: Diversity Meets “Proficient” criteria and concerns and examples are particularly relevant given the organization selected

Examines how cultural, socioeconomic, and other diversity issues might impact the quality and equity of services provided under the selected legislation in presenting organization’s concerns and provides relevant examples

Examines how cultural, socioeconomic, and other diversity issues might impact the quality and equity of services provided under the selected legislation in presenting organization’s concerns, but does not provide relevant examples or examination lacks relevant detail

Does not examine how cultural, socioeconomic, and other diversity issues might impact the quality and equity of services provided under the selected legislation in presenting the organization’s position

5.75

Your Position: Legal or Ethical Matters

Meets “Proficient” criteria and explanation is particularly relevant given the organization selected

Examines legal or ethical matters related to the legislation in presenting organization’s position and explains response

Examines legal or ethical matters related to the legislation in presenting organization’s position, but does not explain response

Does not examine legal or ethical matters related to the legislation in presenting organization’s position

5.75

Your Position: Redesigned: Addressing

Diversity

Meets “Proficient” criteria and suggestions are particularly relevant given the organization selected

Proposes ways to improve the legislation being considered to better address beneficiary diversity using analysis presented in the paper and supports suggestions with evidence

Proposes ways to improve the legislation being considered to better address beneficiary diversity, but suggestions are not connected to analysis presented in the paper or are not supported with evidence

Does not propose ways to improve the legislation being considered to better address beneficiary diversity

5.75

Your Position: Redesigned: Addressing

Legal

Meets “Proficient” criteria and suggestions and evidence are particularly relevant given the organization selected

Proposes ways to improve the legislation being considered to better address legal or ethical concerns based on analysis presented in the paper, and supports suggestions with evidence

Proposes ways to improve the legislation being considered to better address legal or ethical concerns, but suggestions are not connected to the analysis presented in the paper or are not supported with evidence

Does not propose ways to improve the legislation to better address legal or ethical concerns

5.75

Your Position: Redesigned: Other

Meets “Proficient” criteria and suggestions and evidence are particularly relevant given the organization selected

Proposes other ways to improve the legislation being considered to better serve intended beneficiaries, taking into consideration the costs, social attitudes, and political feasibility

Proposes other ways to improve the legislation being considered, but suggestions do not consider costs, social attitudes, or political feasibility issues presented in the paper or are not supported with

Does not propose other ways to improve the legislation being considered

5.75

issues presented in the paper and supporting suggestions with evidence

evidence

Your Position: Language

Meets “Proficient” criteria and analysis strikes a particularly effective balance between credibility and brevity

Employs language and communication strategies appropriate for political or organizational leaders in explaining positions and making recommendations

Employs language and communication strategies for political or organizational leaders, but application is not appropriate for lending credibility to analysis or is unduly detailed

Does not employ language or communications strategies appropriate for political or organization leaders

5.75

Stakeholders: Responsibility

Meets “Proficient” criteria and reasons demonstrate insightful understanding of the policy process

Assesses who should be responsible for developing, implementing, and paying for proposed changes and supports assessment with reasons that take into consideration the policy process and different groups’ resources

Assesses who should be responsible for developing, implementing, and paying for proposed changes, but does not support with reasons that take into consideration the policy process and different groups’ resources

Does not assess who should be responsible for developing, implementing, and paying for proposed changes

5.75

Stakeholders: Beneficiaries

Meets “Proficient” criteria and discussion provides keen insight into beneficiaries’ role and interests in the policy process

Accurately identifies intended beneficiaries’ position (or lack of position) on the legislation under consideration and supports with evidence

Identifies intended beneficiaries’ position (or lack of position) on the legislation, but identification is inaccurate or not supported by evidence

Does not identify intended beneficiaries’ position (or lack of position) on the legislation

5.75

Stakeholders: Other Groups

Meets “Proficient” criteria and discussion provides keen insight into the variety of stakeholders involved and their roles in the policy process

Accurately identifies other groups, organizations, or individuals that have an interest in the legislation, their position, and the reason behind those positions and supports answer with evidence

Accurately identifies other groups, organizations, or individuals that have an interest in the legislation, but does not accurately identify their position or the reasons behind those positions, or does not support answer with evidence

Does not accurately identify other groups, organizations, or individuals that have an interest in the legislation

5.75

Stakeholders: Strategies

Meets “Proficient” criteria and strategies consider how different levels of advocacy could help build support for proposed change

Recommends strategies for building support for suggested changes, including identifying potential allies as well as activities they might undertake from their position in order to influence the policy process

Recommends strategies for building support for suggested changes, but does not identify potential allies or suggest activities they might undertake from their position in order to influence the policy process

Does not recommend strategies for building support for suggested changes

5.75

References Meets “Proficient” criteria and reference list strikes a particularly effective balance between

Provides high quality references that are credible and relevant for convincing political or

Provides references, but they are of insufficient quality, relevance, and/or credibility to be

Does not provide references 5.75

credibility and brevity organizational leaders to support analysis and recommendations

convincing to political or organizational leaders

Articulation of Response

Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format

Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization

Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas

Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas

2.25

Earned Total 100%

Undergraduate Courses

Proficiency Level Conceptual Meaning Value

Exemplary Performance exceeds expectations as specified in the outcome or objective. 100%

Proficient Performance meets expectations as specified in the outcome or objective. 85%

Needs Improvement Performance approaches, but does not meet expectations as specified in the outcome or objective. 55%

Not Evident Performance is not evident.

0%