PADM 550 Research Paper Grading Rubric Page 1 of 2 speaks to whether government has the authority from God, the people and from the Constitution—to MAY act on the issue and the policy initiative. That is the first question we ask as policy makers. It could be that other spheres such as churches, non-profits, businesses, local communities, etc. have the authority to act on the policy issue. It may fall in the realm of just one of those spheres but it is likely that many spheres will be involved in some form of cooperation. speaks to whether it is feasible to address the issue. We consider the question of whether we have CAN sufficient physical, political, and financial resources to solve the problem or implement the policy initiative. Policy solutions do not occur in a vacuum; most issues come with much debate and sometimes even acrimony. A wise Christian policy maker understands the political implications behind any decision, including how the press will cover the issue and communicate intentions from the stakeholder and how the opposition will seek to undermine and discredit the agenda. Once we know we have the authority (May) and the resources (Can), we ask practical/pragmatic SHOULD questions of how best to solve the problem or implement the solution. To do so, we use the policy analysis process listed above. To some extent, the Can and Should portions of the analysis have to occur simultaneously. Finally, the May portion of the analysis also prescribes how one develops political strategies (Can). For instance, Biblically, we are called to act with integrity and humility. Further, how one defines the nature of the problem itself (Should) is the result of worldview assumptions—Biblical or otherwise. CAN: "Feasibility" • Finanicial Feasibility: Do we have the financial resources? • Phyiscal Feasilibity: do we have the resources? • Political Feasibility: do we have the political capital? SHOULD: Timing, Strategy • Policy Analysis Process: 1) Define and Analyze the Problem, 2) ; Construct Policy Alternatives; 3) Develop Evaluative Criteria; 4) Assess alternatives in light of the criteria; and 5) Choose the appropriate alternative(s) • Logisticis: what is the best way to implement a solution. • Timing: what is the best time to implement a solution MAY: • Does government have the authority to address this issue or implement the particular policy in question? • If so, where does it get its authority? (Law of Nature and Nature’s God, the people, the Constitution) Running Head: YOUR PAPER TITLE YOUR PAPER TITLE HERE 2 Your Paper Title Your Name Date Class Name and Section Dr. Kahlib Fischer Abstract Defining the Problem Overview Impacts Root Causes Competing Interpretations Policy Alternatives Policy Alternative 1 Comment by Fischer, Kahlib: Change each of these headings to reflect the names of the actual policy alternatives..

1. PADM 550
Research Paper Grading Rubric
Page 1 of 2
speaks to whether government has the authority from God, the
people and from the Constitution—to MAY
act on the issue and the policy initiative. That is the first
question we ask as policy makers. It could be that
other spheres such as churches, non-profits, businesses, local
communities, etc. have the authority to act on
the policy issue. It may fall in the realm of just one of those
spheres but it is likely that many spheres will be
involved in some form of cooperation.
speaks to whether it is feasible to address the issue. We
consider the question of whether we have CAN
sufficient physical, political, and financial resources to solve
the problem or implement the policy initiative.
Policy solutions do not occur in a vacuum; most issues come
with much debate and sometimes even acrimony.
A wise Christian policy maker understands the political
implications behind any decision, including how the
press will cover the issue and communicate intentions from the
stakeholder and how the opposition will seek
to undermine and discredit the agenda.
Once we know we have the authority (May) and the resources

2. (Can), we ask practical/pragmatic SHOULD
questions of how best to solve the problem or implement the
solution. To do so, we use the policy analysis
process listed above. To some extent, the Can and Should
portions of the analysis have to occur
simultaneously.
Finally, the May portion of the analysis also prescribes how one
develops political strategies (Can). For
instance, Biblically, we are called to act with integrity and
humility. Further, how one defines the nature of the
problem itself (Should) is the result of worldview
assumptions—Biblical or otherwise.
CAN:
"Feasibility"
• Finanicial Feasibility: Do we
have the financial resources?
• Phyiscal Feasilibity: do we
have the resources?
• Political Feasibility: do we
have the political capital?
SHOULD:
Timing,
Strategy
• Policy Analysis Process: 1)
Define and Analyze the
Problem, 2) ; Construct Policy

3. Alternatives; 3) Develop
Evaluative Criteria; 4) Assess
alternatives in light of the
criteria; and 5) Choose the
appropriate alternative(s)
• Logisticis: what is the best way
to implement a solution.
• Timing: what is the best time
to implement a solution
MAY:
• Does government have the
authority to address this issue or
implement the particular policy in
question?
• If so, where does it get its authority?
(Law of Nature and Nature’s God,
the people, the Constitution)
Running Head: YOUR PAPER TITLE
YOUR PAPER TITLE HERE 2

4. Your Paper Title
Your Name
Date
Class Name and Section
Dr. Kahlib Fischer
Abstract
Defining the Problem
Overview
Impacts
Root Causes
Competing Interpretations
Policy Alternatives
Policy Alternative 1 Comment by Fischer, Kahlib: Change
each of these headings to reflect the names of the actual policy
alternatives.

5. Policy Alternative 2
Policy Alternative 3
May
Policy Alternative 1
Biblical guidelines and principles.
Constitutional guidelines for federal and state involvement.
Policy Alternative 2
Biblical guidelines and principles.
Constitutional guidelines for federal and state involvement.
Policy Alternative 3
Biblical guidelines and principles.
Constitutional guidelines for federal and state involvement.
Can
Policy Alternative 1
Financial feasibility.
Political feasibility.
Physical feasibility.
Policy Alternative 2
Financial feasibility.
Political feasibility.
Physical feasibility.
Policy Alternative 3

6. Financial feasibility.
Political feasibility.
Physical feasibility.How
Policy Alternative 1
Timing.
Logistics.
Effectiveness.
Policy Alternative 2
Timing.
Logistics.
Effectiveness.
Policy Alternative 3
Timing.
Logistics.
Effectiveness.Policy Recommendation Comment by Fischer,
Kahlib (Helms School of Government): Provides an assessment
of whether and which of the 2-3 alternatives should be adopted
based upon the May-Can-How analysis.
References Comment by Fischer, Kahlib: List your sources
in APA format below.
Running Head: YOUR PAPER TITLE
YOUR PAPER TITLE HERE 2

7. Your Paper Title
Your Name
Date
Class Name and Section
Dr. Kahlib Fischer
Abstract
Defining the Problem
Overview
Impacts
Root Causes
Competing Interpretations
Policy Alternatives
Policy Alternative 1 Comment by Fischer, Kahlib: Change
each of these headings to reflect the names of the actual policy
alternatives.

8. Policy Alternative 2
Policy Alternative 3
May
Policy Alternative 1
Biblical guidelines and principles.
Constitutional guidelines for federal and state involvement.
Policy Alternative 2
Biblical guidelines and principles.
Constitutional guidelines for federal and state involvement.
Policy Alternative 3
Biblical guidelines and principles.
Constitutional guidelines for federal and state involvement.
Can
Policy Alternative 1
Financial feasibility.
Political feasibility.
Physical feasibility.
Policy Alternative 2
Financial feasibility.
Political feasibility.
Physical feasibility.
Policy Alternative 3
Financial feasibility.

9. Political feasibility.
Physical feasibility.How
Policy Alternative 1
Timing.
Logistics.
Effectiveness.
Policy Alternative 2
Timing.
Logistics.
Effectiveness.
Policy Alternative 3
Timing.
Logistics.
Effectiveness.Policy Recommendation Comment by Fischer,
Kahlib (Helms School of Government): Provides an assessment
of whether and which of the 2-3 alternatives should be adopted
based upon the May-Can-How analysis.
References Comment by Fischer, Kahlib: List your sources
in APA format below.
speaks to whether government has the authority from God, the
people and from the Constitution—to MAY
act on the issue and the policy initiative. That is the first
question we ask as policy makers. It could be that
other spheres such as churches, non-profits, businesses, local
communities, etc. have the authority to act on
the policy issue. It may fall in the realm of just one of those

10. spheres but it is likely that many spheres will be
involved in some form of cooperation.
speaks to whether it is feasible to address the issue. We
consider the question of whether we have CAN
sufficient physical, political, and financial resources to solve
the problem or implement the policy initiative.
Policy solutions do not occur in a vacuum; most issues come
with much debate and sometimes even acrimony.
A wise Christian policy maker understands the political
implications behind any decision, including how the
press will cover the issue and communicate intentions from the
stakeholder and how the opposition will seek
to undermine and discredit the agenda.
Once we know we have the authority (May) and the resources
(Can), we ask practical/pragmatic SHOULD
questions of how best to solve the problem or implement the
solution. To do so, we use the policy analysis
process listed above. To some extent, the Can and Should
portions of the analysis have to occur
simultaneously.
Finally, the May portion of the analysis also prescribes how one
develops political strategies (Can). For
instance, Biblically, we are called to act with integrity and
humility. Further, how one defines the nature of the
problem itself (Should) is the result of worldview
assumptions—Biblical or otherwise.
CAN:
"Feasibility"
• Finanicial Feasibility: Do we
have the financial resources?

11. • Phyiscal Feasilibity: do we
have the resources?
• Political Feasibility: do we
have the political capital?
SHOULD:
Timing,
Strategy
• Policy Analysis Process: 1)
Define and Analyze the
Problem, 2) ; Construct Policy
Alternatives; 3) Develop
Evaluative Criteria; 4) Assess
alternatives in light of the
criteria; and 5) Choose the
appropriate alternative(s)
• Logisticis: what is the best way
to implement a solution.
• Timing: what is the best time
to implement a solution
MAY:
• Does government have the
authority to address this issue or
implement the particular policy in
question?

12. • If so, where does it get its authority?
(Law of Nature and Nature’s God,
the people, the Constitution)