Running head HEALTH POLICY ANALYSIS .docx

Running head: HEALTH POLICY ANALYSIS
1
HEALTH POLICY ANALYSIS
8
Health Policy Analysis Comment by Sarah J. Hammill:
Change to the title of your thesis.
Your Complete Name
Florida International University
MAN6974: HCMBA Thesis
Abstract
The abstract is optional. If you are going to include it, then it
goes on page 2 by itself. Start on page 3 with the Problem
Statement. The abstract should be about 250 words and is a
summary of your health policy analysis! We don’t want to read
an abstract of an article you found on your topic. Comment by

Sarah J. Hammill: If you are going to include your abstract, be
sure to read it over for grammar and sentence structure issues.
The Writing Coach doesn’t review abstracts in the final thesis
because they are graded separately.
Problem Statement Comment by Sarah J. Hammill: This
section can simply be the problem statement question. It should
not be a yes/no question. It shouldn’t be too broad.
Your problem statement question guides your entire paper.
Everything must relate back to your problem statement
question.
This can be the toughest part of your paper. It is normal to
modify your problem statement question as you write the other
parts of the paper.
Make sure to write clear and concise sentences. Avoid
writing wordy and lengthy sentences and do not use inflated
words. Express your ideas as clearly as possible. Write a clear
problem statement in the form of a single question. This is the
starting point of your analysis, so writing a succinct problem
statement will frame the entire analysis. As research analysts,
your goal is to connect all the dots across the various sections
of the final analysis and align them closely with the problem
statement.
Ask yourself whether the problem statement is too broad.
Depending on the research problem under analysis, it might be
necessary to narrow it. This can be accomplished by focusing
on a specific demographic group or geographical area. For
instance, does your research problem specifically address
challenges in the South Florida region? Does it concern
African-American single parents without health insurance
coverage?
As a rule of thumb, this section (serving as the

introduction to your analysis) should clearly specify “the needs
and concerns of your client” (Tietelbaum & Wilensky, 2013, p.
255). Note that the phrase enclosed by double quotation marks
was copied verbatim from Tietelbaum and Wilensky’s text;
therefore, credit must be given to these authors and a page
number must be provided for all direct quotations. Please
remember that if direct quotations include 40 words or more, a
block quotation format must be used (see APA Manual, 6th ed.,
p. 92). Make sure NOT to use double quotation marks to
enclose block quotations. If you are paraphrasing the material,
it is not necessary to include a page or paragraph number within
parenthetical citations. However, you must always give credit
to original authors even if paraphrasing their material.
Finally, you should avoid writing vague statements. The
problem statement should focus on a specific issue, as opposed
to a series of issues. This will make the analytical process more
manageable. Make sure NOT to offer any solutions in this
section of your analysis. Avoid writing long sentences
whenever possible.
Background
It is essential to remember that the Background section is
informational, as opposed to analytical. In this section, you
should specify why your team was charged with the analysis of
this problem. It is equally important to keep your “audience” in
mind at all times. In addition to your client (primary audience),
other readers include your professor and possible faculty
members and/or healthcare industry practitioners interested in
your topic. Providing as many relevant facts (from empirical
research) as possible, will strengthened your viewpoints and,
ostensibly, persuade your client as to why your proposed
solution is the most appropriate. However, to reiterate,
remember this section is just “informing” others about the facts
emerging from your research. This section should not “analyze”
the issue(s) at hand or offer any recommendations at this point.
Landscape Comment by Sarah J. Hammill: Use

subheadings. I recommend that the stakeholders be your
subheadings. Discuss the issues (legal, political, practical, and
economic) that are important to each stakeholder.
Similar to the preceding Background section, the content of the
Landscape section is two-fold: to identify “key stakeholders and
the factors that must be considered when analyzing the
problem” (Tietelbaum & Wilensky, 2013, p. 256). Your research
should identify the main stakeholders. In addition to your
client, who is the main stakeholder, other individuals or entities
directly related to the research problem must also be identified.
Among the factors underlying policy implementation are
the political, economic, practical, and legal factors. Please
refer to Tietelbaum and Wilensky’s text (p. 257) for specific
details about these factors. Finally, this section can be
organized by stakeholders or by factors.
Options Comment by Sarah J. Hammill: Use subheadings.
Option 1… Option 2… etc.
Discuss the pros and cons of each option.
This section should be detailed. It is the heart of your paper.
The Background and Landscape sections serve as the preamble
to this policy analysis and puts the research problem in context.
The options section is the heart of your paper. It is the analysis
and should be detailed. Each option should be weighted
equally. Be sure to use the factors in box 3.2 in analyzing each
option (Tietelbaum & Wilensky, 2013, p. 260).
Tietelbaum and Wilensky (2013) suggest “three to five
alternatives for your client to consider” (p. 259). Your team
should provide the positive and negative aspects (i.e., pros and
cons) for each alternative. This is what the authors deem “a
balanced analysis”. They also suggest selecting between three
and five criteria to run the pro vs. con analysis. Some criteria
include: cost, Return-on Investment, political feasibility, etc. It

is important to remember that your client’s values and his/her
ability to make (or not make) decisions (i.e., power) must be
kept in mind when making your final recommendation.
Organizing your list of options logically is extremely important.
The first sentence in each “Option” subsection should clearly
describe that option. When analyzing each option consider the
following:
· Cost: How much does each option cost?
· Cost-Benefit Analysis: Cost versus the value of each option.
· Political Feasibility: Are the options viable?
· Legal Implications: Are the options legal? What are the
ramifications?
· Administrative Ease: How difficult would each option be to
implement?
· Fairness: Does each option treat individuals affected fairly?
· Timeliness: Can each option be implemented in a timely
reasonable fashion?
· Targeted Impact: Does each option actually target the
problem/population involved (Tietelbaum & Wilensky, 2013, p.
260).
Option 1. Describe the option. What are the pros of this option?
What are the cons of this option? Explain your argument briefly
and concisely.
Option 2. Describe the option. What are the pros of this
option? What are the cons of this option? Explain your
argument briefly and concisely.
What are the cons of this option? Explain your argument
briefly and concisely.
Your team may choose to insert brief tables in this section to
illustrate how the team assessed each option. Make sure to keep
the table content concise and brief, as tables are supposed to
supplement your narrative. You might want to refer to the

analytic side-by-side Table 13-2 appearing on page 261 of
Tietelbaum and Wilensky’s textbook.
Recommendation
Choose ONLY ONE option as your recommendation. Why did
your team choose this option over the other ones? Did your
team consider the client’s values and power when choosing this
option? Did the team consider and identify any possible
drawbacks this recommended option may have in its
implementation? Did the team provide alternative ways to avert
such drawbacks, if any? Make sure NOT to repeat the analysis
in this section.
Conclusion
Consider writing at least one concise paragraph wrapping
up the entire content of this analysis very briefly. Do not
ramble! Get to the point! Do not rewrite previous sections of
your paper. The key here is to SUMMARIZE your findings
based on the evidence you gathered and understood from the
sources you investigated. Make sure to end your concluding
paragraph(s) with a persuasive statement.
Comment by Sarah J. Hammill: delete
[Leave this space intentionally blank]
References Comment by Sarah J. Hammill: These references
are for illustrative purposes only.

References always start on a clean page.
Appendices go after the references.
References must be in APA.
Include EVERY source you have cited in your paper.
Include ONLY those sources you have cited in your paper (do
not include those sources you have read but did not cite in the
text of your paper).
In-text citations must match your reference list and vice versa.
Your references and in-text citations MUST match! If you have
an in-text citation, it must be listed here and vice versa. It must
be listed the exact same way. Do not include CDC in text and
spell out the acronym here. Spell out the acronym in text and
here. They must be identical!
Use your APA Manual and APA OWL Purdue
(https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa
_formatting_and_style_guide/general_format.html)
and other resources listed in your W-2-L course.
Affordable Care Act, Volume Source § section number (2010).
Retrieved from
http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/rights/law/index.html
Centers for Disease Control & Prevention. (2020, February 8).
Youth risk behavior surveillance
data tracking: How risky behavior impacts decision-making.
Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/index.htm.
Hammill, S.J. (2019). Essential APA writing. (2nd ed.).
Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett
Learning.

Weismann, M. & Ganske, S. (2019, October 15). Health policy
analysis writing: Evidence-
based research is fundamental. Journal of HCMBA, 16(3), 15-
21. doi: 10.1245x.3445
Weismann, M., Ganske, S., & Hammill, S.J. (2019, October
15). Capstone students will write
great healthcare policy analysis theses. Journal of HCMBA at
FIU, 12(4), 19-31. Retrieved from
http://library.fiu.edu/bestplaceoncampus
Appendix Comment by Sarah J. Hammill: Appendices go after
your references. You need to explain your appendices in the
text of your paper.
Cyberattack Scenario
AJS/524 v3
Page 2 of 2
Cyberattack Scenario
Background:
You are employees of a cyber security company in a Florida.

Your team has been asked to participate in a taskforce
developed by your mayor. The neighboring community of Fort
Lauderdale has been a victim of cyberattacks as outlined below,
and your mayor wants a prevention guide that will become part
of the city’s standard operating procedures.
Consider the attacks in the following scenario as you develop a
Cybercrime Prevention Presentation for a neighboring city.
Location: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
8:00 a.m. – A terrorist group hacks into both the Fort
Lauderdale Police Department and the Broward County Sheriff's
Office. The hacking causes both computer systems to shut down
entirely, including all computer-aided design software, record
management systems, and operating systems on laptops.
8:10 a.m. – The local hospital's network has been compromised
and is not allowing employees to access any of the computers.
8:20 a.m. – The computer system at Hollywood International
Airport in Fort Lauderdale has completely shut down; the
reason is unknown.
8:30 a.m. – Bank A, the largest bank in South Florida, found out
that their system has been hacked and millions of dollars have
been stolen from numerous bank accounts.
Copyright 2020 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Running head: PREVENTIVE CARE & CHRONIC
CONDITIONS
PREVENTIVE CARE & CHRONIC CONDITIONS

Using Preventive Care to Curtail Chronic Conditions in the U.S.
Unique D. Bloom
Florida International University
MAN6974: HCMBA Thesis
Abstract Comment by Unique Mccray:
Preventive care has become an important component in
providing quality care and also changing the future of costs
driven in the health care system. Preventive care is the part of
the healthcare that not only reduces the chances of a patient
obtaining a chronic disease but also ensures the quality of life.
Several levels of preventive care can be implemented to address
the issues of chronic disease on the U.S. health care and how
trillions are spent in money and resources in these systems.
Improving the debt of the country, decreasing the rates of
deaths because of chronic diseases, and increasing the life spans
of the population are several challenges in the healthcare
industry that can be addressed with preventive care. Populations
affected by these challenges include patients in low-income
status who are not able to afford health insurance that covers
preventive care services, these persons lack the motivation to
participate in recommended healthcare services by physicians.

This paper will address diverse initiatives that can not only
address these challenges but also improve the issues of the cost
associated with receiving preventive care. And how can we
ensure that using preventive care can improve how to continue
to provide value-based care.
Problem Statement
How can preventive care be implemented to address and curtail
chronic conditions in populations that are considered low-
educated, and have several risk behaviors in the U.S.?
Background Comment by Unique Mccray:
Preventive Care is the act in decreasing the effects of
chronic disease on the system of healthcare (Quigley &
Carpenter, 2008). The care that is considered preventive is
categorized into three levels primary, secondary, and tertiary.
The level of primary is the attempt to decrease the chances or
attract any disease they may become chronic in the future, for
example, quit smoking to avoid lung cancer. The secondary
level implements the processes of screening any symptoms of
someone’s personal health that may indicate any diseases that
can also become chronic, for example, mammograms for breast
cancer screening. The level of tertiary occurs once a patient has
obtained the chronic disease and now has to begin measures that
will decrease symptoms and reduce any risks of more
complications, for example, chemotherapy or rehabilitation for
chronic disease (Quigley & Carpenter, 2008).
Chronic diseases are defined as medical conditions that
persist for at least a year or longer and cause limitations of
daily living activities and medical attention (National Center for
Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion [NCCDPHP],
2020). Heart disease, cancer, and diabetes are the chronic
diseases that lead to the deaths and disabilities in the population
of the U.S. (NCCDPHP, 2020). Chronic disease is the result of
an individual having limited performance in their health and

survival associated with the poor choices made in that
individual’s lifestyle (Raghupathi, 2019). Chronic diseases
affect 44% of Americans as of 2004, in which some of these
diseases are considered cancer, diabetes, hypertension stroke,
heart disease, asthma, and mental disorders (Raghupathi, 2019).
Every year more than 859,000 Americans die from stroke
or heart disease, this shows the economic burden and reason
why the U.S. health system is spending $199 billion a year
while also causing the productivity lost of $131 billion in
employment (“Health and Economic Costs of Chronic Disease,”
2020). Cancer has been a diagnosis of more than 1.6 million
people each year, which about 600,000 dies from this diagnosis.
Appendix C shows all types of cancer deaths across the U.S.
and how each year the number continues to grow due to the
population growth but all various risk factors, use of screening
tests and treatment improvements (U.S. Cancer Statistics
Working Group, 2018).
The statistics have proved cancer to be the second leading cause
of death in the U.S., this care is going to reach a cost of $174
billion by 2020 (“Health and Economic Costs of Chronic
Disease,” 2020). Diabetes is another high diagnosis of many
Americans, more than 30 million with diabetes and 84 million
adults with prediabetes (“Health and Economic Costs of Chronic
Disease,” 2020). Other illnesses like kidney failure, heart
disease, and blindness are caused by diabetes and these have
cost the U.S. health system great debt and $237 billion every
year for employers (“Health and Economic Costs of Chronic
Disease,” 2020). Obesity is a premedical condition that can lead
to the chronic diseases of diabetes, some cancers, and heart
disease among 1 in 3 adults and 1 in 5 children (“Health and
Economic Costs of Chronic Disease,” 2020). This condition has
created a debt of $147 billion a year for individuals with
obesity (“Health and Economic Costs of Chronic Disease,”
2020).
Several risk behaviors cause chronic diseases: exposure and use
of tobacco, inadequate diet, this includes low in vegetables and

fruits and high saturated fats and sodium, need for physical
activity, extreme alcohol use (NCCDPHP, 2020). The leading
behavior in the United States that causes many preventable
deaths is cigarette smoking, this causes at least one disease in
more than 16 million Americans. Resulting in $170 billion in
direct medical cost (“Health and Economic Costs of Chronic
Disease,” 2020). Billions could be saved by preventive
programs to quit smoking. Another leading cause of chronic
diseases is the lack of physical activity, causing the U.S. health
system $117 billion every year (“Health and Economic Costs of
Chronic Disease,” 2020). Each year in the U.S. 88,000 deaths
are caused by extreme use of alcohol, this includes 1 in 10
deaths of the working-age adults, totaling a cost of $249 billion
in the U.S. (“Health and Economic Costs of Chronic Disease,”
2020).
Seen in Appendix B, the chart demonstrates the average
cost of several leading chronic diseases in the U.S. An increase
of 25% will take place in healthcare spending before new
technology, due to the population of 65 years or older doubling
over the next 30 years (NCCDPHP, 2020). To address the
increasing health cost, strategic intervention and innovation
need to address the associated reasons and causes of chronic
diseases (NCCDPHP, 2020).
By 2030, it is expected that 171 million people will have some
type of chronic disease, and many of those individuals that are
higher in age will continue to have multiple chronic diseases
(Raghupathi, 2019). An estimated total of 58 deaths have been
associated with the several chronic diseases stated above and
also low-income areas (Epping-Jordan et al., 2005). In the U.S.
Healthcare an increase by 3.9 percent in spending, this was an
average of $10,739 per person and had a resulting total of $3.5
trillion in the healthcare spending of 2017 (as cited in Health
and Economic Costs of Chronic Disease, 2019). Currently, 85%
of health care spending has been on chronic diseases, where
many Americans have at least one chronic disease and this is
seen to increase to 157 million by 2020 (Raghupathi, 2019). The

treatments and services of chronic diseases that remain to hurt
the nation’s health system and the economy is more than 75%
annually and resulting in $2.5 trillion in spending for these
conditions (Raghupathi, 2019).
Numerous services such as tobacco cessation screening, daily
aspirin use, and alcohol screening with counseling, all have
added to the net medical savings by more than $1 billion each
(Maciosek et al., 2010). Preventive services have increased the
contribution of more than 100,000 years of life to the
population (Maciosek et al., 2010). In 2006, a total of 1,233.1
life-years saved per 10,000 people per year showed by the
intervention of immunizations for children, which resulted in
$267 in net medical cost per person per year (Maciosek et al.,
2010).
The utilization of preventive services has shown a reduction in
the demand for the use of care services, the motivation to
participate and the cost beforehand associated with services
needed (Quigley & Carpenter, 2008). Data has shown that
several populations that are considered rural, low educated, and
low-income are the populations that have shown under-
utilization of preventive services. The above communities have
and continue to face several barriers in accessing preventive
care such as transportation problems, cost, lack of insurance
coverage, and lack of promotion for recommended services,
providing the importance and needs of engaging in preventive
care (Casey, Call, & Klingner, 2001).
In appendix A, the chart explains the relation of individuals
with a high school and having diabetes. Not having a high
school diploma relates to having little to no education, and
many non-educated individuals struggle with medical
conditions. Adults 18 years and older of age shown from 1980
to 2017, the correlation of how these individuals being
diagnosed with diabetes as the years’ increase. The highest
growth in diabetes diagnosis, with the range of 5-13% of
individuals with less than high school education. Those
individuals with the education of higher than a high school were

a diagnosis percentage 3-7, showing that higher education
people tend to have fewer chronic diseases.
An example of under-utilization for women in urban
communities provided a percentage of 61.5 who participated in
mammograms (Casey, Call, & Klingner, 2001). Factors like
deductibles and copayments associated with preventive services
pf pap tests, mammograms, and counseling affected the
utilization (Casey, Call, & Klingner, 2001). Odds ratios have
shown that difficulties in individuals affording preventive
services, ratios range from 0.67-0.82 and 0.77-0.81 in
purchasing of insurance recommended for cancer screening
(Casey, Call, & Klingner, 2001).
Primary and secondary levels of preventive care have been able
to detect and treat any possible and current disease before
reaching chronic stages and this allows overall cost to decrease
before reaching tertiary levels of treatment (Güneş, Chick, &
Wassenhove, 2009).Several insurance providers include high-
deductibles, and also includes low premiums with out-of-pocket
expenses for the patient (Agarwal, Mazurenko, & Menachemi,
2017).
Comment by Unique Mccray:
Landscape
Healthcare Providers
The healthcare system relies on the services provided not only
by various hospitals but also by private practices and
physicians. These are the first hand in providers of preventive
care, being able to provide the necessary tools and
recommendations for individuals diagnosed with a disease.
Proper inventions can improve the quality and use of preventive
services, and be able to detect any possible chronic diseases
early (“How We Prevent Chronic Diseases and Promote Health,”
2019). Several interventions provided by healthcare providers
will reduce risk factors and manage medical conditions with
various levels of prevention. Examples include: increasing the

access to healthcare for populations with limited to no access;
paying providers for the health outcomes instead of services;
measuring and communication system developments; increasing
use of health IT and cancer screening with minimum health
insurance (“How We Prevent Chronic Diseases and Promote
Health,” 2019).
Insurance Providers
Medicaid is a provider of health coverage for 63.9 million
people as of 2019 (“Medicaid,” n.d.). These Americans are
considered eligible by being low-income adults, pregnant
women, children, individuals with disabilities and elderly
adults. This coverage is managed by states under federal
requirements and is jointly funded by both state and federal
governments (“Medicaid,” n.d.). Along with the Children’s
Health Insurance Program (CHIP) helps millions of their
beneficiaries by promoting preventive care and services to live
longer and healthier lives. Centers for Medicaid and Medicare
Services (CMS) have committed to assist states in increasing
access to preventive health care and information about a high
quality, impactful and effective practices of care delivery
(“Prevention,” n.d.). Initiatives of prevention CMS implements
are the following:
· Medicaid Prevention Learning Network: a program that
provides Medicaid programs from state-to-state to learn and
obtain new technical assistance to better the delivery of
preventive care and services.
· Immunizations: facilitating access to vaccines and
administration for individuals. Along with CDC, the program
Vaccines for Children provides vaccines to the Youth enrolled
in Medicaid and CHIP.
· Obesity: Provides access to screenings to reduce obesity while
promoting eating healthy and engaging in more physical
activity.
· Tobacco Cessation: Reducing disease that smoking causes, and
using treatment have been cost-effective in preventive services.
Benefits cover quitlines, counseling, and pharmacotherapy to

assist with quit smoking. Medicare is medical insurance, Part B
of this program covers health care providers’ and doctor
services and outpatient care. This insurance coverage also helps
with home health care, medical equipment, and some preventive
care services (“What Medicare Covers,” n.d.). The several
preventive services Part B covers are the following:
· Alcohol misuse screenings & counseling
· Cardiovascular disease screenings
· Colorectal cancer screenings
· Diabetes screenings
· Lung cancer screening
· Mammograms (screening)
· Nutrition therapy services
· Obesity screenings & counseling
· Prostate cancer screenings
· Tobacco use cessation counseling
These screenings and services provide the primary and
secondary level of prevention, to avoid and medical conditions
from becoming chronic diseases (“Preventive & screening
services,” n.d.).
Policymakers
The National Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(NCCDPHP) is the center that holds the responsibility to help
people and communities prevent obtaining chronic diseases and
promotes health and overall quality of life in wellness. Each
year 7 to 10 deaths are caused by chronic diseases and
treatments for those individuals are the cause of the U.S. health
care costs (NCCDPHP, 2020). The NCCDPHP advises that
several prevention levels can prevent chronic diseases such as
physical activity, restricting from the use of tobacco and
extreme drinking, and participating in routine health screenings
(NCCDPHP, 2020).
The promotion of changing the policy of prevention to produce
positive change in the various environments will stimulate large
sections of the population. Behaviors that are considered
healthy will establish support for the communities and embrace

a belief that health policies and settings will support those
healthy lifestyles (National Center for Chronic Disease
Prevention and Health Promotion [NCCDPHP], 2009).
To support health initiatives in the living of communities,
and individuals several policies and systems must be promoted
such as requiring physical education on schools daily, and
increasing low-fat and high-fruit and- vegetable menu selections
in these schools along with restaurants and employment cafes
(NCCDPHP, 2009).The need for promotion in smoke-free
policies in work-places, schools, and public areas to reduce the
use of tobacco and promote water drinking through the
continuing and extension of fluoridation (NCCDPHP, 2009).
Patients
Options Comment by Sarah J. Hammill: Comment by
Unique Mccray:
Option 1. Key stakeholders such as primary care physicians and
health care facilities in providing preventive care not only when
patients are in desperate need of the services but to continue to
promote all levels of preventive care through the routine of
providing health care. Policymakers continue to require value-
based health care, this would include screening services to
prevent or decrease patients from obtaining any chronic
diseases. Policies would mandate all physicians and healthcare
professional to make evidence-based recommendations to any
individuals that show risk behaviors that leads to chronic
diseases. This option does cost government agencies and
insurance providers to help assist patients and affording
preventives services. This option is viable and also legal due to
the preventive care already being available and promoted by
CDC and CMS. By implementing this option is to reduce the
diagnosis and also can be done in a timely matter to help
patients screen at initial care visits to avoid chronic conditions
in the future. The con to this option would be the motivation to
physicians and making the recommendations to patients and

providing the levels of preventive care to patients that may need
them. Another con would be the promotion to patients to not
only listen to their physicians’ recommendations but also follow
through with receiving or participating in the necessary
preventive care. By providing preventive care recommendations
and care in initial care visits and primary care facilities, the
increase in the populations of obtaining or receiving a diagnosis
of cancer, diabetes, and other chronic diseases will have a great
effect on the debt of the nations’ health system.
Option 2. Another option base on the analysis of the problem
and background is to implement education and promotion of
what is preventive care, the benefits, and examples to the
communities. Education has been seen as factor in why
individuals may have not taken advantage of preventive
available or why they are highest in being diagnosed with
diseases that are considered chronic.
Option 3.
Health providers such as insurance providers providing
incentives to patients that use preventive
No Intervention on the promoting preventive care or services
Recommendation
Choose ONLY ONE option as your recommendation. that your
client’s values and his/her ability to make (or not make)
decisions (i.e., power) must be kept in mind when making your
final recommendation.
Why did your team choose this option over the other ones? Did

your team consider the client’s values and power when choosing
this option? Did the team consider and identify any possible
drawbacks this recommended option may have in its
implementation? Did the team provide alternative ways to avert
such drawbacks, if any? Make sure NOT to repeat the analysis
in this section.
Conclusion
Consider writing at least one concise paragraph wrapping
up the entire content of this analysis very briefly. Do not
ramble! Get to the point! Do not rewrite previous sections of
your paper. The key here is to SUMMARIZE your findings
based on the evidence you gathered and understood from the
sources you investigated. Make sure to end your concluding
paragraph(s) with a persuasive statement.
References
Casey, M. M., Call, K. T., & Klingner, J. M. (2001). Are rural
residents less likely to obtain recommended preventive
healthcare services? American Journal of Preventive Medicine,
21(3), 182–188. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(01)00349-x
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (n.d.). Medicaid.
Retrieved from https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/index.html
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). U.S.
Diabetes Surveillance System. Retrieved from
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/diabetes/DiabetesAtlas.html#
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (n.d.). Prevention.
Retrieved from
https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/benefits/prevention/index.h

tml
Epping-Jordan, J. E., Galea, G., Tukuitonga, C., & Beaglehole,
R. (2005). Preventing chronic diseases: taking stepwise action.
The Lancet, 366(9497), 1667–1671. doi: 10.1016/s0140-
6736(05)67342-4
How We Prevent Chronic Diseases and Promote Health. (2019,
July 30). Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/center/nccdphp/how.htm
Maciosek, M. V., Coffield, A. B., Flottemesch, T. J., Edwards,
N. M., & Solberg, L. I. (2010). Greater Use Of Preventive
Services In U.S. Health Care Could Save Lives At Little Or No
Cost. Health Affairs, 29(9), 1656–1660. doi:
10.1377/hlthaff.2008.0701
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion. (2009). The Power of Prevention Chronic disease . .
. the public health challenge of the 21st century
https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/pdf/2009-Power-of-
Prevention.pdf
Promotion. (2020, January 22). About the Center. Retrieved
from https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/center/index.htm
Promotion (NCCDPHP). (2020, March 10). Health and
Economic Costs of Chronic Disease. Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/about/costs/index.htm#ref3
Preventive & screening services. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.medicare.gov/coverage/preventive-screening-
services
Quigley, A. S., & Carpenter, C. E. (2008). Containing Costs by
Preventing Them. Journal of Financial Service Professionals,
62(4), 22–25. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.fiu.edu/login.aspx?direct=t
rue&db=bth&AN=33195026&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Raghupathi, V. (2019). An empirical investigation of chronic
diseases: A visualization approach to Medicare in the United
States. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 12(4),

327–339. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1080/20479700.2018.1472849
Sanderson, A., & West Jr., D. J. (2019). A Model for Sustaining
Health at the Primary Care Level. Hospital Topics, 97(2), 46–
53. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1080/00185868.2019.1605321
Comment by Unique Mccray:
U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (n.d.). What
Medicare Covers. Retrieved from
https://www.medicare.gov/what-medicare-covers
U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. U.S. Cancer Statistics
Data Visualizations Tool, based on November 2018 submission
data (1999-2016): U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and
National Cancer Institute; www.cdc.gov/cancer/dataviz, June
2019.
Appendices Comment by Sarah J. Hammill:
Appendix A
CDC - Diagnosed Diabetes
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). U.S.
Diabetes Surveillance System. Retrieved from
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/diabetes/DiabetesAtlas.html#

Appendix B
Promotion. (2009). The Power of Prevention Chronic disease . .
. the public health challenge of the 21st century
https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/pdf/2009-Power-of-
Prevention.pdf
Appendix C

Running head HEALTH POLICY ANALYSIS .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from wlynn1

More from wlynn1 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Running head HEALTH POLICY ANALYSIS .docx