Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid
Use the Agenda Comparison Grid Template found in the Learning Resources and complete the Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid based on the current/sitting U.S. president and the previous president, and their agendas related to the population health concern you selected. Be sure to address the following:
Identify and provide a brief description of the population health concern you selected.
Explain how each of the presidential administrations approached the issue.
Identify the allocation of resources that the presidents dedicated to this issue.
Part 2: Agenda Comparison Grid Analysis
Using the information you recorded in Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid on the template, complete the Part 2: Agenda Comparison Grid Analysis portion of the template, by addressing the following:
Which administrative agency (like HHS, CDC, FDA, OHSA) would most likely be responsible for helping you address the healthcare issue you selected and why is this agency the most helpful for the issue?
How do you think your selected healthcare issue might get on the presidential agenda? How does it stay there?
An entrepreneur/champion/sponsor helps to move the issue forward. Who would you choose to be the entrepreneur/champion/sponsor (this can be a celebrity, a legislator, an agency director, or others) of the healthcare issue you selected and why would this person be a good entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor? An example is Michael J. Fox is champion for Parkinson’s disease.
Part 3: Fact Sheet
Using the information recorded on the template in Parts 1 and 2, develop a 1-page fact sheet that you could use to communicate with a policymaker/legislator or a member of their staff for this healthcare issue. Be sure to address the following:
Summarize why this healthcare issue is important and should be included in the agenda for legislation.
Justify the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues.
regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pi
regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pi