4 to 6 page paper

/in /by

The Assignment

In a 4- to 6-page paper, address the following: Paper should be 4–6 pages, not including the title and reference pages. Your Assignment must be written in standard edited English. Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this module’s Learning Resources and additional scholarly sources, as appropriate. APA Style

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now

Review the World Health Organization (WHO), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Health System Tracker websites in this week’s Learning Resources. Research health care disparities between the United States and another country of your choice. https://www.who.int/en/

  • Compare the economic policies for health promotion, wellness, and prevention programs in the United States and the country you selected (Germany). Include differences in approaches to wellness and prevention.
  • Analyze implications of these policies and disparities.
  • Analyze how you might implement the policies from the country (Germany) you selected in the United States and your own state (Georgia). Evaluate the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of health care.

Learning Resources

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/sites/default/fil…

https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collecti…

GRADING RUBRIC

XCELLENT – above expectations GOOD – met expectations FAIR – below expectations POOR – significantly below expectations or missing
Comparison of economic policies for health promotion, wellness, and prevention programs in the United states and another country

Points:

Points Range: 18 (24%) – 20 (26.67%)

The comparison shows depth and breadth in critical thinking when addressing the key points related to the differences in the programs including, but not limited to, approaches in health promotion, wellness, and prevention.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 16 (21.33%) – 17 (22.67%)

The comparison fully addresses the key points related to the differences in the programs including, but not limited to, approaches in health promotion, wellness, and prevention.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 14 (18.67%) – 15 (20%)

The comparison lacks depth, breadth or clarity in addressing the key points related to the differences in the programs including, but not limited to, approaches in health promotion, wellness, and prevention.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (17.33%)

The comparison does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses key points related to the differences in the programs including, but not limited to, approaches in health promotion, wellness, and prevention.

Feedback:

Analysis of the implications of policies and disparities

Points:

Points Range: 18 (24%) – 20 (26.67%)

The analysis shows critical thinking, considers divergent and competing opinions, and displays creative problem solving in its analysis of the implications of policies and disparities for both the U.S. and another country.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 16 (21.33%) – 17 (22.67%)

The analysis fully addresses the implications of policies and disparities for both the U.S. and another country.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 14 (18.67%) – 15 (20%)

The analysis lacks depth or clarity in addressing the implications of policies and disparities for both the U.S. and another country.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (17.33%)

The analysis does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the implications of policies and disparities for both the U.S. and another country.

Feedback:

Analysis of the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

Points:

Points Range: 9 (12%) – 10 (13.33%)

The analysis shows critical thinking, considers divergent and competing opinions, and displays creative problem solving in its analysis of the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 8 (10.67%) – 8 (10.67%)

The analysis fully addresses the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 7 (9.33%) – 7 (9.33%)

The analysis lacks depth or clarity in addressing the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (8%)

The analysis does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

Feedback:

Evaluations of the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare

Points:

Points Range: 9 (12%) – 10 (13.33%)

The evaluation shows critical thinking, considers divergent and competing opinions, and displays creative problem solving in its evaluation of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 8 (10.67%) – 8 (10.67%)

The evaluation fully addresses the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 7 (9.33%) – 7 (9.33%)

The evaluation lacks depth or clarity in addressing the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (8%)

The evaluation does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare.

Feedback:

Writing

Points:

Points Range: 14 (18.67%) – 15 (20%)

The paper is well organized, uses scholarly tone, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, follows APA style, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate-level writing style.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 12 (16%) – 13 (17.33%)

The paper is mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style and may have some spelling, APA, and writing errors.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 10 (13.33%) – 11 (14.67%)

The paper is somewhat consistent with graduate-level writing style and may have some spelling, APA, and writing errors.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 9 (12%)

The paper is well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting.

Feedback:

Comparison of economic policies for health promotion, wellness, and prevention programs in the United states and another country—

Levels of Achievement:


18
(24%) – 20
(26.67%)

The comparison shows depth and breadth in critical thinking when addressing the key points related to the differences in the programs including, but not limited to, approaches in health promotion, wellness, and prevention.

16 (21.33%) – 17 (22.67%)

The comparison fully addresses the key points related to the differences in the programs including, but not limited to, approaches in health promotion, wellness, and prevention.

14 (18.67%) – 15 (20%)

The comparison lacks depth, breadth or clarity in addressing the key points related to the differences in the programs including, but not limited to, approaches in health promotion, wellness, and prevention.

0 (0%) – 13 (17.33%)

The comparison does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses key points related to the differences in the programs including, but not limited to, approaches in health promotion, wellness, and prevention.

Feedback:

Analysis of the implications of policies and disparities—

Levels of Achievement:


18
(24%) – 20
(26.67%)

The analysis shows critical thinking, considers divergent and competing opinions, and displays creative problem solving in its analysis of the implications of policies and disparities for both the U.S. and another country.

16 (21.33%) – 17 (22.67%)

The analysis fully addresses the implications of policies and disparities for both the U.S. and another country.

14 (18.67%) – 15 (20%)

The analysis lacks depth or clarity in addressing the implications of policies and disparities for both the U.S. and another country.

0 (0%) – 13 (17.33%)

The analysis does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the implications of policies and disparities for both the U.S. and another country.

Feedback:

Analysis of the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.—

Levels of Achievement:


9
(12%) – 10
(13.33%)

The analysis shows critical thinking, considers divergent and competing opinions, and displays creative problem solving in its analysis of the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

8 (10.67%) – 8 (10.67%)

The analysis fully addresses the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

7 (9.33%) – 7 (9.33%)

The analysis lacks depth or clarity in addressing the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

0 (0%) – 6 (8%)

The analysis does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the implementation of foreign policies in the U.S.

Feedback:

Evaluations of the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare—

Levels of Achievement:


9
(12%) – 10
(13.33%)

The evaluation shows critical thinking, considers divergent and competing opinions, and displays creative problem solving in its evaluation of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare.

8 (10.67%) – 8 (10.67%)

The evaluation fully addresses the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare.

7 (9.33%) – 7 (9.33%)

The evaluation lacks depth or clarity in addressing the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare.

0 (0%) – 6 (8%)

The evaluation does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the influence of U.S. market conditions on the provision of healthcare.

Feedback:

Writing—

Levels of Achievement:


14
(18.67%) – 15
(20%)

The paper is well organized, uses scholarly tone, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, follows APA style, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate-level writing style.

12 (16%) – 13 (17.33%)

The paper is mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style and may have some spelling, APA, and writing errors.

10 (13.33%) – 11 (14.67%)

The paper is somewhat consistent with graduate-level writing style and may have some spelling, APA, and writing errors.

0 (0%) – 9 (12%)

The paper is well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting.

Feedback:

Total Points: 75