Public H assmt 2

Course Objective for Assignment:

· Analyze a proposed solution to a public health problem, demonstrating the ability to present concise oral and written reports that defend the appropriateness of the solution selected.

You have been hired as a Deputy Secretary of Health Office Intern of your home state or the state of your choosing. The topic of healthcare is mentioned in the national news on an almost weekly basis. Given the upcoming gubernatorial election, the governor has asked the health commissioner to provide a summary of the state’s public health status. The Secretary has tasked you to develop the

 

analysis and assessment of such. 

Go to the Country Health Rankings & Roadmaps website 

https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/

 and complete the following steps:

1.     Access the Rankings for your home state or the state of your choosing.

2.     View the maps for health outcomes and health factors for the most recent year available, and compare the two. Which counties rank first and last in the state? Is the ranking of health outcomes and health factors aligned? Why? Or why not?

3.     Use the “Compare Counties” feature to examine your home county with another (it can be either the first, last, or another of your choosing). Describe how your home county compares to the state as a whole. Tip: pick one health outcome and one health factor to compare across the counties and the state. 

4.     Go to the Action Center and explore the sections there. Based on the Governor’s elections concerns, you think that he might be questioned

-On the ethical issues around the public health outcome/factor you chose to analyze.

-It would drive the question about the local policies in place to address it,

-And the state/federal regulations and agencies responsible for their enforcement.

5. The Candidate will be expected to demonstrate viable ideas and plans in counteracting the issue as well as leadership tools applied to calm and reassure the public.  

Develop:

1. Conduct analysis and develop a research brief (research report) addressing 1-4 no longer than 6-8 pages long.

2. Develop a Press Release conveying the information from your research report  (

https://www.semrush.com/blog/hook-the-media-with-7-easy-steps-to-writing-a-press-release-free-template/?kw=&cmp=US_SRCH_DSA_Blog_Core_BU_EN&label=dsa_pagefeed&Network=g&Device=c&utm_content=515715474945&kwid=dsa-1053501807067&cmpid=11769537497&agpid=117335014711&BU=Core&extid=167368304751&adpos=&gclid=Cj0KCQjw3f6HBhDHARIsAD_i3D-3LCkm2dQSd22SYHE2pJFDebWWglrhJZfuTuzf78FTny1doQslwtwaAvifEALw_wcB

) for the Candidate to be presented at the press conference dedicated to the election.

Deliverables: 

1. Research Report (6-8 pages plus the title and reference pages)

2. Submit the Press Release (no more than 600-800 words plus the title and reference page) in a separate file for grading.

9/18/22, 12:53 AM Assignment 2: Research Report (local issues) – HCAD 630 9041 Public Health Administration (2228) – UMGC Learning Manage…

https://learn.umgc.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=1304652&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=718325 1/3

Grading Rubric
Course: HCAD 630 9041 Public Health Administration (2228)

Criteria 90-100% 80-89% 70-79% 0-69% Criterion Score

Understand

in

g of Issue

20%

/ 20

Clarity of

Presentation

(Logic,

References)

25%

/ 25

2

0 points

The work

demonstrates

clear

understanding

of the subject,

including its:

(1) history

and

evolution,

(2)

internal and

external

contributing

factors, (3)

participants

and

stakeholders,

and (4)

significance.

17.8 points

The work

demonstrates

significant

understanding

of the subject,

including its:

(1) history and

evolution, (2)

internal and

external

contributing

factors, (3)

participants

and

stakeholders,

and (4)

significance.

15.8 points

The work

demonstrates

minimal

understanding

of the subject,

including its:

(1) history and

evolution, (2)

internal and

external

contributing

factors, (3)

participants

and

stakeholders,

and (4)

significance.

5 points

The work

demonstrates

little or no

understanding

of the subject,

including its:

(1) history and

evolution, (2)

internal and

external

contributing

factors, (3)

participants

and

stakeholders,

and (4)

significance.

25 points

The work

demonstrates

soun

d and

compelling

logic in

incorporating

relevant

research in

terms of (1)

applicability,

(2) sufficiency

(i.e. more than

one source),

and (3)

currency.

The document

is well

organized,

straightforwar

d,

easy to

understand,

and

leads the

reader to an

informed

conclusion.

22.25 points

The work

demonstrates

adequate logic

in

incorporating

relevant

research in

terms of (1)

applicability,

(2) sufficiency

(i.e. more than

one source),

and (3)

currency.

The document

is generally

well organized,

straightforwar

d and

somewhat

easy to

understand,

but

includes

extraneous

information or

questionable

findings as it

leads the

reader to a

conclusion.

19.75 points

The work

demonstrates

questionable

logic, relies on

literature that

is dated or

somewhat

irrelevant in

terms of (1)

applicability,

(2) sufficiency,

or (3) currency.

The document

is somewhat

disjointed, not

easy to

understand,

and the

conclusion is

difficult to

discern.

0 points

The work

employs faulty

logic, relying

on

research

that is (1) not

applicable, (2)

too limited to

support the

analysis, or (3)

not current.

The document

is poorly

organized,

difficult to

understand, or

fails to reach a

cogent

conclusion.

9/18/22, 12:53 AM Assignment 2: Research Report (local issues) – HCAD 630 9041 Public Health Administration (2228) – UMGC Learning Manage…

https://learn.umgc.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=1304652&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=718325 2/3

Criteria 90-100% 80-89% 70-79% 0-69% Criterion Score

Comprehensi

veness of

Analysis 35%

/ 35

Quality of

Writing

(Grammar,

Format) 15%

/ 15

35 points

The work

demonstrates

clear,

insightful

critical

thinking,

incorporating

relevant

research in

identifying the

(1) issues, (2)

interactions,

and (3)

implications of

the topic.

The work

considers both

readily

identifiable

factors and

more obscure

matters,

explore risks

and benefits,

and

examines

multiple

aspects that

can or may

influence the

topic being

examined.

31.

15 points

The work

demonstrates

a general

understanding

based on

relevant

research in

identifying the

(1) issues, (2)

interactions,

and (3)

implications of

the topic.

The work

considers

readily

identifiable

factors, but

omits

researching

more obscure

matters, focus

more on

benefits than

associated

risks, and

examines the

main aspects

that can or

may influence

the topic being

examined.

27.65 points

The work

offers

superficial

analysis,

relying on

generalized

research

addressing the

(1) issues, (2)

interactions,

and (3)

implications of

the topic.

The work

considers only

readily

identifiable

factors,

focuses mostly

on benefits

versus risks,

and examines

only the

prominent

factors that

influence the

topic being

examined.

5 points

The work

demonstrates

marginal or no

understanding

of the

topic or

the (1) issues,

(2)

interactions,

and (3)

implications

thereof.

The work

provides

minimal or no

evidence to

support

observations,

rely on surface

level

information or

commercial

claims, or

bases

conclusions on

limited

information.

15 points

The

sentence

structure is

complete, with

correct

spelling,

punctuation,

and

capitalization,

and varied

diction and

word choice.

The

assignment

length is

correct.

Correct APA

formatting is

employed.

13.35 points

The sentence

structure has

minor errors

(

fragments,

run-ons), with

correct

spelling,

punctuation,

and

capitalization,

but limited

diction and

word choice.

The

assignment

length is

correct. It has

some APA

formatting

errors.

11.85 points

The sentence

structure has

several errors

in sentence

fluency, with

multiple

fragments,

run-ons, and

poor spelling,

punctuation, or

word choice.

The

assignment

length is

inadequate. It

includes

several APA

errors.

1 point

The sentence

structure has

serious and

persistent

errors in

sentence

fluency,

sentence

structure,

spelling,

punctuation, or

word choice.

The

assignment

length is

inadequate. It

includes

multiple APA

errors.

9/18/22, 12:53 AM Assignment 2: Research Report (local issues) – HCAD 630 9041 Public Health Administration (2228) – UMGC Learning Manage…

https://learn.umgc.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=1304652&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=718325 3/3

Total / 100

Overall Score

Criteria 90-100% 80-89% 70-79% 0-69% Criterion Score

Intrinsic

Qualities

(Innovation,

Insight) 5%

/ 55 points

The analysis

exhibits

exceptional

inquisitiveness

in exploring

deeper truths

and complex

underlying

factors, with

the goal of

developing

innovative and

insightful

solutions.

4.45 points

The analysis

applies

inquisitiveness

in exploring

deeper truths

and complex

underlying

factors,

seeking

somewhat

creative

answers.

3.95 points

The analysis

examines

issues within

an acceptable

or routine

framework.

The

conclusions are

sound and well

considered,

but do not

generate a

novel means of

addressing the

topic or

developing a

solution.

0 points

The analysis

accepts things

at face value,

fails to explore

viable

alternatives, or

does not

propose

advanced

approaches to

the topic being

examined.

Level 4
11 points minimum

Level 3
8 points minimum

Level 2
5 points minimum

Level 1
0 points minimum