PU Framework for Policy Analysis Discussion

Description Inmundo T RE: Unit 3.1 DB: Framework for Policy Analysis Good evening class and Professor, Policy analysis frameworks are important because they create a systemic hierarchal system that allows for systemic investigations, systemic comparisons, and examination of social policies or sets of policies. Frameworks allow preceding governments to adopt previous governments’ work, improve upon them or even create new policies based on the frameworks without having to create everything from the scratch. Examination of policies is an important aspect that allows for agencies and other bodies to understand any loopholes either to correct the policies or even to understand the chances of corruption based on a policy and examination of a policy is mostly based on the analysis framework (Hamadeh, 2019). Policy framework analysis creates a systemic pipeline that allows for the creation, analysis, and examination of policies. A welfare state is one that tries to achieve economic equality as much as possible. A welfare state tries to protect the economic well-being of its citizens as much as possible. To do so, a welfare state always tries to maintain financial equality within its citizens, this is achieved either by imposing a dynamic tax system that heavily taxes the rich citizens and does not tax or barely tax the poor ones. Dynamic taxation, as done in Denmark, is useful because the state provides well-established facilities to all citizens mainly based on the taxes of the rich residents. Historically, welfare states started to spread around 1930, the first time the USA adopted the policy. The main reason for the sudden increase in the adaptation of policy was due to the increase in education and technology (Robson, 2018). The technology of all kinds has been extremely popular in its time, be that today’s smartphones or ancient technology of steel manufacturing, hence technology has often been associated with the sudden increase in wealth of a specific sector and this sudden increase creates financial unbalance and welfare states target such changes. References Hamadeh, S. (2019). A critical analysis of the Syrian refugee education policies in Lebanon using a policy analysis framework. Journal of Education Policy, 34(3), 374–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2018.1516800 Robson, W. A. (2018). Welfare State and Welfare Society: Illusion and Reality. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/978042945868 Darren E RE: Unit 3.1 DB: Framework for Policy Analysis Hello Professor and Classmates: A framework for policy analysis has always been an important part of the political process as it provides for a systematic model for examining a specific social welfare policy or set of policies (Karger & Stoesz, 2018). The framework provides a structured avenue to properly assess, analyze, compare and revise policies and ensure that the information lines up with precedented and existing social welfare systems. The framework for policy analysis should include design, implementation, evaluation and feedback of the key aspects of the policy environment (Michener, 2022). “The purpose of policy framework is to provide the analysts with a model or set of questions for systematically analyzing a policy, and consequently, the choice of a policy framework must fit the requirements of the project as welll as available resources. Each policy framework can be fine tuned or modified and the best is often a synthesis of existing models (Karger & Stoesz). This analysis framework was used in the Common Wealth Fund promoting equity and high performance in the healthcare system which has been in need of much reform and revision due to healthcare disparities in America among minorities and the underserved in the healthcare industry (Michener, 2022). Pharmaceutical companies are big business in the United States with a monopoly on presciption medication costs and rising medical supply prices. Those who experience underlying health conditions are unable to afford their daily medications, specifically those with chronic illnesses such as diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, arthritis, etc. Much of these individuals are not able to provide themselves with nutritional foods like fresh fruits and vegetables or true organic products that assist with higher functioning organs with the ability to expel wastes and toxins effectively. The Pandemic definitely had to realign the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits as more people lost jobs and wages, fell behind on mortgage payments, became ill with Covid-19 and depleted any extra source of income to sustain everyday life during the shut down. Policy analysis helped to change the spectrum of serving the type of household receiving benefits which allowed for those who were laid off, became unemployed, owned homes to be eligible for assistance. And, even though, there was a reprive given through stimuluses, most Americans are still struggling who are no longer eligible for benefits. Therefore, many charitable organizations had to step up to the plate such as they did from a historical perspective. “The welfare state is a form of government or well established social institutions in which the state protects and promotes the economic and social wellbeing of the citizens, and is normally based on the the equal opportunity, equal distribution of wealth and public responsibility for citizens unable to avail themselves of the minimal provisions for a good life. The mission and goal of the welfare state is to create a more secure, democratic and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community, and of course, globalization is necessary to create new opportunities for economic growth” (US Dept., 2017). Most Americans do not consider the need to incorporate global alliances with economic growth and prosperity as much of the American products and services are shipped from overseas. Wealth is not distributed equally throughout the United States as the middle-class appears to be a dying class of people and rarely understand the impact that policies have on them due to lacking the knowledge of the analysis, framework or creating of policies for their lifestyle. Policy analysis and framework are extremely important in America because it is the driving force by which social institutions function. However, policy analysis often occurs only after a bill or policy is enacted and analysts are asked to perform an autopsy to determine why a specific bill or policy failed (Karger & Stoesz, 2018). References: Karger, H. K. and Stoesz, D. (2018). American Social Welfare Policy: A Pluralist Approach (8th Edition). Boston, MA. Allyn and Bacon. Michener, Jamila (2022). A Racial Equity Framework for Assessing Health Policy. The CommonWealth Fund. Advancing Health Equity. Issue Briefs. United States Department of State (2017). Diplomacy In Action. Retrieved January 25, 2022 from 2009-2017.state.gov/s/d/rm/r/s/dosstrat/2004/23503htm Shannon C RE: Unit 3.2 DB: Key Elements of Policy Frameworks Professor and class, In this discussion, the author must identify the eight key elements of policy frameworks. She must explain several ways in which these elements are highly rational and systemic, and therefore somewhat incompatible with the political process through which policies are actually adopted. There are eight key elements of policy framework. This framework is to be incorporated with the decision makers, when evaluating and/or re-establishing adequate social policies. The proposed policy framework is divided into four sections: (1) the historical background of the policy, (2) a description of the problem(s) that necessitated the policy, (3) a description of the policy, and (4) the policy analysis (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 50). According to Karger and Stoesz (2018, p. 49), the policy analyst is expected to evaluate policies and make recommendations. To succeed, the analyst must accept his or her own values while basing the analysis on objective criteria (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). This means the evaluators must act without bias, and have a deep understanding of the needs of their population/s. According to Karger and Stoesz (2018, p. 49), the eight key elements of policy framework are; policy frameworks systematically analyze a social policy or program, policy frameworks reflect the understanding that social policy is context sensitive, and there are competing priorities in all policy options, policy frameworks employ rational methods of inquiry and analysis (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). The data used in policy analysis is derived from scientific inquiry and legitimate sources, and it is objectively interpreted and analyzed, the analytic method is explicit and all succeeding policy analyses should approximate the same conclusion, policy analysis is based on the commitment to derive the largest possible social and economic benefit at the least possible social and economic cost (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). A good social policy is one that benefits at least one person (as he or she perceives his or her own self-interest) while at the same time hurting no one (a variation of the Pareto Optimality) (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). Although rarely achieved in the real world of finite resources—and proliferating claims on them—policy analysts should nevertheless strive toward that optimality, policy frameworks should attempt to take into account the unintended consequences of a particular policy or program (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). This could be aided by constructing multiple policy models or scenarios, policy analysts should consider alternative social policies or alternative uses of present or future resources allocated to a given policy, policy frameworks should employ models that examine the potential impact of a policy (or a series of policies) on other social policies, social problems, and the public good (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). These guidelines will assist decision makers to identify if present policies are consistent with the mission, and if it values social justice. The eight key elements are rational and systemic, because it provides an unbiased framework for decisions makers to assess present and future social policies. The purpose of a policy framework is to provide the analyst with a model or a set of questions for systematically analyzing a policy (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). This assists to leave little room for interpretations or subjective perspectives. If a policy fails to address or value a social welfare issue, this leaves room for rejection or adjustments. A policy framework can provide decision makers and the general public with information, an understanding of the ramifications of a policy on the target problem (and other problems and policies), and alternative policies that could more effectively address the problem (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). With a foundation set in place, decision makers may rationalize if a policy is effective or has room for improvement. With an abundance of policies being submitted for approval, this framework assists to ensure consistency among the decision making process. Untoward consequences occur more frequently when the decision-making process is not based on an analytic policy framework (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 49). As professors utilize one answer key to grade exams, policy decision makers may utilize the eight key elements to review social policies. Incorporating the eight key elements will assist to ensure each social policy is reviewed with similar scrutiny in hopes to achieve an overall wellbeing of the welfare state. Every policy framework can be fine-tuned or modified, and the best policy framework is often a synthesis of existing models (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 50). These elements are somewhat incompatible with the political process which policies are actually adopted. According to Cliff Notes (n.d.), the five stages of policy making are agenda building, formulation, implementation, evaluation, and termination. Once a policy has been established, it must be presented to congress, executive branches, the courts, or other groups that may be interested. Social policy is often driven by politics and rarely, if ever, systematically analyzed (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 50). As a result, members of congress or a board may view proposed policies from a biased perspective. Additionally, members of Congress may not be fully aware of what the needs of their population may be. Increasingly, policies were determined by executives and committees (often comprised of conservative lay men and women) over which the practitioner had little or no control (Trattner, 1994, p. 274). This means policies could be rejected by individuals who lack awareness of community needs. Groups of institutions often coalesce around policies that directly affect them, and through lobbying efforts, they can defeat legislation (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 53). Consequently, an opposing policy may be established to counteract the initial policy. In cases where they cannot defeat a policy outright, administrative units can implement a policy in ways that ensure its failure (Karger & Stoesz, 2018, p. 53). Another incompatibility demonstrated through the Prohibition era, was the commitment to benefit communities socially and economically. Congress failed to acknowledge that making alcohol illegal would increase crime, family instability, and unemployment. Had this policy been further investigated by local representatives, they would have advocated for the importance of this industry and the potential ramifications. References: Cliff Notes. (n.d.). American government. The Policymaking Process. Retrieved January 23, 2022, from https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/american-government/public-policy/the-policymaking-process Karger, H. K. & Stoesz, D. (2018). American social welfare policy: A pluralist approach (8th ed). Boston, MA.: Allyn and Bacon. Trattner, W.I. (1994). From poor law to welfare state (6th ed.). New York: The Free Press. Ashley M RE: Unit 3.2 DB: Key Elements of Policy Frameworks The eight key elements of policy frameworks include systematic analysis of a policy or program, understanding the contextual framework, using a rational method of inquiries/analysis, determining if the analytic method is explicit, analyzing what the largest possible benefits and goals are associated with the potential policy or program, considering the unintended consequences of a policy or program, examining alternative social policies, and considering the potential impacts on other social policies, problems and the public (Karger & Stoesz, 2018). The elements of policy frameworks are rational and systematic because they keep analysts on track and promote objectivity through consistency and structured analysis. Social policy is often driven by politics and not analyzed systematically and is therefore inherently more subjective and influenced by factors outside the population policies are meant to protect or serve (Karger & Stoesz, 2018). Even though policy analysis is structured and uses a framework, it is often only after a policy has been adopted and fails that an analysis is done (Karger & Stoesz, 2018). Political analysis focuses on political motivations above policy outcomes and policy analysis is meant to objectively assess the impacts policy will have on everyday people (Doctoroff Media Group, 2010). Policy analysis evaluates root causes and seeks to address a particular question and political analysis assesses what will be politically popular (Doctoroff Media Group, 2010). References: Doctoroff Media Group. (2010). Political analysis vs policy analysis. Karger, H. K. & Stoesz, D. (2018). American social welfare policy: A pluralist approach (8th ed). Boston, MA.: Allyn and Bacon. Ellen G RE: Unit 3.3 DB: Personal Values Professor and Class, The policy analyst is expected to evaluate policies and make recommendations(Karger &Stoesz,2015). To succeed, the researcher must accept his or her values while establishing the analysis on objective criteria(Karger &Stoesz,2015). Policy analysts are expected to evaluate a policy and make recommendations. As part of the process, the analyst must accept their values while at the same time building the analysis on objective criteria(Karger &Stoesz,2015). Codes of ethics and professional guidelines are created for many reasons(Giorgini et al.,2015). First, establishing codes and guidelines creates consistent, rational standards for researchers of a particular field (Giorgini et al.,2015). Additionally, codes of conduct are created to avoid legal outcomes of ethical breaches and assist public image (Giorgini et al.,2015). Alternatively, to ensure that members of a field maintain a higher standard of conduct than would be called for by law(Giorgini et al.,2015). Third, researchers create guidelines and formal ethics codes according to universal issues as scientific advancements are made(Giorgini et al.,2015). Fourth, ethical codes and professional guidelines are put in place to guarantee that integrity will be kept up for outside parties, such as clients, colleagues, and the public. High standards are of the most significant importance (Giorgini et al.,2015). Finally, codes may be established to arbitrate disagreements(Giorgini et al.,2015). Alternatively, forcing individuals to question their present values (Giorgini et al.,2015). Despite the generality and importance of codes of conduct, studies examining their efficacy concerning behavior can render mixed results. Some studies have shown ethical codes to be effective; when they achieve their purpose. In an experimental study, researchers found that graduate student participants who were instructed to make decisions under conditions in which an organizational ethics policy was in place made more ethical decisions than those not reviewing the ethical policy (Giorgini et al.,2015). Likewise, in another study, when participants were asked to react to scenarios, it was found that the condition featuring a code of ethics influenced the morality of participants’ actions (Giorgini et al.,2015), indicating that unethical behavior can be controlled or diminished through organizational practices and approaches(Giorgini et al.,2015). An approximate study bearing on computer ethics concluded that formal codes of computer ethics impact decision making and are thus essential to have, as long as the codes are effectively communicated throughout the organization and considered legitimate by members(Giorgini et al.,2015). References Giorgini, V., Mecca, J. T., Gibson, C., Medeiros, K., Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2015). Researcher perceptions of ethical guidelines and codes of conduct. Accountability in research, 22(3), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2014.955607 Karger, H. K. & Stoesz, D. (2018). American social welfare policy: A pluralist approach (8th ed). Boston, MA.: Allyn and Bacon. Bajah S RE: Unit 3.3 DB: Personal Values Dr. Carhart and Class, Policy analysis presents a way for insight into how and why governments endorse specific policies, and their effects (Browne et al, 2019). Forming healthy societies with strategic plans has been a vital function of social wellbeing (Browne et al, 2019). Policymakers are frequently fascinated with knowing which targeting assumption they should accept to reach the highest productivity in their welfare plans (Kakwani et al, 2020). According to Kakwani et al (2021), policymakers cannot overlook the administrative expense of operating the programs. Because of inadequate resources, policymakers’ intent should be to construct a program that engenders optimal social welfare at a stable price (Kakwani et al, 2021). When policymakers formulate a welfare system, they should make valuations of administrative expenditures of various affecting philosophies (Kakwani et al, 2021). Despite expanding testimony and demands for action on the social determinants of health impartiality since the World Health Organization Commission on the Social Determinants of Health and a cycle of Lancet Commissions, political action has not been proportionated (Baum et al, 2020). Per Baum et al (2020), the outcome has boosted, instead of decreased, health injustices and the social inequities, that reinforce them. The deficiency of achievement can be ascribed to the absence of political will because, however convincing the confirmation, if those who hold political power are not willing to apply action through policy trials, progress towards attaining health equity between and within countries will be partial (Baum et al, 2020). It may be perplexing for a policy researcher to neutralize their personal values when organizing a policy evaluation. Bias may be unintentional but can still ensue when performing an analysis. Bias in policy transformation and bias in recruitment are conflicting with extreme forms of public-interest fanaticism or regulatory capture, even given the two-sided selection disputes the model undertakes (Libgober, 2020). The media plays a considerable role in promoting biased preservations. Though news outlets have always issued a degree of subjective or misleading knowledge, the growth of the internet in the late 20th and early 21st century has dramatically expanded the quantity and accessibility of misleading and erroneous material (Greene et al, 2021). Current research has demonstrated that when people see fictitious news stories or photographs of public events that did not happen, they can start to consider and possibly even remember those illusory actions, specifically if the content of the fabricated substance is coherent with their political or ideological interpretations (Greene et al, 2021). Dissecting a policy is far from uncomplicated since there is little concord regarding what public policy is and how it can be explored and appreciated, with diverse tactics based upon disparate theoretical and methodological hypotheses (Browne et al, 2019). References Baum, F., Townsend, B., Fisher, M., Browne-Yung, K., Freeman, T., Ziersch, A., … & Friel, S. (2020). Creating political will for action on health equity: practical lessons for public health policy actors. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. Browne, J., Coffey, B., Cook, K., Meiklejohn, S., & Palermo, C. (2019). A guide to policy analysis as a research method. Health promotion international, 34(5), 1032-1044. Greene, C. M., Nash, R. A., & Murphy, G. (2021). Misremembering Brexit: Partisan bias and individual predictors of false memories for fake news stories among Brexit voters. Memory, 1-18. Kakwani, N., Wang, X., Xu, J., & Yue, X. (2021). Assessing the social welfare effects of government transfer programs: Some international comparisons. Review of Income and Wealth. Libgober, B. D. (2020). Strategic proposals, endogenous comments, and bias in rulemaking. The Journal of Politics, 82(2), 642-656.