Health Care Financing
The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the framework and various dimensions of access to care, including delivery, and quality among the health care models.
Choose two models from the Topic 3 assignment that you feel are most effective in providing quality care. In a 1,250-1,500 word paper, answer the following questions:
- How is quality monitored?
- What are the qualifications for each of the plans?
- How do these plans reimburse health care providers?
- How much are prevention and wellness emphasized?
- What are the primary drivers of health care financing?
- Explain what component you feel requires the most reform in order to finance a health care system that covers all, or most, people. Justify your rationale.
Support your writing with three to five scholarly peer-reviewed resources.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
Rubic_Print_Format
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | |||||
| HCA-515 | HCA-515-O500 | Health Care Financing | 130.0 | |||||
| Criteria | Percentage | 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | 2: Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) | 3: Satisfactory (79.00%) | 4: Good (87.00%) | 5: Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% | |||||||
| Quality Monitoring | 15.0% | A description of how quality is monitored in each health care plan is incomplete. | A description of how quality is monitored in each health care plan is incomplete or incorrect. | A description of how quality is monitored in each health care plan is complete. | A description of how quality is monitored in each health care plan is complete and includes supporting details. | A description of how quality is monitored in each health care plan is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details. | ||
| Qualifications | 10.0% | An explanation of the qualifications for each of the health care plans is incomplete. | An explanation of the qualifications for each of the health care plans is incomplete or incorrect. | An explanation of the qualifications for each of the health care plans is complete but lacks supporting details. | An explanation of An explanation of the qualifications for each of the health care plans is complete and includes supporting details. | An explanation of the qualifications for each of the health care plans is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details. | ||
| Plan Reimbursement | 10.0% | An explanation of how each health care plan reimburses providers is incomplete. | An explanation of how each health care plan reimburses providers is incomplete or incorrect. | An explanation of how each health care plan reimburses providers is complete but lacks supporting details. | An explanation of how each health care plan reimburses providers is complete and includes supporting details. | An explanation of how each health care plan reimburses providers is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details. | ||
| Prevention and Wellness | 10.0% | A description of how each health care plan emphasizes prevention and wellness is incomplete. | A description of how each health care plan emphasizes prevention and wellness is incomplete or incorrect. | A description of how each health care plan emphasizes prevention and wellness is complete but lacks supporting details. | A description of how each health care plan emphasizes prevention and wellness is complete and includes supporting details. | A description of how each health care plan emphasizes prevention and wellness is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details. | ||
| Primary Drivers | 10.0% | A description of the primary drivers of health care financing is incomplete. | A description of the primary drivers of health care financing is incomplete or incorrect. | A description of the primary drivers of health care financing is complete but lacks supporting details. | A description of the primary drivers of health care financing is complete and includes supporting details. | A description of the primary drivers of health care financing is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details. | ||
| Reform | 15.0% | An explanation of which components of a health care plan require the most reform is incomplete and does not include a rationale. | An explanation of which components of a health care plan require the most reform is incomplete or incorrect and does not include a rationale. | An explanation of which components of a health care plan require the most reform is complete but the rationale lacks supporting details. | An explanation of which components of a health care plan require the most reform is complete and the rationale includes supporting details. | An explanation of which components of a health care plan require the most reform is extremely thorough and the rationale includes substantial supporting details. | ||
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% | |||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | ||
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | ||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | ||
| Format | 10.0% | |||||||
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. | ||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | ||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
For any questions, feedback, or comments, we have an ethical customer support team that is always waiting on the line for your inquiries.
Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!