| Course | NURS 8100 Healthcare Policy and Analysis |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 9 |
| Paper type | Discussion post with two peer replies |
| Length | About 570 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Discussion post, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 8100 Week 9
Week 9 Discussion: Initial Post
Making an Agency Decision Stick: A Nurse-Led Legislative Strategy to Codify Removal of Buprenorphine Prior Authorization
The recommendation from last week, removal of prior authorization for preferred buprenorphine products by agency directive, can be undone by the next agency director with another directive. The aim of this strategy is to write that removal into state law, so that a future administration cannot restore it without the legislature's consent.
Leadership should come from nursing. The state nurses association, an affiliate of the American Nurses Association, and the state nurse practitioner association should lead jointly. The ANA's scope and standards describe advocacy for policy that improves health as part of professional nursing practice, not an optional activity (American Nurses Association, 2021). Nurse practitioners also prescribe buprenorphine and can describe the delay from direct experience, which gives the coalition credible witnesses.
To choose partners, I would use the advocacy coalition framework, which describes policy change as the product of competing coalitions of actors who share core beliefs and coordinate over time (Sabatier & Jenkins-Smith, 1993). Weible et al. (2009) note that coalitions are held together more by shared policy core beliefs than by identical interests, and that learning across coalitions is more likely when a neutral forum and credible evidence are available. By that logic, the natural partners are the medical society, recovery advocates and the pharmacists' association, which share the belief that treatment access should come first. The managed care plans hold a competing belief about utilization control and are unlikely to join, but the pharmacists' association, which supports removal with dose safeguards, could bridge the two if the bill keeps a dose threshold.
The strategy is sequenced around the composite state's session calendar. Before the session: meet the health committee chair and the agency's legislative liaison, share the first months of monitoring data and ask a legislator who has spoken publicly about overdose deaths to sponsor the bill. At filing: include the dose threshold in the bill text, which removes the pharmacists' main objection. Before the committee deadline: organize testimony by a nurse practitioner, a pharmacist and a person in recovery. After passage: ask the agency to align its rule with the statute and continue monitoring.
Question: which partner in your state would be hardest to recruit, and why?
Reply to Carla
Carla, you asked why legislate at all if the agency can make the change alone. The answer is durability. An agency directive depends on the agency's current leadership; a statute survives a change in leadership and can only be undone by another vote. There is a cost: legislation is slower, draws wider opposition and may be amended in ways the coalition does not like. That is why I would pursue it after the directive, not instead of it, so that patients benefit now and the legislature can act with a year of the state's own data rather than evidence from other states.
Reply to Tyrell
Tyrell, you suggested naming specific legislators in the post. I would describe them by role instead, the committee chair, a sponsor who has spoken on overdose and the agency liaison, for two reasons. In a course discussion, roles make the strategy transferable to other states. And in real advocacy, the right sponsor depends on the session's politics, which change; a strategy tied to a named person can fail if that person loses interest or office. The coalition would, of course, name names when it actually begins its visits.
References
American Nurses Association. (2021). Nursing: Scope and standards of practice (4th ed.).
Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (Eds.). (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Westview Press.
Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., & McQueen, K. (2009). Themes and variations: Taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 121-140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00299.x
Reading the NURS 8100 Week 9 instructions
Near the end of the term, the strategy thread has you plan how to move a policy recommendation through a legislature, including leadership, partners and timing. Plan on an initial post of about six hundred words and two replies. State the aim of legislating, especially if an agency could act alone. Assign leadership and explain why nursing organizations should lead. Use a framework to choose partners and to anticipate opposition. Identify any actor who could bridge coalitions and what would bring them in. Sequence the work around the legislative calendar, from pre-session meetings to post-passage follow-up. Describe decision makers by role, and ask classmates which partner would be hardest to recruit. Name who testifies and why each voice matters.
How the NURS 8100 Week 9 example is put together
Paragraph one states the aim of codification. Paragraph two assigns leadership to the two nursing associations and cites the ANA's scope and standards. Paragraph three explains the advocacy coalition framework, cites Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith and Weible and colleagues and identifies partners, opponents and the pharmacists as a bridge. A highlighted fourth paragraph sequences pre-session meetings, filing, testimony and post-passage steps. It asks peers which partner they would struggle to recruit. The reply to Carla explains durability and the cost of legislation. The reply to Tyrell explains why sponsors are described by role. The sequence is tied to calendar points rather than vague phases. Each step names who acts.
Where the marks sit in the NURS 8100 Week 9 rubric
Graders of a legislative strategy look first at whether the aim is clear, the rationale for leadership and partners, the use of a framework and the realism of the sequence. Aim credit goes to posts that explain why legislation is needed. Leadership and partnership choices earn credit when justified. Framework use is rewarded when it explains coalition choices rather than decorating them. Sequencing around real calendar points shows practical understanding. Replies earn credit for answering the obvious objections. Faculty value awareness of opponents and bridges. APA citations of frameworks and professional documents complete the criteria for most sections. Some instructors reward naming a bridge actor, since that is where coalitions often grow.
Common NURS 8100 Week 9 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Advocacy posts lose marks when they say nurses should contact legislators without saying who leads, with whom or when. Another common loss is naming a framework without using it to choose partners. Some posts ignore opponents entirely. Others name individual legislators, which ties the strategy to people rather than roles. State why you are legislating, assign leadership, choose partners with a framework, identify bridges and opponents, sequence the work and describe decision makers by role. The desk can draft a strategy for your own recommendation. Check your state's filing and committee deadlines before sequencing. Say what the coalition will do after passage, not only before. Keep it short.
Get a NURS 8100 Week 9 example written to your instructions
Along with the Week 9 discussion question and its rubric, include the recommendation you are carrying forward; a NURS 8100 legislative strategy thread is then written, strategy post first and two replies after. First one free, back within 24 to 48 hours. No legislator is named in the sample, and the state session it plans around is composite.
More NURS 8100 papers and DNP samples
- NURS 8100 Week 1: Policy cycle post
- NURS 8100 Week 2: Agenda-setting thread
- NURS 8100 Week 3: Policy issue justification
- NURS 8100 Week 4: Policy Analysis
- NURS 8100 Week 5: Stakeholder power map
- NURS 8100 Week 6: Financing trade-off thread
- NURS 8100 Week 7: Policy options appraisal
- NURS 8100 Week 8: DNP policy analysis
- NURS 8100 Week 10: Policymaker brief
- NURS 8100 Week 11: Policy leadership reflection
- NURS 8003 Week 9: Development plan
- NURS 8002 Week 9: DNP change agent post
- DNRS 6800 Week 9: Discussion post
- DNRS 6630 Week 9: Special populations paper
NURS 8100 Week 9 questions, answered
Why legislate a change an agency can make alone?
For durability. An agency directive can be reversed by a later directive, sometimes without public process, while a statute requires another vote to undo. The example's post raises that point first because a peer will ask it. Legislating also brings public hearings, which can build support. The cost is time and the risk of amendments, and your post should acknowledge both.
What is the advocacy coalition framework?
An approach associated with Paul Sabatier and Hank Jenkins-Smith holding that policy change is driven by coalitions of actors who share core beliefs and work together over long periods. The example uses it to explain partner choice: groups sharing a belief in treatment access form the coalition, while a group with different core beliefs is approached only on a secondary concern where agreement is possible.
Where can I find a free NURS 8100 Week 9 sample paper?
The initial legislative strategy post and both replies, with three references, are posted here and are free to read. A strategy for your own recommendation can be requested.
Who leads the coalition in the NURS 8100 Week 9 strategy?
The state nurses association and the state nurse practitioner association jointly, with the medical society, recovery advocates and pharmacists as partners.
Which actor could bridge the coalitions in NURS 8100 Week 9?
The pharmacists' association, which supports removal with dose safeguards and could join if the bill keeps a dose threshold.