This assignment builds on the previous components of this research project, where you identified a social problem and selected a federal policy that affects it. Once social workers have

Assignment Overview

This assignment builds on the previous components of this research project, where you identified a social problem and selected a federal policy that affects it.

Once social workers have located a policy that addresses a social problem, the next step is to analyze the policy's development and potential impacts. In other words, does the policy resolve or mitigate the issue? Looking at China’s one-child policy, you would want to know whether it is indeed reducing fertility rates. Next, you would want to know if the policy has any unintended consequences that must also be addressed. For example, China’s one-child policy has led to significant labor shortages in the country.

By successfully completing this assignment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following EPAs and practice behaviors:

Competency 5: Engage in Policy Practice
- C5.GP.A: Identify social policy at the local, state, and federal level that impacts well-being, service delivery, and access to social service.
  - Related Assignment Criterion:
    - 1. Analyze the development of the chosen policy.
Competency 5: Engage in Policy Practice
- C5.GP.B: Assess how social welfare and economic policies impact the delivery of and access to social services.
  - Related Assignment Criteria:
    - 2. Evaluate the effectiveness of the policy with respect to the target population.
    - 3. Evaluate the feasibility of the policy.
Competency 5: Engage in Policy Practice
- C5.GP.C: Apply critical thinking to analyze, formulate, and advocate for policies that advance human rights and social, economic, and environmental justice.
  - Related Assignment Criterion:
    - 4. Identify the policy constraints that inhibit the policy from fully addressing the problem for the chosen population.

Assignment Description

In this assignment, you will analyze the federal policy you chose to address your social justice issue, including providing background of the development of the policy and evaluating its effectiveness and feasibility. Remember that the feasibility of a policy relates not only to its economic feasibility, but also to its political and social impact. You will also identify the policy constraints that inhibit the policy from most effectively reaching your targeted population.

Continue to consult Congress.gov, the Government Accountability Office, public policy analysis research and reports, and other peer-reviewed research to support your analysis. Also, use the NASW Code of Ethics Web page to guide your analysis.

Assignment Instructions

For this assignment:

Analyze the development of your chosen federal policy.
- Analyze the historical background that led to the development of the policy.
- Define the goals of the policy and how these goals are intended to be met, including services and programs intended to achieve the goals.
Evaluate the effectiveness of the policy with respect to the target population.
- Consider how well the policy has met the needs of your target population and to what extent it improves the social justice problem you initially researched. Does the policy seem to ignore, impede, or strengthen the social functioning of the target population?
- To what extent does the policy meet or improve the social values of the target population?
- To what extent does the policy adhere to best practice ethics and best practice standards?
- If the outcome of your analysis is that best practice ethics and standards are not being adhered to, include that information in your analysis as well.
Evaluate the feasibility of the policy.
- Is the policy politically, economically, and administratively feasible? Provide details and rationale.
Identify the policy constraints that inhibit the policy from fully addressing the problem for the chosen population. Have other constraints arisen since the passage of the policy that have made conditions worse or better for the chosen population?

Guidelines

Support your claims and recommendation with clear rationale and support from scholarly, peer-reviewed literature.
Refer to the rubric that will be used to grade your work, before completing this assignment.
Reference feedback you received from the previous assignment to improve the quality of your submission. Further feedback from this project component will help you improve your work for the final Federal Policy Analysis and Recommendations course project.

Example assignment: You may use the assignment example, linked in the Resources, to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the rubric would look like.

Additional Requirements

The assignment you submit is expected to meet the following requirements:

Written communication: Written communication is free of errors that detract from the overall message.
APA formatting: Resources and citations are formatted according to current APA style and formatting standards.
Cited resources: Minimum of eight scholarly sources. All literature cited should be current, with publication dates within the past five years.
Length of paper: Six to eight double-spaced, typed pages.
Font and font size: Times New Roman, 12 point.
Due date: Assignment must be submitted to your instructor in the courseroom no later than 11:59 p.m. on Sunday of this week.

Resources

View RubricWeek 6 Assignment – Policy AnalysisWeek 6 Assignment – Policy AnalysisCriteriaRatingsPtsAnalyze the development of the chosen policy. (C5.GP.A)view longer description55 to >46.75 ptsDISTINGUISHEDAnalyzes the development of the chosen policy and uses outstanding details and examples to support the analysis.46.75 to >38.5 ptsPROFICIENTAnalyzes the development of the chosen policy.38.5 to >0 ptsBASICDescribes but does not analyze the development of the chosen policy.0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCEDoes not describe the development of the chosen policy./ 55 ptsEvaluate the effectiveness of the policy with respect to the target population. (C5.GP.B)view longer description55 to >46.75 ptsDISTINGUISHEDEvaluates the effectiveness of the policy with respect to the target population, using outstanding details and examples to support the evaluation.46.75 to >38.5 ptsPROFICIENTEvaluates the effectiveness of the policy with respect to the target population.38.5 to >0 ptsBASICAnalyzes but does not evaluate the effectiveness of the policy with respect to the target population.0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCEDoes not analyze the effectiveness of the policy with respect to the target population./ 55 ptsEvaluate the feasibility of the policy. (C5.GP.B)view longer description55 to >46.75 ptsDISTINGUISHEDEvaluates the feasibility of the policy, using outstanding details and examples as support.46.75 to >38.5 ptsPROFICIENTEvaluates the feasibility of the policy.38.5 to >0 ptsBASICDescribes but does not evaluate the feasibility of the policy.0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCEDoes not describe the feasibility of the policy./ 55 ptsIdentify the policy constraints that inhibit the policy from fully addressing the problem for the chosen population. (C5.GP.C)view longer description55 to >46.75 ptsDISTINGUISHEDAnalyzes the policy constraints that inhibit the policy from fully addressing the problem for the chosen population, using outstanding details and examples as support.46.75 to >38.5 ptsPROFICIENTIdentifies the policy constraints that inhibit the policy from fully addressing the problem for the chosen population.38.5 to >0 ptsBASICIdentifies only some of the policy constraints that inhibit the policy from fully addressing the problem for the chosen population.0 ptsNON_PERFORMANCEDoes not identify policy constraints that inhibit the policy from fully addressing the problem for the chosen population./ 55 ptsCommunicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and consistent with expectations for members of the social work profession.view longer description30 to >25.5 ptsDISTINGUISHEDCommunicates in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and consistent with expectations for members of the social work profession, consistently and with no errors, referencing at least eight, well-chosen scholarly sources.25.5 to >21 ptsPROFICIENTCommunicates in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and consistent with expectations for members of the social work profession, referencing at least eight scholarly sources.21 to >0 ptsBASICInconsistently communicates in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and consistent with expectations for members of the social work profession, or does not support the claims with at least eight scholarly sources.

socialjusticeproblems..edited.docx

Addressing Healthcare Disparities in Racial and Ethnic Minorities through the Affordable Care Act

Racial and ethnic minority healthcare disparities are a serious social justice issue. Cultural obstacles, socioeconomic issues, implicit bias, and structural racism are the main causes of the discrepancies. The factors lead to poor health outcomes and unequal access to high-quality healthcare. United States crested the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to alleviate the healthcare inequities among racial and ethnic minorities (Adamson et al., 2019). Affordable Care Act (ACA) was a federal law enacted order to create health insurance markets and increase Medicaid eligibility. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) also mandates essential health benefits and forbids insurance companies from refusing coverage due to pre-existing diseases. The goal of the Affordable Care Act was to lessen racial and ethnic minority gaps in healthcare access and provision. This paper explores the ACA goals, services and programs it offers, the background, and its effects.

Purpose of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)

The 2010 Affordable Care Act aimed to improve healthcare access and reduce disparities, It was targeted to elevate healthcare disparity issues affecting racial and ethnic minorities. Many minorities were disproportionately represented and had limited access to health insurance. ACA's expansion of Medicaid eligibility extended coverage to numerous low-income individuals, a substantial portion of whom come from minority backgrounds. ACA anticipated to increase Medicaid eligibility and deliver insurance coverage to affected low-income individuals. (Snowden et al., 2022). The expansion was crucial in addressing disparities in access to healthcare services.

Second, the ACA created markets for health insurance. Families and individuals could shop about for and compare various insurance policies. According to Hero et al. (2019), the marketplaces provided a means for underrepresented groups to select plans that aligned with their health needs at an affordable cost. Thirdly, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) forbade insurance companies from refusing coverage to customers who already had medical issues. Numerous racial and ethnic minority groups frequently suffer from chronic illnesses or have had prior health problems; therefore, the service would be helpful to them. (Huguet et al., 2019). The ACA also mandated that essential health benefits be offered in insurance plans. The benefits included preventive care, mental health services, and prescription drug coverage, among others. The essential health benefits ensured racial and ethnic minority populations access necessary healthcare services. They removed financial barriers that often-prevented disadvantaged populations from seeking necessary healthcare.

Programs and Services Provided through the ACA

The ACA introduced several programs and services to achieve its objectives of reducing healthcare disparities and improving healthcare access for racial and ethnic minorities. Medicaid eligibility was expanded in many states and allowed individuals with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level to qualify for coverage. The expansion increased insurance coverage among low-income minority populations. Creation of health insurance marketplaces eases the access and purchase insurance plans that suit individual needs. Marketplaces offered options and subsidies to lower-income individuals to afford insurance (Ercia et al., 2021). The ACA's prohibition on coverage denials based on pre-existing conditions also removed barriers to accessing insurance for chronic ill. Racial and ethnic minorities often experience higher rates of chronic conditions.

The target population for the programs and services provided through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) primarily includes low-income individuals and families, many of whom belong to racial and ethnic minority populations. Specifically, these programs and services aim to benefit those with limited financial resources previously at risk of being uninsured or underinsured. Minority communities often encompass Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American populations. They often face disparities in healthcare access and coverage due to socioeconomic factors.

Connection to the Social Justice Problem

Healthcare disparities in racial and ethnic minority populations often manifest as unequal access to healthcare services and poorer health outcomes for minority individuals and communities. The disparities are deeply rooted in structural racism, implicit bias, socioeconomic factors, and cultural barriers. ACA directly addresses targeting the root causes of healthcare disparities. It recognizes that individuals from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds face greater barriers to accessing healthcare, like limited income, pre-existing conditions, and cultural differences that cause discrimination (Baumgartner et al., 2020). The ACA aims to mitigate the barriers by expanding Medicaid, establishing health insurance marketplaces, prohibiting coverage denials, and mandating essential health benefits. The provisions collectively bridge gap in healthcare access and provision for minority populations. Research has shown that the policy has resulted in substantial coverage gains among Black, Hispanic, and Asian populations, narrowing insurance coverage gaps (Baumgartner et al., 2020). Medicaid expansion under the ACA has also positively affected access to care for low-income minorities.

Historical Issues and Context Leading to the ACA

Complex historical situation and substantial political dynamics influenced Affordable Care Act development and enactment. Healthcare disparities in racial and ethnic minorities has a long history in the United States. The disparities are rooted in systemic racism, socioeconomic inequalities, and unequal access to quality healthcare. Healthcare disparities have been perpetuated by policies excluding racial and ethnic minorities from accessing essential services. Implicit bias among healthcare professionals also causes differential treatment based on race or ethnicity and exacerbates the disparities.

The ACA emerged in response to the longstanding disparities and need for comprehensive healthcare reform. President Barack Obama championed the policy and made it pass through a contentious political process. It was aimed at address the historical inequalities and create equitable healthcare system (Carrasco-Aguilar et al., 2022). However, the policy faced opposition from some political leaders. They argued that policy would result to government overreach and negatively impact the healthcare system.

The ACA's historical background is marked by debates in Congress and legal challenges that questioned the policy's constitutionality. Supreme Court upheld the law in 2012, affirming its place in the U.S. healthcare system (Jost & Keith, 2020). ACA has since made progress in reducing healthcare disparities among racial and ethnic minorities.

Impact of Historical Features on Policy Implementation

The historical features and challenges surrounding the ACA’s establishment impacted its implementation. The political debates and legal challenges delayed the ACA ‘s full implementation. They delayed the policy benefits, and targeted populations were forced to wait for the essential services. ACA allowed states choose between expanding Medicaid. The freedom of has brought disparities in access to Medicaid benefits. Some states opted to expand Medicaid, providing greater access to low-income individuals from minority backgrounds. However, others failed to adopt, leaving many without coverage (Crowley et al., 2020). The historical political controversy surrounding the ACA has also enhanced the ongoing efforts to repeal or amend the policy.

Some states choose to extend Medicaid, giving minority low-income people more access to healthcare. Some, nevertheless, failed to adopt the policy and left many without coverage (Crowley et al., 2020). The ACA's political turbulence in the past has bolstered current efforts to change or repeal the law. The ongoing debates have also created uncertainty for individuals and families who rely on the ACA for healthcare coverage.

Conclusion

Racial and ethnic minority healthcare disparities are a serious social justice issue that need for multipronged solutions. Significant progress has been made in addressing the disparities by the Affordable Care Act. The law has created health insurance markets, increased Medicaid eligibility, outlawed coverage denials due to pre-existing conditions, and mandated essential health benefits. For many minority populations, the provisions have greatly improved healthcare coverage and access. However, the ACA's past of legal disputes and political arguments has complicated its application and prolonged the uncertainty surrounding it. Despite these obstacles, the ACA has significantly decreased the number of people without health insurance and increased racial and ethnic minority populations' access to care. Collaborative efforts among healthcare professionals, policymakers, and social workers are crucial in advancing equity and social justice in healthcare. Building upon the ACA's successes, addressing its limitations, and remaining committed ongoing efforts can mitigate healthcare disparities among these vulnerable communities.

References

Adamson, B. J. S., Cohen, A. B., Estevez, M., Magee, K., Williams, E., Gross, C. P., Meropol, N. J., & Davidoff, A. J. (2019). Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion impact on racial disparities in time to cancer treatment. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 37(18_suppl), LBA1–LBA1. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2019.37.18_suppl.lba1

Baumgartner, J., Collins, S., Radley, D., & Hayes, S. (2020). How the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has narrowed racial and ethnic disparities in insurance coverage and access to health care, 2013‐18. Health Services Research, 55(S1), 56–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.13406

Carrasco-Aguilar, A., Galán, J. J., & Carrasco, R. A. (2022). Obamacare: A bibliometric perspective. Frontiers in Public Health, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.979064

Crowley, R., Daniel, H., Cooney, T. G., & Engel, L. S. (2020). Envisioning a better U.S. health care system for all: coverage and cost of care. Annals of Internal Medicine, 172(2), S7. https://doi.org/10.7326/m19-2415

Ercia, A., Le, N., & Wu, R. (2021). Health insurance enrollment strategies during the Affordable Care Act (ACA): a scoping review on what worked and for whom. Archives of Public Health, 79(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-021-00645-w

Hero, J. O., Sinaiko, A. D., Kingsdale, J., Gruver, R. S., & Galbraith, A. A. (2019). Decision-making experiences of consumers choosing individual market health insurance plans. Health Affairs (Project Hope), 38(3), 464–472. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05036

Huguet, N., Angier, H., Hoopes, M. J., Marino, M., Heintzman, J., Schmidt, T., & DeVoe, J. E. (2019). Prevalence of pre-existing conditions among community health center patients before and after the Affordable Care Act. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 32(6), 883–889. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2019.06.190087

Jost, T. S., & Keith, K. (2020). The ACA and the courts: litigation’s effects on the law’s implementation and beyond. Health Affairs, 39(3), 479–486. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.01324

Snowden, L. R., Graaf, G., Keyes, L., Kitchens, K., Ryan, A., & Wallace, N. (2022). Did Medicaid expansion close African American-white health care disparities nationwide? A scoping review. BMC Public Health, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14033-8