Due Date: Week 14, Friday 27 May, 2016, at 5.00 pm Length: 2500 words. Submit in Report Format. (NOTE: Executive Summary, References and Appendices are not included in the word count and excess words will not be marked). Submission Details: Via Turnitin on unit vUWS site. Feedback Details: Via Grade Mark. Rationale The purpose of this assignment is to prepare a national health workforce plan for one country in the category of low and lower-middle income countries, as defined by WHO. These countries in particular have been identified in the latest report by WHO (WHO, 2016) as having a shortfall in health workers of some 18 million by 2030. [1] Task The WHO has a system of classification of countries by region and income which is described in Annex 1 of the “World Health Statistics Report, 2015”. (WHO, 2015) (p.160-161). Use the table showing countries on Page 161 in the low and lower-middle income categories to select the country you will use to develop the health workforce plan. [1] This report also provides a range of statistics on the health workforce by country. The assignment will be scaffolded so that tutorials will support the development of the National Health Workforce Plan on key topics relevant to the development of the workforce plan, including preparing an Environmental Scan, analysing the national health workforce data set, identifying critical issues and developing strategies to address the issues identified. The National Workforce Plan should be a five year plan. Prepare a Table of Contents for the National Health Workforce Plan using report format. Draft the Introduction for the Workforce Plan, including documentation of the rationale for selection of the country. Prepare the Environmental Scan for the health workforce of the selected country using national and international health workforce references including policy and planning documents, and any relevant health workforce plans. Prepare a data profile of the health workforce by category using WHO data and other data sources. Develop the workforce profile using tables and graphs and supporting explanatory text. Based on the previous steps and relevant literature, identify critical issues to be addressed in the workforce plan. Use the set of ten recommendations developed in the WHO 2016 report “Working for health and growth: investing in the health workforce” [2] as a framework to develop strategies relevant to implement the workforce plan (WHO, 2016, p.11-12). Criteria You will be assessed according to the following criteria: Academic writing skills, use of report format and APA. Ability to introduce the topic and findings in a well summarised Executive Summary. Understanding of the process of the development of a health workforce plan. Preparation of an Environmental Scan, Capacity to analyse workforce profile data including the use of charts and tables to support the analysis and presentation. Critical analysis and synthesis of the relevant literature to support issues identification and strategies development. Resources Resources Provide your answers based on the unit material and recommended readings in Modules 3 to 5. Graphic material is an essential way of presenting health workforce data. Topics will be discussed at supporting tutorials. Use the Hints document on vUWS to identify the relevant sections for report format. WHO has established Regional Observatories On Human Resources In Health Systems, which includes an Africa Health Workforce Observatory. These regional observatories may include relevant material for the development of the National Health Workforce Plan. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/hrh/governance/en/ http://www.hrhresourcecenter.org/observatory Marking rubric: Assessment 2 Criteria Unsatisfactory Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction Report format 5 marks No executive summary or abstract only, and/or no contents page and/or numbered headings in text. Formatting errors e.g. inaccurate formatting of charts, and headings. No spacing between paragraphs. Used underlining instead of bold. Used familiarity and /or first person. 1-2 marks ES may cover some key points only. Poorly presented contents page which may not match headings in text. Other formatting errors. 2.5 marks Good focus on key points in ES. Good use of report format with some errors. 3.5 marks ES covers all main points. Document well formatted with few errors. 4 marks ES covers all main points. Document professionally presented. 4.5 - 5 marks Proof reads text to ensure accuracy of grammar, spelling and punctuation. Writes clearly and in an appropriate style for an academic report. Identify features of ethical scholarship and academic integrity for citations in-text. Correct use of APA for footnotes/end list. 10 marks Language errors detract significantly from meaning. Abbreviations not defined. Little evidence of proof reading or use of grammar and spell check with English Australia used. Writing is verbose, convoluted or difficult to follow, or informal e.g. subjective style or slang such as isn’t, don’t. Does not use referencing and citations to identify some or all sources used. Correct in-text citation format for less than 50% of sources e.g. citations only given at end of sentences or paragraphs rather than inserted at earliest opportunity; author and year or report title and year not integrated into sentences. Page reference missed for quotations and/or excessive quoting e.g. more than 5%. Sources not provided for tables, graphs etc. which includes author(s), or report title, year and page. APA referencing format not used or used with major errors. 1-4 marks Some language errors interfere with meaning. Purpose of paragraphs difficult to determine or confusing content with no clear theme. Writing generally clear may not be succinct, may use informal or subjective style, sometimes uses technical language and may qualify some assertions. Correct in-text citation and use of APA. Language set to English Australia. 5-6 marks Few language errors. Writing is clear and succinct; uses technical language and qualifies assertions; paragraphs well-structured and logical. Correct in-text citation where references support argument and use of APA. 6.5- 7 marks Very few errors. Correct and consistent in-text citation and use of APA and references very clearly support argument. 7.5 - 8 marks No errors. Correct in-text citation and use of APA. Excellent use of current references. 8.5 -10 marks Understanding of process of development of health workforce plan 10 marks No or minimal understanding, poor introduction and inadequate contents and coverage. Minimal if any justification for country selection 1-4 marks Health workforce plan has adequate introduction, contents and coverage. Some justification for country selection 5 -6 marks Comprehensive workforce plan: introduction sets the scene, including justification for country selection. The process is well described and all remaining sections well covered. 6.5 – 7 marks Comprehensive and integrated workforce plan: introduction sets the scene, including justification for country selection. The process is well described and all remaining sections well documented and inter-linked. 7.5 - 8 marks Excellent understanding of process of development of workforce plan with originality of thought. Introduction sets the scene, including justification for country selection process. The plan is well documented and all remaining sections very well documented and inter-linked. 8.5 - 10 marks Demonstrated skills in development of Environmental Scan. Evidence of wide and relevant reading from appropriate recent sources. 10 marks Little if any review of relevant reports and/or inappropriate information selected. Inadequate coverage of content. Few references cited, and/or out of date and/or from inappropriate sources e.g. Wikipedia. 1-4 marks Sufficient references cited i.e. min of ten, may not all be up to date or from appropriate sources. Adequate coverage of content. Limited analysis of the material. 5-6 marks Information gathered is comprehensive. Analysis of the material included to provide a good overview of key policy framework and internal and external environment. 6.5 - 7 marks Comprehensive use of current, relevant and reliable sources. Analysis of the material provides a very good overview of key policy framework and internal and external environment. 7.5 - 8 marks Extensive reading of current, relevant and reliable sources. Excellent coverage and analysis of the material included to provide a very good overview of key policy framework and internal and external environment. 8.5 - 10 marks Demonstrate ability to critically analyse national workforce data and present workforce profile. 10 marks No or limited presentation and analysis of workforce data by category. Minimal comparison of key data items using tables and graphs. 1-4 marks Sufficient presentation and analysis of national workforce data by category. Some use of tables and graphs to support the comparison of key data items. Some discussion of data findings. 5 – 6 marks Good presentation and analysis of workforce data by category, and other key data items supported by tables and graphs. Graphics and tables relate to text. Good overview of data findings. 6.5 marks Extensive presentation and analysis of national workforce data by category and other key data items, supported by well integrated tables and graphs. Good overview of data findings for workforce profile supported by a range of references. 7.5 - 8 marks Excellent presentation and analysis of workforce data by category and other key data items, supported by well integrated tables and graphs. Extensive overview of data findings for workforce profile supported by an extensive range of references. 8.5 - 10 marks Demonstrated ability to develop critical issues and present proposed strategies by topic linked to key recommendations. Original and relevant strategies addressing the topic for health workforce improvements. 15 marks No or inappropriate critical issues and strategies development. Critical issues not linked to Environmental Scan and findings from workforce profile. Little if any attempt to develop strategies for the ten recommendations. Insufficient justification for selection of key strategies 1-7 marks May include some critical issues and strategies development. Critical issues linked to Environmental Scan and findings from workforce profile. Some attempt to develop strategies for the ten recommendations. Some justification for selection of key strategies. 7.5 – 9.5 marks Comprehensive critical issues and strategies development. Significant linkages to Environmental Scan and findings from workforce profile. Justification for selection of key strategies based on the ten recommendations. Well- developed strategies supported by evidence. 10- 11 marks Extensive critical issues and strategies development. Justification for selection of key strategies. Significant linkages to Environmental Scan and findings from workforce profile. Well- developed strategies for the ten recommendations supported by a range of evidence. 11.5 – 12.5 marks Excellent critical issues and strategies development. Comprehensive justification for selection of key strategies. Significant linkages to Environmental Scan and findings from workforce profile. Well- developed strategies for the ten recommendations supported by a wide range of evidence. 13 - 15 marks Submission Submission Submission Point goes here