MPH 503 Week 4 Stakeholder and Power Map Example

Course	MPH 503 Advocacy in Public Health Policy and Law
Week	4
Paper type	Stakeholder and power map
Length	About 1,090 words, 5 pages
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Chamberlain University
Program	Master of Public Health (MPH)
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for MPH 503 Week 4

Stakeholder and Power Map for a Riverton Rental Cooling Standard, With Each Position Sourced or Marked as Inferred

Student Name

Chamberlain University

MPH 503: Advocacy in Public Health Policy and Law

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title promises named actors placed by influence and position, with the basis for each position shown, which is what makes a power map honest.

Stakeholder and Power Map for a Riverton Rental Cooling Standard, With Each Position Sourced or Marked as Inferred

The Decision Being Mapped

The decision is whether the Riverton city council adds a summer cooling duty to the housing code, setting an 82-degree ceiling for one habitable room in every rental unit. The first gate is the council's Housing and Neighborhoods Committee, which must schedule a hearing; the second is a council vote, which needs five of nine members. The map places named offices and organizations, not categories, on two axes the course sets: influence over this decision and position on it. Each position is marked as sourced, when the actor has said or written something on the record, or inferred, when it is the working group's judgment.

The Map

Table 1

Stakeholder and Power Map for a Rental Cooling Standard, Riverton

Actor	Influence over the decision	Position	Basis for position	Movable?
Council Member, District 4, committee chair	High: controls the committee agenda	Undecided	Inferred from a 2025 statement calling heat deaths "a tragedy" without proposing action	Yes
Mayor	High: can urge the council and sign or veto	Supportive in principle	Sourced: heat action plan press release, July 2025	Partly
Council Members, Districts 1, 2 and 7	High: three votes	Likely support	Inferred from tenant protection votes in 2024	Not needed
Council Members, Districts 3 and 5	High: two votes	Likely oppose	Inferred from votes against a 2024 rental registration ordinance	Unlikely
Council Members, Districts 6, 8 and 9	High: three votes	Undecided	Inferred; mixed housing records	Yes
Neighborhood Services Department director	Medium: will testify on enforcement capacity	Neutral, concerned about staffing	Sourced: budget testimony on inspector vacancies	Yes, with resources
Riverton Apartment Association	Medium to high: large membership, active at hearings	Oppose	Sourced: newsletter calling cooling mandates "costly overreach"	Partly, on cost terms
Small Landlords Alliance	Medium: owners of one to four units, sympathetic to council members	Oppose	Inferred from opposition to registration fees	Yes, with rebates and phase-in
Tenant Justice Riverton	Medium: mobilizes residents	Support	Sourced: public statement after 2025 deaths	Already supportive
County public health department	Medium: credible data and testimony	Support	Sourced: heat-death surveillance report recommends cooling access	Already supportive
Area Agency on Aging	Low to medium: trusted by older residents and staff	Support	Inferred from its cooling distribution program	Already supportive
Riverton Power, electric utility	Low on the vote, medium on cost	Neutral	Inferred; has efficiency rebates	Yes, as a resource
State landlord association	Low now, high if it seeks preemption	Oppose	Inferred from preemption bills it backed elsewhere	No

Note. Note. Actors and positions are composites. Sourced positions rest on a public statement or record; inferred positions are the working group's judgment and should be checked.

What this page is doingMarking every position as sourced or inferred tells the reader which placements rest on evidence and which need to be confirmed before effort is spent.

Influence as Capacity to Act

Influence here means what an actor can do about this decision, not how prominent it is. The committee chair has the most influence at the first gate, because without a hearing nothing else matters. Each council member has one vote, but the three undecided members in Districts 6, 8 and 9 hold the outcome, since three likely supporters and two likely opponents leave four votes to find among the chair and those three. The apartment association's influence comes from turning out members at hearings and from its relationships with council staff. The state landlord association has little influence on the city vote but could matter greatly afterward, through a preemption bill (Pomeranz & Pertschuk, 2017).

Honesty About the Top of the Map

A flattering map would place the mayor and the chair as allies. The evidence does not support that. The mayor's support is in principle and comes from a press release, not a commitment to this ordinance. The chair has called the deaths a tragedy but has not proposed anything, and represents a district with many small landlords. Treating either as a firm ally would direct effort away from the people who most need persuading.

The Movable Actors

Four actors are flagged as movable, and they are where most of the work should go. The committee chair could be moved by the district's own numbers, six of the 19 indoor deaths in homes without working cooling, and by a narrow ordinance that answers cost concerns. The three undecided council members could be moved by testimony from their own constituents and by the utility's willingness to direct rebates to landlords. The Small Landlords Alliance could be moved from opposition to neutrality by a phase-in and rebates, which would remove the most sympathetic voice against the ordinance. And the Neighborhood Services director could be moved from concern to support if the ordinance comes with funding for two inspectors.

Commentary: What the Map Shows

The map shows a winnable council vote with an unclear first gate at the committee. The supporters are credible but mostly outside the council: tenant advocates, public health and aging services. The organized opposition is concentrated in landlord groups, with one of them, the small landlords, more movable than the other. The evidence base, that working cooling protects against heat death (Semenza et al., 1996), is strong enough that opposition is likely to focus on cost and enforcement rather than on whether cooling matters.

What this page is doingReading the map as a whole, rather than row by row, identifies the first gate and the movable votes as the decisive points.

Allies Who Could Act Together

The supporters on the map are scattered: tenant advocates, public health, aging services and, potentially, the utility. Each brings something the others lack. Tenant Justice Riverton can bring residents to hearings; the county health department brings data and credibility; the Area Agency on Aging brings trust among older residents and their families; the utility brings a way to lower landlords' costs. None of them, acting alone, holds enough influence to move the undecided votes. Coalitions work when partners' contributions and interests are made explicit and someone coordinates them (Butterfoss, 2007), which is the task for the next stage of the campaign.

What this page is doingSeeing that the supporters are many but individually weak points the campaign toward a coalition rather than toward more outreach by any single group.

Where the Effort Should Go

Effort should go first, and most heavily, to the committee chair, through a meeting with district residents and the district's death data, then to the three undecided members, through constituent testimony and the utility rebate offer. The Small Landlords Alliance should be approached early with a phase-in proposal, before its position hardens alongside the larger association. And the campaign should prepare now for a possible preemption bill in the next legislative session, since a city win could well prompt one.

References

Butterfoss, F. D. (2007). Coalitions and partnerships in community health. Jossey-Bass.

Pomeranz, J. L., & Pertschuk, M. (2017). State preemption: A significant and quiet threat to public health in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 107(6), 900-902. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.303756

Semenza, J. C., Rubin, C. H., Falter, K. H., Selanikio, J. D., Flanders, W. D., Howe, H. L., & Wilhelm, J. L. (1996). Heat-related deaths during the July 1995 heat wave in Chicago. New England Journal of Medicine, 335(2), 84-90. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199607113350203

Reading the MPH 503 Week 4 instructions

Define the decision you are mapping as a specific action by a specific body, including the gates it must pass, such as a committee hearing before a vote. List the actors who matter, naming offices and organizations rather than broad categories. Place each on two axes: influence over this decision and position on it. For each position, say whether it is sourced from something the actor has said or done on the record or inferred from your judgment, and give the basis for inferences. Explain where influence comes from, whether votes, money, members or access. Show the arithmetic of the decision. End with what the map means for your strategy, especially which actors are both influential and movable.

Inside the MPH 503 Week 4 example

The sample maps a nine-member council and the actors around it. A table lists each actor with influence, position and whether that position is sourced or inferred. Three council members are likely supporters on the record, two likely opponents and three undecided, and the committee chair controls whether a hearing happens. The apartment association is a sourced opponent with turnout power, and the state landlord association could matter later through a preemption bill. The firefighters' union and congregations appear as unexpected allies. The paper does the vote arithmetic, showing four votes must come from the chair and the three undecided members, and ends by naming those four as the campaign's targets.

Where the points sit in the MPH 503 Week 4 rubric

Maps in this week lose marks when they list categories, such as policymakers or the community, rather than named offices and organizations, because a category cannot be met or persuaded. Another frequent problem is placing positions without saying how they are known, which turns guesses into apparent facts. Some maps describe every actor equally and never draw conclusions. Maps score well when the decision is defined with its gates, each actor is specific, each position is labeled as sourced or inferred, influence is explained by its source and the paper ends by naming the small number of actors who will decide the outcome.

MPH 503 Week 4 help: mistakes that cost points

A power map is only useful when it is specific and honest about what you know. If you tell us your decision and the body that makes it, we can help you list the actors who really matter, place them on the two axes and decide which positions you can source and which you are inferring. We can also help you work out the vote arithmetic and see which actors are both influential and movable, which is where your later assignments will focus. Your knowledge of the place, the actors and the final placements remains your own. Where the record is thin, we can help you phrase inferred positions so a reader sees exactly what each placement rests on.

Get a MPH-503 Week 4 example written to your instructions

Send the Week 4 instructions with the axes or template your section requires and your issue, and a custom example is built in that format and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. Which actors you decide to pursue stays your judgment.

More MPH 503 papers and MPH samples

MPH 503 Week 4 questions, answered

How do I judge influence without inside knowledge?

From formal authority and observable record. Committee membership, procedural control, budget authority and a documented history of shaping similar decisions are all visible from outside. Where you are inferring, say so. A map that distinguishes what is known from what is estimated is marked above one that presents every placement with the same confidence.

Should opponents be on the map?

Yes, and putting powerful ones in the powerful corner is what makes the exercise worth doing. Maps in which the opposition is uniformly weak read as wishful, and faculty see many of them. Naming a strong opponent and what would be required to move or neutralise them is the analytical content the assignment is looking for.

What if an actor's position is genuinely unknown?

Place them where the evidence points, label the placement as uncertain, and say what you would do to find out. Unknown positions among influential actors are often the most useful finding in the whole map, because they identify where a conversation would be worth more than any amount of further research.

Where can I find a free MPH 503 Week 4 sample paper?

This page carries the complete power map for a city cooling ordinance, with every actor's position marked as sourced or inferred.

Which actors does the MPH 503 Week 4 sample say will decide the vote?

The housing committee chair and the three undecided council members, because four votes must come from them.