| Course | MSW 513 Policy II: Soc Pol & Soc Just |
|---|---|
| Week | 8 |
| Paper type | Presentation with speaker notes |
| Length | About 570 words, 5 pages |
| Format | Slides with speaker notes, APA 7 references |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | Master of Social Work (MSW) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MSW 513 Week 8
Same Children, Different Pay: A Policy Change Presentation on a Separate Kin Licensing Standard for the County Kinship Workgroup
Student Name
Chamberlain University
MSW 513: Policy II: Soc Pol & Soc Just
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Slide 1: The Rule
Relatives meet the same licensing standard as strangers
Room size per child, 30 hours of training before approval
Set by the state Office of Licensing, not by federal law
Speaker notes: Good afternoon. Our state asks a grandmother who took two children on a Friday night to meet the same room measurements and the same 30-hour course as a family that spent a year preparing to foster. That standard comes from our state licensing office. Federal law does not require it.
Slide 2: What It Does to a Family
Unlicensed relatives receive a child-only cash grant
Licensed homes receive maintenance payments, often several times larger
Same children, same safety, different pay
Speaker notes: When a relative cannot meet the standard, the children stay but the payment changes. A state commenter on the federal rule put the cash help for three children at $654 monthly, while a licensed home caring for the same three would draw between $2,016 and $2,430 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2023).
Slide 3: How Many
Fall term navigator tally, composite, de-identified
31 began licensing; 9 approved
19 stopped at room size or training; 0 at background checks
Speaker notes: These are the households our program saw this fall. Most did not stop because of anything to do with safety.
Slide 4: Is Kin Care Safe Without the Measurements?
102 studies: fewer behavior problems, fewer moves in kin care
No difference in reunification
Speaker notes: A Cochrane review found children in kinship care had fewer behavior problems and fewer placement disruptions than children in non-kin foster care (Winokur et al., 2014). The studies are not randomized, so I offer this as support, not proof.
Slide 5: What Is Asked
A separate kin standard, allowed since November 2023
Keep background checks and safety inspection
Replace room measurement with a safety judgment at the visit
A kin course within 90 days of placement
Speaker notes: The ask is to the state licensing office, through this workgroup. The federal rule lets states do this and still claim federal funding.
Slide 6: Cost and Objection
More licensed relative homes means more maintenance payments
Federal share covers part of each eligible payment
Objection: a second tier lowers standards
Speaker notes: It will cost the state more in payments, partly offset by federal funding. On the objection, the safety floor does not move. States that tried to close the gap with service contracts saw it return when contracts ended (Dorch et al., 2008).
Slide 7: Who Is Not on This Screen
Caregivers chose what to share; two are here today
Some prefer to stay unlicensed, and that choice stays open
Speaker notes: I want to name who is present. Two grandparents from our support group are here and will speak next if they wish. Some families have told us they prefer not to be licensed. A separate standard keeps that choice.
Slide 8: What We Ask of This Room
Workgroup letter to the Office of Licensing by January 15
Regional manager to carry it
Speaker notes: I am asking this workgroup for one thing: a letter by January 15, carried by the regional manager.
References
Dorch, E., Mumpower, J., & Jochnowitz, L. (2008). The cost and benefits of cash and services to kinship caregivers. Social Work in Public Health, 23(6), 55-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/19371910802059601
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2023). Separate licensing or approval standards for relative or kinship foster family homes (Final rule, 88 FR 66700). Federal Register.
Winokur, M., Holtan, A., & Batchelder, K. E. (2014). Kinship care for the safety, permanency, and well-being of children removed from the home for maltreatment. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (1), Article CD006546. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006546.pub3
The Chamberlain MSW 513 Week 8 instructions
The final assignment presents the term's policy argument to an audience that has not read your papers. Each slide should carry one claim, and the speaker notes should carry the full sentences you would say. Keep a causal order visible from any point in the deck: the rule, what it does to people, how many, what you ask and who could grant it. Put a source line under every figure. Give cost and the main objection their own slide. Think about who will be in the room and whose situation is on the screen; if affected people are present, decide with them how their story is used. Watch the slide count and time limit. Close by asking a specific person or body to do a specific thing by a specific date.
How this MSW 513 Week 8 example is built
Slide 1 names the rule and its author, the state licensing office, and notes that federal law does not require it. Slide 2 shows what the rule does to a household, using a commenter's figures from the 2023 federal rule. Slide 3 gives the composite fall tally, and slide 4 asks whether kin care is safe without the measurements, citing Winokur et al. (2014) and stating that the studies are not randomized. Slide 5 states the ask: a separate kin standard with checks and inspections kept. Slide 6 takes cost and the second tier objection together and cites Dorch et al. (2008) on gaps returning after service contracts. Slide 7 names the two grandparents present and the choice to stay unlicensed. Slide 8 asks for one letter by January 15, carried by the regional manager.
Reading the MSW 513 Week 8 grading rubric
Presentations in this course are graded on the chain more than on design. Faculty check that the audience could follow the argument from any slide, that the order is causal rather than chronological and that the ask is spoken aloud to someone able to grant it. Every figure needs a visible source, and any identifying detail on a slide costs points. Credit goes to a slide that faces cost and objection squarely. Speaker notes are assessed as the actual content of the talk, so they need full sentences, not reminders. The handling of affected people's stories and presence is evaluated as practice, not decoration. The slide count and time limit are enforced, and a reference slide in APA format is expected at the end.
MSW 513 Week 8 help: mistakes that cost points
The deck that loses most is dense slides read aloud with the ask never stated. Next comes a presentation where sympathetic material and a request share the screen but nothing connects the harm to a rule, or the rule to the change. Missing sources under figures and an identifiable detail on a slide are common deductions. Many students also leave cost off entirely and freeze when asked who pays. If your policy is different, perhaps a city eviction diversion rule or a school transportation policy, the same chain applies: rule, effect, count, ask, cost, presence, close. A deck built for your policy would keep each slide to one claim, write notes you could speak from and end with a single request directed at a named person or body.
Get a MSW-513 Week 8 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 8 instructions with the slide count, the time limit and the policy you have worked on all term, and a custom example is built to those constraints and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. What you ask the room for stays your own decision.
More MSW 513 papers and MSW samples
- MSW 513 Week 1: Hardship Versus Injustice Post
- MSW 513 Week 2: Kin Licensing Policy Analysis
- MSW 513 Week 3: Kin Licensing Policy Brief
- MSW 513 Week 4: Kin Licensing Stakeholder Map
- MSW 513 Week 5: Kin Licensing Testimony Draft
- MSW 513 Week 6: Advocacy Conflict Post
- MSW 513 Week 7: Kin Licensing Advocacy Plan
- MSW 514 Week 8: Theory Synthesis Paper
- MSW 512 Week 8: Practice Reflection Example
- MSW 511 Week 8: Synthesis Reflection Example
- MSW 509 Week 8: Comprehensive Case Analysis
MSW 513 Week 8 questions, answered
How many slides should the deck run to?
Whatever the assignment sets, and it is worth checking whether the limit counts a title slide and references. Where nothing is specified, a slide for roughly every minute of speaking is a workable ratio. Presentations are commonly marked against a time limit, and finishing early with the ask delivered beats overrunning with the last slides skipped.
What goes in speaker notes?
The sentences that are not on the slide, written the way you would say them, plus the figure behind any number and one line on what to answer if the obvious question comes. Notes reading as full paragraphs get read out, and an audience can tell. Short prompts that carry the argument work better than a script.
What if the answer to the ask is no?
Prepare a slide for it, because somebody usually asks. The strongest decks name a smaller thing the same audience could grant, a piece of information that would settle a live disagreement, or a date at which the question comes back. An advocacy argument with no fallback tends to end the conversation, which is the opposite of what the term has been building toward.
Where can I find a free MSW 513 Week 8 sample paper?
An eight slide MSW 513 Week 8 presentation with full speaker notes on a separate kin licensing standard is available here, with margin notes on how the chain is kept visible.
What does the MSW 513 Week 8 sample ask the audience to do?
To send one letter to the state licensing office by January 15, carried by the regional manager, so the ask has a named carrier and a date.