| Course | NR 717 Concepts in Population Health Outcomes & Health Policy |
|---|---|
| Week | 6 |
| Paper type | Policy brief memo |
| Length | About 840 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Memo with APA 7 citations |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 717 Week 6
Memorandum
To: Chief Medical Officer and Vice President of Finance, Lakeview Community Health Plan
From: Doctor of Nursing Practice student, Riverbend Health
Date: 15 February 2027
Re: Funding remote postpartum blood pressure monitoring for members with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: about $23,500 a year
Recommendation
Fund remote blood pressure monitoring for every Lakeview member discharged from Riverbend Health with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy, at $160 per member, for a twelve-month pilot beginning 1 July 2027. At last year's volume that is about 147 members and $23,500, paid from the plan's medical management budget as a per-member payment to Riverbend for each enrolled patient. Riverbend would supply the cuffs, the text platform and the nurse review, and report results to Lakeview monthly.
The Problem in One Rate
Last year, 39.0% of Riverbend patients leaving with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy had a blood pressure check in the 7 to 10 days after discharge that national guidance recommends (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2018). The other 61% went home during the period when postpartum preeclampsia most often appears, with no scheduled check until their six-week visit.
What It Costs, Over What Period, From Which Budget
The $160 per member covers a validated cuff the member keeps, six weeks of a text-based reporting platform and same-day nurse review of any reading above threshold. For Lakeview's share of Riverbend deliveries, about 147 members a year, the total is about $23,500 over twelve months. The money would come from Lakeview's medical management budget, which already funds the post-discharge care management calls that reach these members but cannot take a blood pressure. The pilot needs no change to the global obstetric fee or to Riverbend's hospital contract; it is a separate per-member payment for a defined service.
What the Present Arrangement Already Costs Lakeview
Lakeview currently pays for the consequences rather than the check. Last year, about 10 Lakeview members were readmitted to Riverbend with postpartum hypertension within six weeks of delivery, at an average payment of $9,450, or about $94,500. Another 36 emergency visits for raised blood pressure or headache ended with the member sent home, at $780 each, or about $28,100. That is roughly $122,600 a year, five times the cost of the pilot, spent after the harm. The pilot breaks even on readmissions alone if it prevents three of the ten.
The Evidence, Briefly
In a randomized trial of 206 postpartum patients with hypertensive disorders, text-based monitoring with a home cuff captured a reading within ten days for 92.2% of patients, compared with 43.7% of those told to attend the office (Hirshberg et al., 2018). The trial measured whether pressures were captured, not readmissions; the pilot will measure both.
A Clinical Note
Last spring a Riverbend patient discharged on day two after a preeclampsia diagnosis felt well until day six, when a severe headache began. With no cuff at home and no appointment for five weeks, the first blood pressure reading was taken by paramedics: 174/116. The patient was readmitted for three days of intravenous treatment. A home reading on day four, when the pressure was already rising, would most likely have led to an oral medication change and a clinic visit instead.
What Riverbend Would Commit To
In return for the payment, Riverbend would enroll every eligible Lakeview member before discharge, provide the cuff and teaching at the bedside, staff same-day review of every reading above the agreed thresholds and arrange a clinic or telehealth visit within 24 hours when a reading requires one. It would also absorb the cost of members who decline or drop out, so Lakeview pays only for enrolled members. The obstetric practices have agreed to accept same-day referrals from the monitoring nurses, which is the part of the arrangement that turns a reading into treatment rather than into an emergency visit.
How Lakeview Would Know It Worked
Riverbend would report monthly, for enrolled Lakeview members: the share with a recorded pressure by day ten, readmissions for hypertension within six weeks and emergency visits for raised pressure. At twelve months, Lakeview could compare these with the baseline year and decide whether to continue, expand to other hospitals in its network or stop, with the data in hand rather than an estimate.
The Cost of Deciding Nothing
With twelve-month postpartum coverage now in place, Lakeview carries these members through the whole postpartum year. If nothing changes, the plan can expect to keep paying about $122,600 a year for avoidable use from Riverbend alone, while 61% of its members with a hypertensive disorder go unchecked in the first ten days. Briefs to decision makers are most useful when they make the cost of inaction as explicit as the cost of action (Brownson et al., 2009), and here the cost of inaction is the larger number.
The Decision Requested
Approve $23,500 from the medical management budget for a twelve-month pilot starting 1 July 2027, and name a contact in Lakeview's quality department to receive the monthly reports and attend a short review at six months.
References
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2018). ACOG Committee Opinion No. 736: Optimizing postpartum care. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 131(5), e140-e150. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002633
Brownson, R. C., Chriqui, J. F., & Stamatakis, K. A. (2009). Understanding evidence-based public health policy. American Journal of Public Health, 99(9), 1576-1583. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2008.156224
Hirshberg, A., Downes, K., & Srinivas, S. (2018). Comparing standard office-based follow-up with text-based remote monitoring in the management of postpartum hypertension: A randomised clinical trial. BMJ Quality & Safety, 27(11), 871-877. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2018-007837
What the NR 717 Week 6 assignment asks for
Address the brief to the person who controls the money and open with the recommendation, with the price inside it. Establish the problem with a single rate rather than a crowd of figures. Then give the financing paragraph that makes the brief doctoral: what the change costs, over what period, from which budget, and what that budget currently spends absorbing the problem. Show the break-even point if there is one. Keep the evidence brief and accurate about what it measured. Include one short clinical passage written by someone who has seen the problem, stripped of any detail that could identify a patient or unit. State what the provider will commit to in return and how the payer will know it worked. Close with the cost of deciding nothing and the specific decision requested.
How the NR 717 Week 6 example is put together
The memo header gives the plan's two decision makers, the date and a subject line naming about $23,500 a year. The recommendation states the per-member payment, about 147 members, the pilot start and the budget line. A single rate establishes the problem. The financing section explains what $160 buys and that no change to existing fees is needed. The status quo section adds readmission and emergency payments to about $122,600 and shows the pilot breaking even at three prevented readmissions. The evidence section reports one trial and notes it measured readings, not readmissions. A de-identified account of a day-six headache and a reading of 174/116 follows. Riverbend's commitments, monthly reporting, the cost of inaction under twelve-month coverage and the decision requested close the brief.
Reading the NR 717 Week 6 grading rubric
The first loss is a recommendation with no number, which reads as a request that someone else work out whether it is affordable, and is where a budget holder usually stops reading. Next is a number with no source of funds, so the brief asks for spending without saying which line pays or what it displaces. Marks are also lost for a problem drawn wider than the recipient's authority, for a crowd of figures where one rate would do, for clinical detail that could identify a patient and for evidence set out in long paragraphs. Briefs score well when the status quo cost is set beside the request, when the break-even is stated and when the decision requested is specific enough to act on that day.
NR 717 Week 6 help from the desk
Writing for someone who signs for money means putting the price first and the background last, which reverses how most nurses are taught to write. Tell us the change, who would pay and what you know about current spending, and we can help you put the price in the recommendation, choose the one rate that sizes the problem, find the budget line and set the request against what the status quo already costs. We can also help you de-identify a clinical passage. The request and the figures reflect your own project and setting.
Get a NR 717 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 6 instructions with the layout requirement your section sets and the change you want costed, and a custom example is built to that format and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. Who you address it to, and what you ask them for, stays yours to settle.
More NR 717 papers and DNP samples
- NR 717 Week 1: Outcome and Cost Post
- NR 717 Week 2: Population Health Analysis
- NR 717 Week 3: Epidemiologic Profile
- NR 717 Week 4: Sample Paper, in Real Form
- NR 717 Week 5: Health Care Financing Analysis
- NR 717 Week 7: Advocacy Plan
- NR 717 Week 8: Policy Presentation
- NR 716 Week 6: Critical Appraisal Paper
- NR 715 Week 6: Literature Matrix
- NR 714 Week 6: Data Analysis Results
- NR 702A Week 6: Project Charter
NR 717 Week 6 questions, answered
How precise does the cost estimate have to be?
Traceable rather than exact, and given as a range wherever the underlying figures are uncertain. A published per case cost applied to the population count you established earlier is defensible at this level. What a finance reader distrusts is the single confident total, since anybody working with budgets knows the estimate behind it carries error and expects that to be acknowledged.
What if I cannot find out which budget would pay?
Name the plausible sources and say what would settle it, which is honest and much closer to how these requests actually move. Many changes could be funded from an operating line, a grant, a quality program or a payer contract, and identifying the candidates is genuinely useful to a reader. Claiming a funding source you have not verified is the version that fails on contact.
Can the brief include something from my own practice?
One short passage, thoroughly de-identified, and only where nothing about your employer or your patients could be reconstructed from what remains. Alter whatever is distinctive about the circumstances and not merely the name. Where your organization restricts what staff may write publicly about its operations, that governs, and a passage assembled out of more than one case is generally safer.
Where can I find a free NR 717 Week 6 sample paper?
This page holds a complete policy brief memo that seeks plan funding for home blood pressure checks after delivery.
At what point does the NR 717 Week 6 pilot pay for itself?
Three prevented readmissions at about $9,450 each would cover the pilot's roughly $23,500 cost, before counting any avoided emergency visits.