Consider a health service within your own setting.?
Briefly describe what you think should be the key elements underpinning an evaluation of the health service that you have identified?
Need about 500 words. Need about 8 references list your answer must use at least 3 academic sources and these should not include my files attached. Questions 1- Consider a health service within your own setting.? 2- Briefly describe what you think should be the key elements underpinning an evaluation of the health service that you have identified? You must Read the book and ALL articles, to answer the above questions and you MUST include them in references list and based on them to write this assignment . Note that this assignment consist of 2 parts of question please answer them in depth. · Book1 citation(Attached): Hunter, D.J. (ed.). (2007) ‘Chapter 1: The policy context and growing importance of health’. In: Managing for health. Oxford: Routledge, pp.129-147. · · Book2 citation(Attached): World Health Organization (2000) ‘Chapter 2: How well do health systems perform?’ In: WHO report 2000: health systems: improving performance. Geneva: WHO, pp. 23–46 (pp. 37–61 in eBook). Available from: http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/lib/liverpool/docDetail.action?docID=5006803 · · Article 1 citation (Attached): Navarro, V. (2000) ‘Assessment of the World Health Report 2000’, Lancet, 356 (9241), pp. 1598–1601 [Online]. Available from: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03139-1 (Accessed: 18 May 2010). · Article 2 citation (Attached): Murray, C. & Frenk, J. (2001) ‘World Health Report 2000: a step towards evidence-based health policy’, Lancet, 357 (9269), pp. 1698–1700 [Online]. Available from: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04826-1 · Article 3 citation (Attached): Navarro, V. (2001) ‘World Health Report 2000: responses to Murray and Frenk’, Lancet, 357 (9269), pp. 1701–1702 [Online]. Available from: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04827-3 · Please write the answer with subtitle introduction, discussion and conclusion You must read all articles and books and include them on references list must use at least 3 academic sources and these should not include my files attached. MY REQUIREMENTS:- PLEASE READ BOOK AND ARTICLES BEFORE START WRITE THIS ASSIGNMENT. Read the BOOK AND ARTICLES.AND MUST INCLUDE THEM ON REFERENCES. 1- Chose a subtitle in you writing. 2- Please write the answer with subtitle introduction, discussion and conclusion 3- 4- It MUST important to use my ATTACHED FILES(BOOK AND ARTICLES) on references. And based it on your writing 5- PLEASE WRITE THIS ASSIGNMET ON DEPTH (GENERAL WRITING IS NOT ACCEPTABLE). 6- Referencing (in text citation) should be evident in the discussions. 7- You MUST use author name and page number on essay while writing. Like this (Kaplan,2006 p.24). should be evident in the discussions. 8- Please you should choose examples from your own experience or find appropriate cases on the Web that you can discuss. 9- Need at least 8 References(INCLUDE MY FILES ATTACHED. 10- Please use Harvard style. 11- Referencing (in text citation) should be evident in the discussions. MUST IMPORTANT NOTE Your writing should not submitted before to any others colleges. Need about 500 words. Need about 8 references list your answer must use at least 3 academic sources and these should not include my files attached. Questions 1 - Consider a health service within your own setting. ? 2 - Briefly describe what you think should be the key elements underpinning an evaluation of the health service that you have identifie d ? You must Read the book and ALL articles , to answer the above questions and you MUST include them in references list and based on them to write this assignment . Note that this assignment consist of 2 parts of question please answer them in depth. Book 1 citation (Attached) : Hunter, D.J. (ed.). (2007) ‘Chapter 1: The policy context and growing importance of health’. In: Managing for health . Oxford: Routledge , pp. 129 - 147 . B ook2 citation (Attached) : World Health Organization (2000) ‘Chapter 2: How well do health systems perform?’ In: WHO report Need about 500 words. Need about 8 references list your answer must use at least 3 academic sources and these should not include my files attached. Questions 1- Consider a health service within your own setting.? 2- Briefly describe what you think should be the key elements underpinning an evaluation of the health service that you have identified? You must Read the book and ALL articles, to answer the above questions and you MUST include them in references list and based on them to write this assignment . Note that this assignment consist of 2 parts of question please answer them in depth. Book1 citation(Attached): Hunter, D.J. (ed.). (2007) ‘Chapter 1: The policy context and growing importance of health’. In: Managing for health. Oxford: Routledge, pp.129-147. Book2 citation(Attached): World Health Organization (2000) ‘Chapter 2: How well do health systems perform?’ In: WHO report Prelims i-ixx/E How Well do Health Systems Perform? 23 2 HOW WELL DO HEALTH SYSTEMS PERFORM? ATTAINMENT AND PERFORMANCE � ssessing how well a health system does its job requires dealing with two large questions. The first is how to measure the outcomes of interest – that is, to determine what is achieved with respect to the three objectives of good health, respon- siveness and fair financial contribution (attainment). The second is how to compare those attainments with what the system should be able to accomplish – that is, the best that could be achieved with the same resources (performance). Although progress is feasible against many of society’s health problems, some of the causes lie completely outside even a broad notion of what health systems are. Health systems cannot be held responsible for influ- ences such as the distribution of income and wealth, any more than for the impact of the climate. But avoidable deaths and illness from childbirth, measles, malaria or tobacco con- sumption can properly be laid at their door. A fair judgement of how much health damage it should be possible to avoid requires an estimate of the best that can be expected, and of the least that can be demanded, of a system. The same is true of progress towards the other two objectives, although much less is known about them (1). GOALS AND FUNCTIONS Better health is of course the raison d’être of a health system, and unquestionably its primary or defining goal: if health systems did nothing to protect or improve health there would be no reason for them. Other systems in society may contribute greatly to the popu- lation’s health, but not as their primary goal. For example, the education system makes a large difference to health, but its defining goal is to educate. Influence also flows the other way: better health makes children better able to learn, but that is not the defining purpose of the health system. In contrast, the goal of fair financing is common to all societal sys- tems. This is obvious when the system is paid for socially, but it holds even when everything is financed purely by individual purchases. It is only the notion of fairness that may vary. “Getting what you pay for” is generally accepted as fair in market transactions, but seems much less fair where health services are concerned. Similarly, in any system, people have expectations which society regards as legitimate, as to how they should be treated, both physically and psychologically. Responsiveness is therefore always a social goal. Taking the education system as an example, fair financing means the right balance of contributions from households which do and those which do not have children in school, and enough subsidy that poor children are not denied schooling for financial reasons. Responsiveness includes respect for parents’ wishes for their children, and avoiding abuse or humiliation of the students themselves. 24 The World Health Report 2000 The health system differs from other social systems such as education, and from the markets for most consumer goods and services, in two ways which make the goals of fair financing and responsiveness particularly significant. One is that health care can be cata- strophically costly. Much of the need for care is unpredictable, so it is vital for people to be protected from having to choose between financial ruin and loss of health. Mechanisms for sharing risk and providing financial protection are more important even than in other cases where people buy insurance, as for physical assets like homes or vehicles, or against the financial risk to the family of a breadwinner dying young. The other peculiarity of health is that illness itself, and medical care as well, can threaten people’s dignity and their ability to control what happens to them more than most other events to which they are exposed. Among other things, responsiveness means reducing the damage to one’s dignity and au- tonomy, and the fear and shame that sickness often brings with it. Systems are often charged to be affordable, equitable, accessible, sustainable, of good quality, and perhaps to have many other virtues as well. However, desiderata such as acces- sibility are really a means to an end; they are instrumental rather than final goals. The more accessible a system is, the more people should utilize it to improve their health. In contrast, the goals of health, fair financing, and responsiveness are each intrinsically valuable. Rais- ing the achievement of any goal or combination of goals, without lowering the attainment of another, represents an improvement. So if the achievement of these goals can be meas- ured, then instrumental goals such as accessibility become unnecessary as proxy measures of overall performance; they are relevant rather as explanations of good or bad outcomes. It is certainly true that financing that is more fairly distributed may contribute to better health, by reducing the risk that people who need care do not get it because it would cost too much, or that paying for health care leaves them impoverished and exposed to more health problems. And a system that is more responsive to what people want and expect can also make for better health, because potential patients are more likely to utilize care if they anticipate being treated well. Both goals therefore are partly instrumental, in that they pro- mote improvements in health status. But they would be valuable even if that did not hap- pen. That