1

Speech-Language Pathology

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course Name

Professor`s Name

Date
 2

Speech-Language Pathology

The public health policies, which were proposed in module one and two, might have some financial

implications to the involved parties. While these laws might have both long term and short-term benefit to

the public, there are key effects connected with the general healthcare market and processes. Most of the

financial effects from the respective law initiation will extend to both public and private health facilities.

In addition, the key player might regulate the financial effects emanating from these policies with an ideal

strategic plan. This exercise reflects on the anticipated financial implication of implementing the

jurisdictions and professional workforce priority policies. The paper will also discuss funding sources for

the government program identified in speech-Language pathology module one.

The implementation of professional workforce priority policy might have both positive and

negative implications to the financial selected for the processes. First, both private and public payers will

experience a persistent increase in healthcare spending that might exceed the income growth. This will

not only affects the healthcare system at the public levels, but also affects the general fiscal health of the

nation. While funding the policy of professional workforce priority might adversely affects the general

healthcare in its implementation, the best practices that might be adopted by the respective policymakers

might have long-term financial profits (Chernew, 2011). For example, professional workforce priority

policies will assure the public over quality care at a leveraged cost making the policy practical in the

financial view. Another adverse financial impact of having professional workforce priority policies is

forced payment to the public to avoid economic disaster (Frick & Ma 2009). This will make payers to

coming decade to experience significant changes in healthcare financing. The main beneficial effect

associated with professional workforce priority policies extend to a leveraged health market for both

public and private consumers, considering that all stakeholders, mainly healthcare providers who will

need to adapt to the changes for efficient care delivery. In general, implementation of professional

workforce priority policies as guided by the former module exercise might have adverse financial

implication compared to benefits.

 3

Jurisdiction presents itself as an essential aspect to understand when it comes to official power to

make legal decisions and judgments, but marks significant financial impacts, mainly in healthcare

systems. First having jurisdiction in healthcare, purposely in speech language pathology might mark a

bottom line for the general healthcare within the country especially considering the importance in

healthcare as part of human lives. The main financial effect emanating from this policy is having an ideal

regulation of healthcare budges for the respective fiscal years. This will enable healthcare providers to

ensure quality care at a reasonable cost. Another effect of having this policy is an assurance of efficient

financial risk management within the care systems. The main goal of having jurisdiction policy as the

guiding tool for all healthcare endeavors is to avoid losses and expense that might affect the general

sector. This marks a prospective financial impact in ensuring that the budget line is maintained for the

costs of all SLP processes. In addition, the main adverse affiliated with the implementation of jurisdiction

policy as a factor to guide healthcare financial activities is the unacceptance trade-off between its costs

and it general effectiveness in future.

Funding Sources for the Government Program

There are several funding sources for the SLP program by the government including the internal

sources, external sources, and debts. Funding of the respective policy might in the largest proportion rely

on the internal sources, which can be in form of property taxes, local income taxes, user’s fees, and

business taxes. Property tax might be the main source of funding, whereby, the lawmakers and the

stakeholders expected to implement this policy make a budget from this taxes. The user fees are another

source of internal sources that the government can set from health facilities and balance with the

prospected profits from the effect of this policy (Kinner & Pellegrini, 2009). External sources might be in

form of export taxes, whereby, the government can set a proportion to support implementation of the very

policy. Government can use debt to finance this policy, with a goal set that the effectiveness and financial

rewards from the very policy will pay the debt and any incurred interests.

Competing Priorities and the Likelihood of Receiving Funding

 4

From a thorough review of the most recent budgets within the state, there are competing priorities

and the likelihood of receiving for the proposed policy. The main competing priority emanates from the

question of rewards and benefits of the very policy to both the government and running of SLP programs.

This might be hand to prospect considering that implementation of this policy will require large findings

(Frick & Ma 2009). Another competing priority is how the respective SLP policy will be able to rebuild

the financial incurred in its short-term test and medication in case of a failure. In addition, the general

policy reflects high chances of financial benefits from the general healthcare market and changes. This

marks a promising basis for requesting financial support from the government without doubt over losses.
 5

References

Chernew, M. (2011). Health care spending growth: Can we avoid fiscal Armageddon? Inquiry, 47(4),

285-95. Retrieved from the Trident Online Library.

Frick, K., & Ma, S. (2009). Overcoming challenges for the economic evaluation of investments in

children's health. Academic Pediatrics, 9(3), 136-7.

Kinner, K., & Pellegrini, C. (2009). Expenditures for public health: Assessing historical and prospective

trends. American Journal of Public Health, 99(10), 1780-1791.