| Course | NU733 Ethics, Policy, and Advocacy for Population Health |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 8 |
| Paper type | Stakeholder power map |
| Length | About 1,150 words, 7 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU733 Unit 8
Beds Outrank Titles: A Stakeholder Power Map of the Ten Parties Shaping Camping Enforcement in Composite Port Hadley, Sorted by the Resources Each Controls
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU733: Ethics, Policy, and Advocacy for Population Health
Unit 8 Stakeholder Power Map
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Port Hadley and its organizations are composite; the resource categories and rankings are the author's analysis.
Method
Stakeholder analysis in health policy usually asks who has an interest in a policy, how much influence each party has, and what position each holds (Brugha & Varvasovszky, 2000). This map focuses on influence and defines it by resource. Seven types are used: rules (the power to set binding requirements), money (control of funding), beds (control of shelter capacity and intake), enforcement (control of police or code action), data (control of information that shapes decisions), legal standing (the ability to sue or compel action) and public voice (the ability to shape opinion or testimony). Each party was scored on each resource, and parties were ranked by their overall influence on how enforcement is actually carried out, not on whether enforcement exists at all.
The Ten Parties in Rank Order
1. The state legislature. Its resource is rules. Through the Public Camping Act it requires the city to enforce and bars authorized camping, which sets the outer frame for every other party. It ranks first because no local actor can override it, and since the Supreme Court's 2024 Grants Pass decision removed the federal constitutional limit on camping enforcement, state law now sets the frame largely on its own (City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, 2024), but it ranks first only on whether enforcement happens; it is silent on how.
2. The two shelter operators. Their resource is beds, and with beds come intake rules. Because the city's only practical alternative to outdoor sleeping is a shelter bed, the operators' rules on couples, pets and curfews determine whether an offer of shelter is one a person can accept. Outreach logs show that [61] percent of refusals cite those three rules. On the question of how enforcement plays out for the people affected, the operators have more influence than any elected official except the legislature.
3. The city manager. Her resources are rules, through administrative directives, and enforcement, through her authority over police and public works. She can sequence enforcement without a council vote, which makes her the most important local decision maker on method.
4. The police chief. His resource is enforcement. He controls how officers carry out directives and how citations are issued, and his department's practices can soften or harden any policy.
5. The downtown business improvement district. Its resources are legal standing and public voice. Under the state act's private right of action, its members can sue the city for failing to enforce, and the district's testimony shapes council debate. It also funds private security patrols.
6. The continuum of care lead agency. Its resources are money and data. It administers federal homeless assistance funds and runs coordinated entry, the system that assesses and prioritizes people for housing, following federal requirements (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2017). Its prioritization rules decide who reaches housing first.
7. The city council. Its resources are rules and money. It can amend the camping ordinance and sets the budget for outreach and storage, but it acts slowly and has deferred to the manager on enforcement method.
8. The county health officer. Her resources are rules, through public health orders, and data. Her written recommendation triggered the riverside clearance, and she controls the cold-weather protocol that opens warming centers.
9. The Health Care for the Homeless program. Its resources are data and public voice. It holds the frostbite and amputation figures and can testify with clinical authority, but it controls no rules, money for enforcement, or beds.
10. The lived-experience advisory board. Its resource is public voice. Its members speak from experience of unsheltered homelessness and can influence how proposals are received, but it has no formal authority.
On the question of how enforcement happens, the people who control shelter intake rules matter more than most of the people who were elected.
What the Map Shows
Three findings stand out. First, influence over enforcement method sits mostly with non-elected actors: the city manager, the shelter operators and the police chief. The council, often assumed to be the key decision maker, ranks seventh on this question. Second, the resources that matter most for the people affected, beds and intake rules, are controlled by organizations that are rarely at the table when enforcement is debated. Third, the parties with the most direct knowledge of the harm, the health program and people with lived experience, hold only data and voice, the weakest resources on the map.
Positions as Well as Power
Influence is only half of a stakeholder analysis; position is the other. The business district and the police chief favor fast clearances. The health officer supports clearances when disease risk is high but has not objected to adding health staff. The shelter operators have said publicly that they want more people indoors, which gives them a reason to reconsider rules that keep people out. The city manager has described herself as bound by the state act, which suggests she may welcome a directive that shows how to comply more humanely. The council is divided. The continuum of care agency, the health program and the advisory board all favor sequencing. Read together with the resource rankings, these positions suggest that the most promising coalition joins the health program and advisory board with the shelter operators and the city manager, two high-influence parties whose stated goals align with change.
Where a Nurse Practitioner Can Apply Pressure
A DNP-prepared nurse practitioner in the Health Care for the Homeless program cannot change state law or control beds, but the map shows three points where pressure can work. The first is the city manager, who can sign a directive within her own authority; the Unit 6 brief is addressed to her for that reason. The second is the county health officer, whose cold-weather protocol and clearance recommendations are within her office's control; the Unit 9 letter is addressed to her. The third is the shelter operators, whose intake rules could change without any public vote if they saw evidence that the rules keep people outdoors in dangerous cold. Bringing the outreach logs to the operators' boards may be the highest-yield step on the map.
Limits
The rankings are the author's judgment, based on the resources each party controls and on the city's recent decisions. Influence changes: a lawsuit by the business district, a new city manager or a harsh winter could reorder the map. The analysis also does not capture informal alliances, such as those between the business district and council members, which can amplify influence beyond formal resources.
References
Brugha, R., & Varvasovszky, Z. (2000). Stakeholder analysis: A review. Health Policy and Planning, 15(3), 239-246. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/15.3.239
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, 603 U.S. 520 (2024).
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2017). Notice establishing additional requirements for a continuum of care centralized or coordinated assessment system (Notice CPD-17-01).
The Purdue Global NU733 Unit 8 instructions
For Unit 8 you map the stakeholders who shape a policy and analyze their power. Most versions want each party identified, its sources of influence described, its position noted, a ranking or grid, and a plan for where advocacy should focus. A one-page matrix and about 1,500 words is common. Faculty reward maps that define influence precisely, include the people affected with whatever power they hold, rank parties on the specific question rather than on general prominence, and draw practical conclusions for the writer's own advocacy. Eight to twelve parties is usually enough for a municipal issue, and each should hold a real lever over the decision rather than an interest alone.
Inside the NU733 Unit 8 example
The method section defines seven resource types and explains that parties are ranked on influence over how enforcement happens. Ten parties are then described in rank order, from the legislature and shelter operators to the city manager, police chief, business district, continuum of care agency, council, health officer, health program and lived-experience board, each with its specific lever. The highlighted sentence states that bed rules outrank titles. Three findings follow, a section adds each party's position and suggests a coalition, and a section names three places a nurse practitioner can press: the city manager, the health officer and the shelter operators' boards. A limits section notes that rankings are judgments and can change.
Where the points sit in the NU733 Unit 8 rubric
Stakeholder maps are usually scored on completeness, definition of power, accuracy, analysis and practical use. Completeness earns credit when every party with a lever is included, including affected people. Definition of power rewards a clear method, such as sorting by resource, applied consistently. Accuracy is judged on correct descriptions of each party's authority. Analysis is credited when the map yields findings that are not obvious from titles alone. Practical use scores well when the map leads to specific advocacy targets tied to the writer's role. Many rubrics also reward a section on positions as well as power, since influence without a stated position gives an advocate little guidance on where to press.
NU733 Unit 8 help from the desk
A frequent weakness is ranking parties by title, which puts elected officials first even when others control the outcome. Another is leaving out the people affected or listing them with no power at all. Some maps describe influence vaguely, as high or low, without saying what gives it. Others omit positions, so the reader cannot tell allies from opponents. Many end without saying what the writer will do. And rankings are often presented as facts rather than judgments. Define influence by resource, include every party with a lever, rank on the specific question, add positions, and finish with the two or three places where your own pressure could work.
Get an NU733 Unit 8 example written to your instructions
List the parties your Unit 8 map should cover, or name the policy and let them be identified; add the prompt, the rubric and whatever format your section specifies. Within 24-48h you receive a free first custom sample written to those instructions, each party placed by a lever it demonstrably holds. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More NU733 papers and DNP samples
- NU733 Unit 1: Issue Analysis, Homelessness Deaths
- NU733 Unit 2: Discussion Post, Costs of a Clearance
- NU733 Unit 3: Ethical Framework Paper, Kass
- NU733 Unit 4: Population Profile, Unsheltered Adults
- NU733 Unit 5: Statute Analysis, Public Camping Act
- NU733 Unit 6: Policy Brief to the City Manager
- NU733 Unit 7: Seminar Reflection, Involuntary Holds
- NU733 Unit 9: Advocacy Letter
- NU733 Unit 10: Position Paper
- NU713 Unit 8: Secondary Data Appraisal, CDC WONDER
- NU703 Unit 8: Professional Organization Analysis, ONS
NU733 Unit 8 questions, answered
Why sort stakeholders by resource instead of using a power-interest grid?
A power-interest grid is common and acceptable, but it tends to rank parties by general prominence. Sorting by resource, such as rules, money, beds or legal standing, forces each placement to name the specific lever a party holds over the question at hand. If your prompt requires a grid, you can still justify each position with the resource behind it.
Should the people affected by a policy appear on the map?
Yes, and with whatever power they actually hold. People living unsheltered usually have little formal authority, but they may hold voice through advisory boards, testimony or litigation, and they hold knowledge no other party has. Leaving them off, or treating them only as the policy's subject, misrepresents the field and is frequently marked down.
How many stakeholders should the map include?
Enough to cover every party that holds a lever over the decision, usually eight to twelve for a municipal issue. More is not better if the extra parties hold nothing relevant. What matters is that no party with real control is missing and that each placement rests on evidence rather than on title or public profile.
Where can I find a free NU733 Unit 8 sample paper?
The complete NU733 Unit 8 stakeholder power map appears on this page, with its method, ten parties ranked by resource, three findings, positions and a possible coalition, three pressure points for a nurse practitioner and limits, plus three references. Mapping help for the issue you are working on is available.
Why do shelter operators rank so high in NU733 Unit 8?
They control beds and intake rules. Since an offer of shelter is the city's only practical alternative to outdoor sleeping, rules on couples, pets and curfews decide whether that offer is usable, which shapes enforcement more than most elected officials can.