| Course | D025 Essentials of Advanced Nursing Roles and Interprofessional Practice |
|---|---|
| Task | Task 2 |
| Paper type | Policy advocacy ISBAR summary |
| Length | About 1,100 words, 3 pages |
| Format | APA 7 |
| School | Western Governors University (WGU) |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for D025 Task 2
Advocating for Policy Change: An ISBAR Summary to a State Legislator on Universal Third-Trimester Syphilis Screening
Student Name
Leavitt School of Health, Western Governors University
D025: Essentials of Advanced Nursing Roles and Interprofessional Practice, Task 2
Course Instructor
Month Day, Year
Advocating for Policy Change: An ISBAR Summary to a State Legislator on Universal Third-Trimester Syphilis Screening
ISBAR Summary
The summary below is written to the state representative for the composite county described in the population analysis, who serves on the House Health and Human Services Committee.
Identify
I am a registered nurse and graduate student in advanced nursing practice who works in prenatal care in your district, and I am writing on behalf of a local interprofessional team made up of obstetric clinicians, pharmacy, the county's disease intervention staff and community health workers.
Situation
Congenital syphilis cases in our county rose from 3 in 2019 to 17 in 2023. In most of the 2023 cases, the mother tested negative for syphilis at the first prenatal visit and was never tested again. State law currently requires testing only at the first prenatal visit, so these infections were not found until after birth.
Background
This is not a local anomaly. A national review of congenital syphilis cases reported to the CDC for 2022 counted 3,761 affected pregnancies, with stillbirths and infant deaths among them, and found that in close to nine of every ten cases the pregnant patient was not tested in time or not adequately treated (McDonald et al., 2023). The infection responds to penicillin, and a course started at least 30 days before delivery is considered adequate to protect the infant (Workowski et al., 2021). Federal guidance already calls for testing again early in the third trimester and at delivery when risk is higher, and obstetric guidance now advises testing every patient at all three points. State laws have been slow to follow that guidance, leaving many states, including ours, with rules that lag the science (Darcy et al., 2025).
Assessment
Our current law relies on a single early test and on clinicians recognizing risk. That approach misses people who acquire syphilis later in pregnancy and people whose risk is not disclosed because of stigma. Testing is inexpensive, and a single case of congenital syphilis can require a neonatal intensive care stay, long-term follow-up and, in the worst cases, lead to stillbirth or infant death. The cost of adding two tests is small compared with the harm and cost of one missed case.
Recommendation
I ask you to introduce or cosponsor a bill amending the state's prenatal testing statute to require syphilis testing for all pregnant patients at the first prenatal visit, in the third trimester between 28 and 32 weeks, and at delivery, with testing of the birthing parent required before an infant is discharged if no delivery result is on record. I also ask that the bill direct the state health department to report congenital syphilis cases by county each year so the law's effect can be measured. Our team would welcome the chance to meet with you or your staff and to provide testimony at a committee hearing.
Stakeholders
Supporters are likely to include the state nurses association, the state chapter of the obstetric professional organization, the state public health association, local health departments, children's hospitals whose neonatal units treat affected infants, and maternal health advocacy groups. Each can offer testimony, data or members' stories. Medicaid managed care plans may support the bill once they see the costs of neonatal treatment, but they will want to know how testing will be paid for.
Possible opponents or cautious parties include hospital associations concerned about delivery-unit workflow and liability if a test is missed, some clinicians who see mandates as interference with clinical judgment, and legislators wary of new requirements with fiscal notes. The advocacy team will answer these concerns directly: delivery testing can be built into admission order sets, the bill can include a good-faith provision for documented refusals, and the fiscal note should be small because testing is already covered as a prenatal service.
Patients and families are stakeholders too, and their voice matters most. The team will invite a parent whose infant was treated for congenital syphilis, if they are willing, to share their experience with the representative's staff privately, with full consent and no identifying detail made public. Local groups that work with people living unhoused or using substances will be asked how the law could be carried out without discouraging anyone from seeking prenatal care, since a testing requirement that feels punitive could drive the people at highest risk further from the clinic.
Advocacy Strategies
The advanced professional nurse will use three strategies. First, coalition building: the nurse will ask the state nurses association's legislative committee to adopt the bill as a priority and will recruit two physician partners and a community health worker to testify alongside nurses, since legislators respond to a united clinical voice. Second, direct communication: after sending the ISBAR summary, the nurse will request a 20-minute meeting with the representative's health aide, bring a one-page fact sheet with county and state data, and follow up within a week. Third, public education: the team will write an opinion piece for the regional newspaper and share short, de-identified stories on the nurses association's social media during the legislative session, because public attention helps move a bill through committee.
Throughout, the nurse will work through the interprofessional team built in the first part of this work, using its monthly meetings to assign tasks, share responses from legislators and adjust the plan. The nurse's credibility rests on clinical experience and data, so every message will pair a number with a patient-centered reason.
Evaluating the Policy
If the bill passes, its effect would be measured in three ways. The process measure is the proportion of pregnant patients with documented third-trimester and delivery syphilis tests, drawn from the state's prenatal and delivery records. The outcome measure is the annual number and rate of congenital syphilis cases by county, reported by the health department as required by the bill. A secondary measure is the proportion of pregnant patients diagnosed with syphilis who complete treatment at least 30 days before delivery. The team would ask for a report to the legislature two years after the law takes effect.
Conclusion
Congenital syphilis is preventable, and the county's cases show exactly where the current system fails: a single early test in a population whose risk continues through pregnancy. An ISBAR summary that asks for a specific change, a coalition that can speak for it and a plan to measure its effect give the advanced professional nurse a realistic path from caring for individual patients to changing the conditions that harm them.
References
Darcy, R., Ayala, L., Quinlan, M., Brikshavana, D., Statton, A., Tabidze, I., Cejtin, H., Jao, J., Sutton, S., Madden, N., Espinal, M., & Yee, L. M. (2025). Prevention of congenital syphilis: The current state of legislation and public health guidelines. Pregnancy, 1(5), e70110. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmf2.70110
McDonald, R., O'Callaghan, K., Torrone, E., Barbee, L., Grey, J., Jackson, D., Woodworth, K., Olsen, E., Ludovic, J., Mayes, N., Chen, S., Wingard, R., Johnson Jones, M., Drame, F., Bachmann, L., Romaguera, R., & Mena, L. (2023). Vital signs: Missed opportunities for preventing congenital syphilis, United States, 2022. MMWR: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 72(46), 1269-1274. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7246e1
Workowski, K. A., Bachmann, L. H., Chan, P. A., Johnston, C. M., Muzny, C. A., Park, I., Reno, H., Zenilman, J. M., & Bolan, G. A. (2021). Sexually transmitted infections treatment guidelines, 2021. MMWR: Recommendations and Reports, 70(4), 1-187. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.rr7004a1
What the D025 Task 2 instructions ask
The second D025 task asks you to advocate for a policy change addressing the issue from Task 1. Most versions ask for an ISBAR summary, identify, situation, background, assessment and recommendation, addressed to a decision maker, followed by stakeholders, advocacy strategies and how the policy would be evaluated. The summary should be concise and persuasive, written for someone outside healthcare. The evaluator reads for a specific, feasible recommendation, evidence that supports it, stakeholders on both sides and strategies an advanced nurse could actually use to move the policy. The recommendation should fit the decision maker's actual authority.
How this D025 Task 2 example is built
The sample begins with a short note on the audience, a state representative on the health committee. Each ISBAR element has its own heading. Identify establishes credibility in one sentence. Situation gives the local numbers. Background adds national data. Assessment explains the gap in current law. Recommendation asks for a specific amendment. The sections after the ISBAR list supporters and likely opponents, describe three advocacy strategies with the first steps for each, and set process, outcome and equity measures so the legislator knows how success would be judged. The conclusion restates the ask in two sentences. Stakeholders are sorted into supporters and likely opponents, each with the reason for their position.
Where the D025 Task 2 rubric puts the marks
D025 Task 2 aspects are assessed individually at competent, approaching competence or not evident. ISBAR aspects check that each element is present and does its job for the intended audience. A recommendation aspect looks for a specific policy change supported by evidence. A stakeholder aspect wants supporters and opponents identified with their interests. An advocacy strategies aspect asks for actions an advanced nurse could take. An evaluation aspect looks for measures of the policy's effect. Evaluators reward concise, persuasive writing suited to a policymaker, along with correct APA citations. Evaluators look for a summary brief enough for a busy legislator and an ask specific enough that the legislator knows exactly what to introduce. Measures that include equity, such as testing rates by insurance type, strengthen the evaluation aspect.
D025 Task 2 help: what sends it back
ISBAR summaries come back most often because they are written for clinicians rather than legislators. Cut jargon and lead with what the reader can do. Second, recommendations are vague, such as improving screening. Name the statute or rule and the change. Third, only supporters are listed; name likely opponents and their concerns so the plan can answer them. Fourth, advocacy strategies are general. Describe the first concrete step for each, such as asking a professional association to adopt a position. Finally, keep the summary short. Decision makers read quickly, and a focused page with a clear ask is more persuasive than a long essay.
Get a D025 Task 2 example written to your instructions
Send the D025 instructions and rubric from your course of study, plus the health issue and policy you want to advocate for. We write a custom ISBAR summary and advocacy plan to those exact aspects and return it in 24-48h. The first custom sample is free.
More D025 papers
Other Nursing (MSN) sample papers
- C919 Task 1 Facilitation Plan
- D158 Task 2 Implementation Plan
- C922 Task 2 Program Response Plan
- C947 Task 1 Education Program Design
D025 Task 2 questions, answered
Who should the D025 ISBAR be addressed to?
Someone who can make the change you are recommending. For a state law, that is usually a state legislator or a committee chair; for a county policy, a county health officer or board. Name the role and explain why that person has the authority to act.
How long should the ISBAR summary be in D025?
Short. Each ISBAR element is usually a few sentences, with the recommendation stated as a specific action. The detail belongs in the stakeholder and strategy sections that follow.
What happens if my D025 Task 2 comes back as not competent?
You revise the aspects named and resubmit. Returns usually concern a vague recommendation or a stakeholder list without analysis, and both are fixed in a paragraph.
What policy change works best for D025 Task 2?
One specific enough to act on and linked to your Task 1 data, such as amending a testing statute. The sample asks a legislator to require third-trimester syphilis screening for all pregnant patients.
Where can I find a free D025 Task 2 sample paper?
The complete ISBAR summary and advocacy plan are on this page with a note on each part. For a summary on your own issue, send the D025 instructions and your first custom version is free.