| Course | HCD 303 Global Health Care Systems |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 1 |
| Paper type | Team charter |
| Length | About 440 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | BS in Health Care Administration and Policy |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HCD 303 Module 1
Four People, One Comparison: A Team Charter for Analyzing Germany's Health System Against the United States
Student Name
BS in Health Care Administration and Policy, Arizona State University
HCD 303: Global Health Care Systems
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Four People, One Comparison: A Team Charter for Analyzing Germany's Health System Against the United States
Team and Case
Team members: four students, referred to here as Members A through D. Case: Germany's statutory health insurance system compared with the United States. We chose Germany because it achieves universal coverage through multiple competing insurers rather than a single government payer, which makes it a closer and more useful comparison for the United States than single-payer systems (Busse et al., 2017), and because the gap in spending between the two countries is large (Papanicolas et al., 2018).
Purpose
To produce an 8 to 10 page comparative analysis and a 6 to 8 slide presentation that are accurate, evidence-based and written in one consistent voice.
Roles
| Member | Paper domain | Presentation role | Additional duty |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | Structure and financing | Slides on structure and financing | Editor for draft 1 |
| B | Access | Slides on coverage and access | Reference manager (APA) |
| C | Quality and health outcomes | Slides on outcomes and data | Editor for draft 2 |
| D | Policy implications and innovations | Opening and closing slides | Timekeeper and submitter |
Timeline
Week 2: charter submitted; each member lists three sources for their domain. Week 3: section drafts posted to the shared folder. Week 4: Editor A merges draft 1; all members comment within 48 hours. Week 5: revisions; Editor C produces draft 2 and checks consistency of data. Week 6: final paper submitted by Member D; presentation outline agreed. Week 7: slides completed, rehearsal on video call, presentation recorded and submitted.
Communication
Day-to-day questions go to our team chat. Documents: a shared folder with one master file for the paper. Meetings: 30-minute video call every Sunday evening. Response time: within 24 hours on weekdays. Decisions: by consensus where possible, otherwise by majority vote recorded in the chat.
Availability
Two members work full time and are available evenings Arizona time; one member lives on the East Coast and is available early mornings Arizona time; one member works weekend shifts. The Sunday call time was chosen because all four are free.
Conflict Resolution
New teams commonly pass through a stage of friction before settling into productive work (Tuckman, 1965), so we agreed on steps in advance.
1. Raise the concern directly with the person in a private message within 48 hours.
2. If it is not resolved, bring it to the Sunday call, where the team agrees on a specific fix and deadline.
3. After two missed deadlines with no word from a member, we email the instructor, knowing the peer evaluation will record it.
Signatures
All four members confirm the charter by posting "I agree" in the team discussion before submission.
References
Busse, R., Blumel, M., Knieps, F., & Barnighausen, T. (2017). Statutory health insurance in Germany: A health system shaped by 135 years of solidarity, self-governance, and competition. The Lancet, 390(10097), 882-897. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31280-1
Papanicolas, I., Woskie, L. R., & Jha, A. K. (2018). Health care spending in the United States and other high-income countries. JAMA, 319(10), 1024-1039. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.1150
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022100
Reading the HCD 303 Module 1 assignment instructions
HCD 303 asks each team to sign a team contract and then prepare a group charter before starting its two group projects, the Comparative Health System Analysis paper and the Create Your Own Healthcare System presentation. The syllabus lists what the charter must settle: the case the group will study, each member's role, a timeline for completion, how the group will communicate, when members are available and how conflicts will be resolved. The charter is worth 10 points and the contract 5, and a peer evaluation at the end of the projects, worth 15 points, assesses each member's contribution. Treat the charter as a working plan the team will actually use, not a formality.
How the HCD 303 Module 1 example is put together
Organized under the headings the syllabus lists, the sample starts with the team and its chosen case, with a sentence and a source explaining why Germany suits a comparison with the United States. A purpose statement restates the two deliverables. A roles table assigns each member a paper domain, a matching presentation role and an extra duty such as editing or reference management. The timeline sets weekly milestones through both deliverables, with named editors for each draft. Communication rules cover channels, meeting times, response times and decision rules. Availability is described honestly across work schedules and time zones, and a three-step conflict process closes the charter, linked to the peer evaluation.
Reading the HCD 303 Module 1 grading rubric
Ten points are available for the charter under the Canvas rubric. Charters are typically credited for a clear case selection with a reason, specific roles that divide the work fairly, a realistic timeline with milestones before the due dates, concrete communication methods and response expectations, honest availability and a conflict process with steps. Charters lose credit when roles are vague ("everyone writes"), when the timeline lists only final due dates, when communication rules have no response times and when the conflict section says only "we will talk it out." Because the peer evaluation at the end refers back to commitments made here, specific roles also protect members who do their share. A charter that names who submits the final files avoids last-minute confusion that costs the whole team.
HCD 303 Module 1 help: mistakes that cost marks
The weakest part of most charters is the timeline. Put interim deadlines, such as section drafts and an editing week, well before the paper is due. Give each person a named domain and a named extra duty so no task is orphaned. Choose a meeting time everyone can actually attend. Write conflict steps that escalate gradually and name when the instructor will be contacted. Have every member confirm the charter in writing. Choose your case early enough to gather sources. The desk can review your draft charter for gaps if you share it. Keep the charter where every member can edit it, and revisit it at the midpoint.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HCD 303 and BS in Health Care Administration and Policy sample papers
- HCD 303 Module 2: Comparative Health System Analysis: Germany and the United States
- HCD 303 Module 3: Create Your Own Healthcare System: Group Presentation
- HCD 400 Module 7: Module 7 Assignment: Critical Review
- HCD 330 Module 1: News Update Initial Discussion: Medicare Drug Price Negotiation
- HCD 420 Module 4: Writing Workshop 4: Public Health and Health Care Collaboration
- HCD 404 Module 1: Telemedicine and Telehealth Scenario Paper
HCD 303 Module 1 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HCD 303 Module 1 sample paper?
The HCD 303 Module 1 sample on this page is a full team charter for a comparative analysis of Germany's health system and the U.S. system.
What must the HCD 303 team charter include?
The chosen case, individual roles, a timeline, communication methods, availability and conflict resolution strategies.
How much is the HCD 303 charter worth?
The team charter is worth 10 points and the team contract 5; a peer evaluation at the end is worth 15.
Why compare Germany with the United States?
Germany reaches universal coverage through competing insurers funded by contributions, a model closer to the U.S. mix of payers than single-payer systems.
What are the HCD 303 group projects?
An 8 to 10 page Comparative Health System Analysis paper and a 6 to 8 slide Create Your Own Healthcare System presentation.