HC 405 Herzing University Performance Improvement Data Paper
HC 405 Herzing University Performance Improvement Data Paper
Unit 7 Assignment 1 – Performance Improvement Data
Submit Assignment
Due Sunday by 11:59pm
Points 35
Submitting a text entry box, a website url, a media recording, or a file upload
ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED SOLUTION PAPERS
Because performance improvement activities are information intensive, organizations must provide the proper resources and systems to support improvements. It’s important to recognize that PI programs need to meet accreditation standards such as The Joint Commission and Medicare and Medicaid Conditions of Participation, which require access to national comparative data collections. This assignment, based on a textbook case study, will help students to understand Joint Commission information management standards by analyzing how a scenario relates those standards.
Instructions
Your assignment will focus on the Case study on pages 444-447. After reading Chapter 17 and the Case Study, please complete the tasks at the end of the case study:
Review the collected data
Assign the appropriate quality code using the key provided in figure 17.5
Analyze the data:
Which code is most common?
Is there one service that seems to be a problem?
What can you conclude from the data?
Establish a plan. How you are going to fix the problem?
Your submission should be a minimum of two pages but does not require APA style or outside research.
Be sure to fully address each of the questions in the assignment. If you do use outside research, list your references in proper APA style.
Rubric
Unit 7 Assignment 1 – Performance Improvement Data
Unit 7 Assignment 1 – Performance Improvement Data
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
15.0 ptsLevel 5
Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors.
13.5 ptsLevel 4
Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement, thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, and problem statement is adequately detailed.
12.0 ptsLevel 3
Begins to demonstrate the ability to construct a problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, but problem statement is superficial.
10.5 ptsLevel 2
Demonstrates a limited ability in identifying a problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement or related contextual factors.
9.0 ptsLevel 1
Demonstrates the ability to explain contextual factors but does not provide a defined statement.
0.0 ptsLevel 0
There is no evidence of a defined statement.
15.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysisPRICE-P
15.0 ptsLevel 5
Organizes and compares evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.
13.5 ptsLevel 4
Organizes and interprets evidence to reveal patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.
12.0 ptsLevel 3
Organizes and describes evidence according to patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.
10.5 ptsLevel 2
Organizes evidence, but the organization is not effective in revealing patterns, differences, or similarities.
9.0 ptsLevel 1
Describes evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus.
0.0 ptsLevel 0
Lists evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus.
15.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
3.0 ptsLevel 5
The paper exhibits an excellent command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling.
2.0 ptsLevel 4
The paper exhibits a good command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics or spelling with minor grammatical errors that impair the flow of communication.
1.0 ptsLevel 3
The paper exhibits a basic command of written English language conventions. The paper has minor errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impact the flow of communication.
0.0 ptsLevel 0
The paper does not demonstrate command of written English language conventions. The paper has multiple errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader difficulty in discerning the meaning.
0.0 ptsLevel 1
The paper exhibits little command of written English language conventions. The paper has errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader to stop and reread parts of the writing to discern meaning.
0.0 ptsLevel 2
The paper exhibits a limited command of written English language conventions. The paper has frequent errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impede the flow of communication.
3.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPAPRICE-I
2.0 ptsLevel 5
The required APA elements are all included with correct formatting, including in-text citations and references.
1.0 ptsLevel 4
The required APA elements are all included with minor formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.
0.0 ptsLevel 0
There is little to no evidence of APA formatting and/or there are no in-text citations and/or references.
0.0 ptsLevel 1
Several APA elements are missing. The errors in formatting demonstrate a limited understanding of APA guidelines, in-text-citations, and references.
0.0 ptsLevel 2
The required APA elements are not all included and/or there are major formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.
0.0 ptsLevel 3
The required APA elements are all included with multiple formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.
2.0 pts
Total Points: 35.0
PreviousNext
