Module 3 Assignment: Exploring EBP Quality Improvement
For this Assignment you will explore key components of a quality improvement initiative, which will be the focus of the DNP Project required for your doctoral program. This Assignment is designed to help you begin investigating potential practice sites for your project, possible practice problems to address based on your interests and the needs of specific sites, and how to identify and approach stakeholders with whom to work and align in a health care setting.
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
NURS 8114 Module 3 Assignment: Exploring EBP Quality Improvement | Homework Solution
Just from $13/Page
You will begin the Assignment this week and submit it by Day 7 of Week 6. The topic focus on the science of translation and Learning Resources in Weeks 5 and 6 will further support development of this Assignment.
Important Note: Your activities in this Module 3 Assignment are exploratory and hypothetical only. You should not begin any formal contact with regard to your DNP Project. The DNP project is a translation of evidence initiative addressing a gap in practice or a practice change identified by the project site. Review the project resources for types of projects: https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/research-center/program-documents/dnp-8702-8703Links to an external site.
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
TO PREPARE: Exploring EBP Quality Improvement
- Review the readings and media in the Week 4 Learning Resources. Pay particular attention to how Quality Improvement (QI) is defined in the DNP Glossary and Chapter 8 of the White, Dudley-Brown, and Terhaar text.
- Identify three potential sites within your community for a quality improvement project. These might be a health care organization in which you practice and two other locations. For example, you might practice in a large organization and consider a small clinic and a skilled care facility as other potential settings for your project.
- Based on your practice experience, consider potential practice problems as the focus of an EBP Quality Improvement initiative. Investigate the three practice sites you have identified for specific needs, including by making informal contact with staff members you know. (Remember the importance of confidentiality in any such discussions.)
- Note:You may continue to address the same practice issue that was the focus of your Discussions in Weeks 2 and 3. You may also draw on the Week 4 blog to consider a broad focus on EBP and then drill down on specific practice problems to address through application of EBP. The PET model described in the video, An Evidence-Based Practice Model, also provides examples for identifying practice issues to address.
- Research the literature for scholarly articles to support developing a quality improvement project that applies evidence-based practice to address specific practice problems. Aim to identify at least three scholarly articles to support this Assignment.
- Based on the practice problems you are identifying, investigate your potential practice sites for key stakeholders that would be involved in a quality improvement initiative. Using website and other information available to you for each site, explore for:
- A department that leads quality improvement or, if one does not exist, who within the organization would approve a quality improvement initiative;
- Stakeholder titles, from the highest level of required approval to health care associates who would implement QI changes in the practice of patient care.
- From your research into potential sites and practice problems, choose one practice problem and one site as your focus. Based on your target practice problem and selected site, identify an implementation framework and consider the steps or process required for an EBP QI project that would follow this framework/model. Note:Week 5 Learning Resources and Discussion will provide strategic support.
- Outline how you would present the elements of your proposed QI project to stakeholders to gain their approval. Reminder:Your purpose is to prepare for a future presentation to stakeholders. Do not contact stakeholders for this Assignment.
- Use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template, provided in the Learning Resources, for developing a presentation to stakeholders. The template offers options in a cover slide and format options for other slides, to enable you to customize your presentation. Also refer to the handout, Preparing for an EBP QI Presentation to Stakeholders at a Practice Site, in the Learning Resources for guidance.
THE ASSIGNMENT Exploring EBP Quality Improvement
Part 1: Key Project Elements
In a paper of 6–8 pages, plus cover page and references page, include the following:
- Describe the three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project. For each health care setting, identify the following defining features: patient population, mission, public or private entity, single institution or member of a corporation, and others you identify as significant.
- Compare the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide examples.
- Explain the practice problems that you explored based on your interests and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated.
- Explain why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide examples.
- For each health care setting, describe the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results.
- Compare similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings.
- Identify the one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem you have selected as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders, and explain your choices.
Part 2: Implementation Science Presentation Exploring EBP Quality Improvement
Develop a PowerPoint presentation of 3–5 slides, plus cover and reference slides, to inform a set of potential stakeholders at the practice site you have identified for a proposed EBP QI project. Although you will not make your presentation, it should be authentic to the purpose and include the following:
- Introduce the framework or model you have selected for the EBP QI project and your reasoning. (1–2 slides)
- Present a draft of the proposed practice problem. Include notes for each slide describing points you would make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. (2–3 slides). NOTE:The final decision of your practice issue is made in the project mentoring course, NURS 8702, with your project committee and organization.
There is no submission this week.
Module 3 Assignment is due by Day 7 of Week 6.
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632Links to an external site.). All papers submitted must use this formatting.
Read more on regulatory agency homework help on our blog
Rubric EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
| NURS_8114_Module3_Assignment_Rubric EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
| Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe Assignment: Part 1: Key Project Elements In a paper of 6–8 pages, plus cover page and references page, include the following:• Describe the three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project. For each health care setting, identify the following defining features: patient population, mission, public or private entity, single institution or member of a corporation, and others you identify as significant. |
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed description of three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project, with a clear, accurate, and detailed identification of all defining features and others you identify as significant. |
8 to >7.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate description of three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project, with clear and accurate identification of all defining features; there may not be others identified as significant. |
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate description of three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project, with vague and/or inaccurate identification of defining features and no others identified as significant. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
6 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague and inaccurate description of three or fewer health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project, with vague and inaccurate or missing identification of defining features and no others identified as significant. |
|
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Compare the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide examples. |
| 15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed comparison of the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. … The response fully synthesizes and integrates at least three scholarly resources that fully support the comparison provided. |
13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate comparison of the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. … The response synthesizes and integrates at least two scholarly resources that support the comparison provided. |
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate comparison of the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. … The response somewhat synthesizes and integrates two scholarly resources that may support the comparison provided. |
10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague, inaccurate, or missing comparison of the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. … The response minimally and/or inaccurately synthesizes and integrates one or two scholarly resources or is missing resources. |
|
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Explain the practice problems that you explored based on your interests and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. |
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed explanation of the practice problems that you explored based on your interests, and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. |
8 to >7.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate explanation of the practice problems that you explored based on your interests, and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. |
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate explanation of the practice problems that you explored based on your interests, and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
6 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague, inaccurate, or missing explanation of the practice problems that you explored based on your interests, and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. |
|
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Explain why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide examples. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
| 15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed explanation of why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. … The response fully synthesizes and integrates at least three scholarly resources that fully support the explanation provided. |
13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate explanation of why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. … The response synthesizes and integrates at least two scholarly resources that support the explanation provided. |
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate explanation of why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. … The response somewhat synthesizes and integrates two scholarly resources that may support the explanation provided. |
10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague, inaccurate, or missing explanation of why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. … The response minimally and/or inaccurately synthesizes and integrates one or two scholarly resources or is missing resources. |
|
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• For each health care setting, describe the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. |
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed description of the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. |
8 to >7.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate description of the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. |
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate description of the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
6 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague and inaccurate and/or missing descriptions of the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. |
|
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Compare similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
| 15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed comparison of similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. |
13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate comparison of similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. |
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate comparison of similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. |
10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague and inaccurate, or missing, comparison of similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. |
|
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Identify the one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem you have selected as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders, and explain your choices. |
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed identification of one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders; and a clear, accurate, and detailed explanation of those choices. |
8 to >7.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate identification of one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders; and a clear and accurate explanation of those choices. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate identification of one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders; and a vague and/or inaccurate explanation of one or both choices. |
6 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague and inaccurate, and/or missing identification of one proposed health care setting/practice site and/or one proposed practice problem as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders; and a vague and inaccurate and/or missing explanation of one or both choices. |
|
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe Assignment: Part 2: Implementation Science Presentation In a PowerPoint presentation of 3–5 slides, plus cover and references slides, include the following:• Introduce the framework or model you have selected for the EBP QI project and your reasoning. (1–2 slides) |
| 50 to >44.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed introduction of the framework or model you selected for the EBP QI project and clear, accurate, and detailed reasoning. |
44 to >39.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate introduction of the framework or model you selected for the EBP QI project and clear and accurate reasoning. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
39 to >34.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague or inaccurate introduction of the framework or model you selected for the EBP QI project and vague or inaccurate reasoning. |
34 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague and inaccurate or missing introduction of the framework or model you selected for the EBP QI project and vague, inaccurate, or missing reasoning. |
|
50 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Present a draft of the proposed practice problem. Include notes for each slide describing points you would make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. (2–3 slides) |
| 50 to >44.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed presentation of a draft of the proposed practice problem, including clear, accurate, and detailed notes for each slide describing points to make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. |
44 to >39.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate presentation of a draft of the proposed practice problem, including mostly clear and accurate notes for each slide describing points to make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
39 to >34.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague or inaccurate presentation of a draft of the proposed practice problem, including some vague or inaccurate notes for each slide describing points to make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. |
34 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague and inaccurate presentation of a draft of the proposed practice problem, with vague and inaccurate and/or mostly or completely missing notes for each slide describing points to make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. |
|
50 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: Paragraph/Sentence StructureParagraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity. |
4 to >3.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. |
2 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. |
|
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation. |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
4 to >3.5 pts
Good 80%–89%
Contains a few (1–2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Contains several (3–4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
|
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: The assignment contains parenthetical/in-text citations, and at least three evidence-based references are listed. |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least three evidence-based references are listed. |
4 to >3.5 pts
Good 80%–89%
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least two evidence-based references are listed. EXPLORING EBP QUALITY IMPROVEMENT |
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least one evidence-based references are listed. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Contains one or no parenthetical/in-text citations and no evidence-based references are listed. |
|
5 pts |
| Total Points: 200 |
EBP, IS, AND QI
For Week 6, you will continue to develop your EBP, IS, and QI Assignment, which you began in Week 4.
Note: This Assignment is hypothetical in nature and is unrelated to your Practicum and DNP Project. However, the work you put in on this Assignment can help inform your future Practicum and DNP Project.
Note: This is a two-part Assignment consisting of a written paper and a PowerPoint presentation, both of which are due by Day 7 of Week 6.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To Prepare Exploring EBP Quality Improvement
- Review the Learning Resources in Weeks 4, 5, and 6 that address evidence-based practice (EBP), implementation science (IS), and quality improvement (QI).
- Review the Learning Resources that address how to use PowerPoint and create narrated PowerPoint presentations.
- Identify threesites within your community that would benefit from an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) project.
- Based on your professional experience, consider practice or organization issues that would make sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) project initiative. Select one on which to focus for this Assignment. Note:You should consider practice or organization issues that you are particularly interested in or passionate about.
- Search the Walden Library and/or the internet to identify at least fiverecent, peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years) to support the development of a QI project that applies EBP to address the specific practice or organization issue you selected.
- Based on the practice or organization issue you selected, consider the key stakeholders who would be involved in a QI initiative at each of the three sites you selected. For each site, research the website and any other available information to identify:
- A department that leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the organization who would be in charge of approving such initiatives
- Titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (including the highest level of required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement changes in daily patient care)
- Select one of the three potential sites you identified that you think is the best option. Consider the factors on which you based your decision, as well as the mechanics of your decision-making process.
- Based on the practice or organization issue and the site you selected, consider various translation frameworks/models that may be a good fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative.
- Select onetranslation framework/model that you think is the best fit. Then, consider the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows this framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. Note: Utilize the Week 5 Learning Resources and Discussion to help you with this.
- Begin outlining how you would present the elements of your proposed evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative to key stakeholders of the site you selected in order to gain their approval. Note:You will use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template document, provided in the Learning Resources, to develop this presentation to stakeholders.
Read more on interrogation techniques homework help on our blog
Note: This is a two-part Assignment consisting of a written paper and a PowerPoint presentation. Both are due by Day 7 of Week 6.
The Assignment (3–5 pages) Exploring EBP Quality Improvement
Part 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper)
For Part 1, you will present the specifics of your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. You will also explain your decision-making processes.
In a 4- to 6-page paper (not including cover page and references page), do the following:
Site Selection (1–2 pages) Exploring EBP Quality Improvement
- Describe each of the threehealthcare settings you identified as the proposed site for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be sure to address the following questions about the site:
- Who is the patient population(s)?
- What is their mission?
- Is it a public or private entity?
- Is it a stand-alone organization or a member of a larger corporation?
- What other information about the site do you think is relevant and significant?
- Compare the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites in terms of their viability as the location for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be specific and provide examples.
- Identify the onesite of the three you selected. Describe the factors on which you based your decision. Explain your decision-making process.
Stakeholders (1 page)
- Identify the department that leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the organization who would be in charge of approving such an initiative.
- Identify the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (from the highest level of required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement changes in daily patient care).
Practice or Organization Issue (1 page)
- Describe the practice or organization issue you selected.
- Explain why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be specific, provide examples, and cite at least fiverecent, peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years).
Translation Framework/Model (1–2 page) Exploring EBP Quality Improvement
- Identify and briefly describe the onetranslation framework/model that you decided is the best fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative.
- Explain why you selected it amongst all the alternatives.
- Describe the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model you selected to translate research and evidence to improve practice.
Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 1 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. Use the College of Nursing Writing Template for your Assignment submission.
Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 1 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. The College of Nursing requires that all papers include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. Use the College of Nursing Writing TemplateLinks to an external site. for your Assignment submission.
Part 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation)
For Part 2, you will present your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) Initiative proposal to (hypothetical) stakeholders at the healthcare organization site. Your goal is to persuade and obtain approval for the EBP QI initiative you are proposing.
In a 6- to 10-slide PowerPoint presentation (not including cover and references slides), address the following:
- Title
- Include the title of your presentation and your name.
- Introduction (1–2 slides)
- Identify the healthcare organization site.
- Introduce and describe the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative you are proposing.
- The Issue (2–3 slides)
- Introduce and describe the practice or organization issue you aim to address.
- Explain the goal of the project. Why is it important?
- Translation Framework/Model (2–3 slides)
- Introduce and describe the translation framework/model you will use to implement the project.
- Explain how it will work. Why will it be effective to achieve your goal?
- Conclusion (1–2 slides)
- Summarize your presentation. Ask for stakeholder support.
- References
- Cite the sources you used to support your presentation.
Note: You must Include detailed speaker notes for each slide. Your speaker notes should explain all of the points you would make to the stakeholders to convince them to approve your proposal.
Also Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 2 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. Use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template document Download College of Nursing PowerPoint Template document for your Assignment submission.
| Part 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Site Selection Describe each of the three healthcare settings you identified as the proposed site for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Compare the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites in terms of their viability as the location for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Identify the one site of the three you selected. Describe the factors on which you based your decision. Explain your decision-making process. |
| 18 to >16.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
16 to >14.0 pts
Good
The response accurately describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
14 to >12.5 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
12.5 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
|
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Stakeholders Identify the department that leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the organization who would be in charge of approving such a QI initiative. Identify the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (from the highest level of required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement changes in daily patient care). |
| 18 to >16.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
16 to >14.0 pts
Good
The response accurately identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
14 to >12.5 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
12.5 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
|
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Practice or Organization Issue Describe the practice or organization issue you selected. Explain why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be specific, provide examples, and cite at least five recent, peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years). |
| 18 to >16.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly describes the practice or organization issue selected; explains why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
16 to >14.0 pts
Good
The response accurately describes the practice or organization issue selected; explains why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
14 to >12.5 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely describes the practice or organization issue selected; explains why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
12.5 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the practice or organization issue selected; explains why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
|
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Translation Framework/Model Identify and briefly describe the one translation framework/model that you decided is the best fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Explain why you selected your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative amongst all the alternatives. Describe the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model you selected to translate research and evidence to improve practice. |
| 18 to >16.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly identifies and describe the one translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
16 to >14.0 pts
Good
The response accurately identifies and describe the one translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
14 to >12.5 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains identifies and describe the one translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
12.5 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely identifies and describe the one translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
|
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Title and Introduction Include the title of your presentation and your name. Identify the healthcare organization site. Introduce and describe the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative you are proposing. |
| 15 to >13.5 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
13.5 to >12.0 pts
Good
The response accurately identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
12 to >10.5 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
10.5 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
|
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) The Issue Introduce and describe the practice or organization issue you aim to address. Explain the goal of the project. Why is it important? |
| 15 to >13.5 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly introduces and describes the practice or organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
13.5 to >12.0 pts
Good
The response accurately introduces and describes the practice or organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
12 to >10.5 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely introduces and describes the practice or organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
10.5 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely introduces and describes the practice or organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
|
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Translation Framework/Model Introduce and describe the translation framework/model you will use to implement the project. Explain how it will work. Why will it be effective to achieve your goal? |
| 15 to >13.5 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be effective to achieve the goal. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
13.5 to >12.0 pts
Good
The response accurately introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be effective to achieve the goal. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
12 to >10.5 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be effective to achieve the goal. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
10.5 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be effective to achieve the goal or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
|
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Conclusion and References Summarize your presentation. Ask for stakeholder support. Cite the sources you used to support your presentation. |
| 15 to >13.5 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
13.5 to >12.0 pts
Good
The response accurately summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
12 to >10.5 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. |
10.5 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
|
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
| 6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. 90% of the time. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
5 to >4.2 pts
Good
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. |
4.2 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 70% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 70% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
|
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation |
| 6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
5 to >4.0 pts
Good
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
4 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
|
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. |
| 6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct APA format with no errors. |
5 to >4.0 pts
Good
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. |
4 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
|
6 pts |
| Total Points: 150 |
