Description
When was albert einstein born ?
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.
Explanation & Answer
Review
Review
Anonymous
Great study resource, helped me a lot.
Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4
24/7 Homework Help
Stuck on a homework question? Our verified tutors can answer all questions, from basic math to advanced rocket science!
Most Popular Content
Lamar University Outsourcing Research Paper
Pick one of the following terms for your research: collaboration, divisional structure, functional structure, horizontal s ...
Lamar University Outsourcing Research Paper
Pick one of the following terms for your research: collaboration, divisional structure, functional structure, horizontal structure, matrix structure, outsourcing, reengineering, teams, vertical linkages, or virtual team.
PBSC Wk 10 Trustworthiness & Credibility of Your Qualitative Research Paper
Section A Post an explanation of how you ensure the quality, trustworthiness, and credibility of your qualitative researc ...
PBSC Wk 10 Trustworthiness & Credibility of Your Qualitative Research Paper
Section A Post an explanation of how you ensure the quality, trustworthiness, and credibility of your qualitative research. Provide examples of specific techniques and strategies. Use your Learning Resources as well as the article you found in your search to support your explanation. Use proper APA format, citations, and referencing. Sample Quality Qualitative investigations are commonly compared with quantitative investigations and ethical concerns are not an exception. The concepts of validity and reliability are common to both methodologies but are addressed differently (Shenton, 2004). According to Shenton (2004) qualitative researchers can incorporate measures to address risks to trustworthiness by carefully planning and executing according to the following concepts: credibility (instead of internal validity); transferability (instead of external validity/generalizability); dependability (instead of reliability); and confirmability (instead of objectivity). A quality qualitative study aims to address all issues listed above. Trustworthiness To ensure trustworthiness, qualitative research ethical concerns should be addressed in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Credibility Credibility addresses the central issue of how congruent the findings of the research are with reality (Shenton, 2004). In order to ensure credibility, Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Shenton (2014) details 14 mechanisms to ensure credibility: 1) the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in general and in information science in particular; 2) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection dialogues take place; 3) random sampling of individuals to serve as informants; 4)triangulation; 5)tactics to help ensure honesty in informants when contributing data; 6) iterative questioning; 7) negative case analysis; 8) frequent debriefing sessions between the researcher and his or her superiors; 9) peer scrutiny; 10) the researcher’s reflective commentary; 11) background, qualifications and experience of the investigator; 12) member checks; 13)detailed description of the phenomenon under scrutiny; and 14) examination of previous research findings to assess the degree to which the project’s results are congruent with those of past studies. Examples The research purpose of my project would be to explore in depth, through a qualitative methodology, the experience of persons living in the Bahamas that have symptoms of anxiety and how they were able or not to find access to a diagnosis and treatment options, according to their socioeconomic status and culturally shaped beliefs regarding mental health. My sample is composed by university students and I would gather data through focus groups. I would like to focus my investigation into the society where I live and work in the past 9 years: Nassau, the Bahamas. In order to ensure quality through credibility and trustworthiness, I would carefully consider researcher bias and my rapport with students and also gatekeepers. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). I have been living and working as a psychotherapist in the country for the last 9 years with a certain extensive exposure due to my work in a non-profit organization that allows me to conduct large community groups (Abernethy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), my private practice and some speaking engagements (including TV interviews). I also personally and professionally interact with persons of the University Psychology Department as well as some students, although I have never worked there. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Shenton (2004) list of 14 strategies to increase credibility are helpful and I can see that I already have some of them, as for example, the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in general and in information science in particular, and the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection dialogues take place (Shenton, 2004). Reflections Another challenge to be considered is researcher bias and my rapport with students and also gatekeepers. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). I have been living and working as a psychotherapist in the country for the last 9 years with a certain extensive exposure due to my work in a non-profit organization that allows me to conduct large community groups (Abernethy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), my private practice and some speaking engagements (including TV interviews). I also personally and professionally interact with persons of the University Psychology Department as well as some students, although I have never worked there. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). My positionality also must be considered, as I am part of the racial minority (Caucasian), I am female, married, a mother, a foreigner (from South America) and I have lived and worked in three different countries and in three different languages. I have had the opportunity to accompany, professionally and personally, many persons struggling with depression and anxiety. I am constantly put in the position of being simultaneously an insider and an outsider to the phenomena I am engaged with and I have developed a heightened awareness of the role my positionality could play on my investigations. Is there anything else I should be aware of or plan accordingly in regard to my positionality that would enrichen my investigation and not compromise it? References Abernethy, A. D., Allen, D. F., & Carroll, M. A. (2018). Adapting Group Therapy to Address Real World Problems: Insights from Groups Offered in the Bahamas. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 68(1), 17-34. Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. Section B For this Discussion, you will explore the ethical challenges you will encounter as a qualitative researcher. Review Chapter 11 of the Ravitch and Carl course text and consider ethics in qualitative research.Use the Course Guide and Assignment Help to search for an article related to protecting privacy, minimizing harm, or respecting the shared experience of others. Post an explanation of the unique ethical challenges of protecting privacy, minimizing harm, and respecting the shared experience of others. Use your Learning Resources to support your explanation as well as the article you found in your search. Use proper APA format, citations, and referencing. Sample Protecting Privacy Protecting privacy has always been a central ethical issue, but it is even more relevant nowadays due to the new opportunities and challenges due to the use of the internet as a way of collecting data (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Although I am not planning on collecting data through the internet, I may find challenges in assuring anonymity. A common challenge for qualitative investigations is how to deal withconfidentiality and anonymity issues, but it could be even more relevant in smaller communities. New Providence, the capital of The Bahamas is home for 90% of the countries’ population of approximately 400 thousand people and the University of The Bahamas have less than 5 thousand students (University of The Bahamas, 2017). According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) while confidentiality refers to an individual’s privacy (how and what data related to participants will be revealed), anonymity refers to the impossibility for anyone to identify an individual within a sample of participants (data is aggregated and not individually contextualized or displayed). A practical way I could ensure confidentiality is through the use of pseudonyms, but it does not ensure anonymity, once many other details could reveal the participants identity. To ensure both, I should be careful not associate pseudonyms identifying information or associated it with data. But, as highlighted by Ravitch and Carl (2016), sometimes this is only possible in large sample study. If I only use pseudonyms but are not careful with other identifying characteristics, it would not be so difficult for participants to lose their anonymity. The use of focus group could add to those challenges and the only way to abide to ethical standards would be to discuss in a transparent way those challenges and explain how I am planning to deal with them with the participants (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Minimizing Harm The research purpose would be to explore in depth, through a qualitative methodology, the experience of persons living in the Bahamas that have symptoms of anxiety and how they were able or not to find access to a diagnosis and treatment options, according to their socioeconomic status and culturally shaped beliefs regarding mental health. My sample is composed by university students and I would gather data through focus groups. I would like to focus my investigation into the society where I live and work in the past 9 years: Nassau, the Bahamas.Changes in society have accelerated, creating different challenges and possibly impacting traditional lifestyles, including the area of mental health. According to Abernathy, Allen and Carroll (2018). The Bahamas has undergone a serious social fragmentation process, due to the widespread cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and significant international financial downturn since 2008. This social fragmentation would be manifested by burgeoning murder and violent crime rates, widespread angry outbursts and destruction of the family and community. Due to this worrisome scenario, investigations into the experiences of adults suffering from anxiety and depression symptomatologywould allow a better picture of the problems to be addressed for more effective design, implementation and evaluation of social and health programs for this population. But I must be careful with this population as not cause more harm, as for example, not to exacerbate the anxiety symptoms. I should create an experience through data collection that is very respectful and reassuring for participants. I also need to ensure that possibilities of access to mental health care would be available for participants that are suffering from anxiety symptoms and would like to do so. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Respecting Shared Experiences Another challenge to be considered is that my rapport participants are done with respect to the shared experiences. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). In dealing with mental health issues and possible stigma attached to it, the researcher has to be extra careful, especially when focus group are thought as the data collection method. To counterbalance the risks I would like to count on my experience with groups in the context of the Bahamas for the last 9 years (Abernathy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), as according to Shenton (2004) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection, as well as with the data collection methodology could prove protective and respectful of participants experiences. References Abernethy, A. D., Allen, D. F., & Carroll, M. A. (2018). Adapting Group Therapy to Address Real World Problems: Insights from Groups Offered in the Bahamas. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 68(1), 17-34 Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. University of The Bahamas (2017). UB at a glance. Retrieved from: http://www.ub.edu.bs/about-us/ub-at-a-glance/#1480568452998-07e893f1-7057 Please use the subheadingSection A Post an explanation of how you ensure the quality, trustworthiness, and credibility of your qualitative research. Provide examples of specific techniques and strategies. Use your Learning Resources as well as the article you found in your search to support your explanation. Use proper APA format, citations, and referencing. Sample Quality Qualitative investigations are commonly compared with quantitative investigations and ethical concerns are not an exception. The concepts of validity and reliability are common to both methodologies but are addressed differently (Shenton, 2004). According to Shenton (2004) qualitative researchers can incorporate measures to address risks to trustworthiness by carefully planning and executing according to the following concepts: credibility (instead of internal validity); transferability (instead of external validity/generalizability); dependability (instead of reliability); and confirmability (instead of objectivity). A quality qualitative study aims to address all issues listed above. Trustworthiness To ensure trustworthiness, qualitative research ethical concerns should be addressed in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Credibility Credibility addresses the central issue of how congruent the findings of the research are with reality (Shenton, 2004). In order to ensure credibility, Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Shenton (2014) details 14 mechanisms to ensure credibility: 1) the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in general and in information science in particular; 2) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection dialogues take place; 3) random sampling of individuals to serve as informants; 4)triangulation; 5)tactics to help ensure honesty in informants when contributing data; 6) iterative questioning; 7) negative case analysis; 8) frequent debriefing sessions between the researcher and his or her superiors; 9) peer scrutiny; 10) the researcher’s reflective commentary; 11) background, qualifications and experience of the investigator; 12) member checks; 13)detailed description of the phenomenon under scrutiny; and 14) examination of previous research findings to assess the degree to which the project’s results are congruent with those of past studies. Examples The research purpose of my project would be to explore in depth, through a qualitative methodology, the experience of persons living in the Bahamas that have symptoms of anxiety and how they were able or not to find access to a diagnosis and treatment options, according to their socioeconomic status and culturally shaped beliefs regarding mental health. My sample is composed by university students and I would gather data through focus groups. I would like to focus my investigation into the society where I live and work in the past 9 years: Nassau, the Bahamas. In order to ensure quality through credibility and trustworthiness, I would carefully consider researcher bias and my rapport with students and also gatekeepers. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). I have been living and working as a psychotherapist in the country for the last 9 years with a certain extensive exposure due to my work in a non-profit organization that allows me to conduct large community groups (Abernethy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), my private practice and some speaking engagements (including TV interviews). I also personally and professionally interact with persons of the University Psychology Department as well as some students, although I have never worked there. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Shenton (2004) list of 14 strategies to increase credibility are helpful and I can see that I already have some of them, as for example, the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in general and in information science in particular, and the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection dialogues take place (Shenton, 2004). Reflections Another challenge to be considered is researcher bias and my rapport with students and also gatekeepers. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). I have been living and working as a psychotherapist in the country for the last 9 years with a certain extensive exposure due to my work in a non-profit organization that allows me to conduct large community groups (Abernethy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), my private practice and some speaking engagements (including TV interviews). I also personally and professionally interact with persons of the University Psychology Department as well as some students, although I have never worked there. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). My positionality also must be considered, as I am part of the racial minority (Caucasian), I am female, married, a mother, a foreigner (from South America) and I have lived and worked in three different countries and in three different languages. I have had the opportunity to accompany, professionally and personally, many persons struggling with depression and anxiety. I am constantly put in the position of being simultaneously an insider and an outsider to the phenomena I am engaged with and I have developed a heightened awareness of the role my positionality could play on my investigations. Is there anything else I should be aware of or plan accordingly in regard to my positionality that would enrichen my investigation and not compromise it? References Abernethy, A. D., Allen, D. F., & Carroll, M. A. (2018). Adapting Group Therapy to Address Real World Problems: Insights from Groups Offered in the Bahamas. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 68(1), 17-34. Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. Section B For this Discussion, you will explore the ethical challenges you will encounter as a qualitative researcher. Review Chapter 11 of the Ravitch and Carl course text and consider ethics in qualitative research.Use the Course Guide and Assignment Help to search for an article related to protecting privacy, minimizing harm, or respecting the shared experience of others. Post an explanation of the unique ethical challenges of protecting privacy, minimizing harm, and respecting the shared experience of others. Use your Learning Resources to support your explanation as well as the article you found in your search. Use proper APA format, citations, and referencing. Sample Protecting Privacy Protecting privacy has always been a central ethical issue, but it is even more relevant nowadays due to the new opportunities and challenges due to the use of the internet as a way of collecting data (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Although I am not planning on collecting data through the internet, I may find challenges in assuring anonymity. A common challenge for qualitative investigations is how to deal withconfidentiality and anonymity issues, but it could be even more relevant in smaller communities. New Providence, the capital of The Bahamas is home for 90% of the countries’ population of approximately 400 thousand people and the University of The Bahamas have less than 5 thousand students (University of The Bahamas, 2017). According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) while confidentiality refers to an individual’s privacy (how and what data related to participants will be revealed), anonymity refers to the impossibility for anyone to identify an individual within a sample of participants (data is aggregated and not individually contextualized or displayed). A practical way I could ensure confidentiality is through the use of pseudonyms, but it does not ensure anonymity, once many other details could reveal the participants identity. To ensure both, I should be careful not associate pseudonyms identifying information or associated it with data. But, as highlighted by Ravitch and Carl (2016), sometimes this is only possible in large sample study. If I only use pseudonyms but are not careful with other identifying characteristics, it would not be so difficult for participants to lose their anonymity. The use of focus group could add to those challenges and the only way to abide to ethical standards would be to discuss in a transparent way those challenges and explain how I am planning to deal with them with the participants (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Minimizing Harm The research purpose would be to explore in depth, through a qualitative methodology, the experience of persons living in the Bahamas that have symptoms of anxiety and how they were able or not to find access to a diagnosis and treatment options, according to their socioeconomic status and culturally shaped beliefs regarding mental health. My sample is composed by university students and I would gather data through focus groups. I would like to focus my investigation into the society where I live and work in the past 9 years: Nassau, the Bahamas.Changes in society have accelerated, creating different challenges and possibly impacting traditional lifestyles, including the area of mental health. According to Abernathy, Allen and Carroll (2018). The Bahamas has undergone a serious social fragmentation process, due to the widespread cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and significant international financial downturn since 2008. This social fragmentation would be manifested by burgeoning murder and violent crime rates, widespread angry outbursts and destruction of the family and community. Due to this worrisome scenario, investigations into the experiences of adults suffering from anxiety and depression symptomatologywould allow a better picture of the problems to be addressed for more effective design, implementation and evaluation of social and health programs for this population. But I must be careful with this population as not cause more harm, as for example, not to exacerbate the anxiety symptoms. I should create an experience through data collection that is very respectful and reassuring for participants. I also need to ensure that possibilities of access to mental health care would be available for participants that are suffering from anxiety symptoms and would like to do so. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Respecting Shared Experiences Another challenge to be considered is that my rapport participants are done with respect to the shared experiences. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). In dealing with mental health issues and possible stigma attached to it, the researcher has to be extra careful, especially when focus group are thought as the data collection method. To counterbalance the risks I would like to count on my experience with groups in the context of the Bahamas for the last 9 years (Abernathy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), as according to Shenton (2004) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection, as well as with the data collection methodology could prove protective and respectful of participants experiences. References Abernethy, A. D., Allen, D. F., & Carroll, M. A. (2018). Adapting Group Therapy to Address Real World Problems: Insights from Groups Offered in the Bahamas. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 68(1), 17-34 Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. University of The Bahamas (2017). UB at a glance. Retrieved from: http://www.ub.edu.bs/about-us/ub-at-a-glance/#1480568452998-07e893f1-7057 Please use the subheading
Colorado State University Evaluating and Assigning Appropriate Funds Discussion
Below is a list of items that could appear in a CAFR report.
Legal debt limits and debt margins
10-year trend data
Note ...
Colorado State University Evaluating and Assigning Appropriate Funds Discussion
Below is a list of items that could appear in a CAFR report.
Legal debt limits and debt margins
10-year trend data
Notes to financial reports
Property tax levy and collection information
Budgetary schedules
Auditor's report
Letter of transmittal
Description of the government's financial condition
Financial highlights for the fiscal year
Defined benefit pension plan schedules
Required:
The GASB requires that information be reported in certain sections of the CAFR. For each of the items listed, indicate whether the item would be reported in the following sections and the reason for doing so:
I - Introductory section
F - Financial section
S - Statistical section
MDA - MDA portion of the Financial section
RSI - RSI portion of the Financial section
Part B:
Assuming that a government has governmental, proprietary, and fiduciary funds, identify and briefly explain the nine financial statements that must be prepared for the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
When conducting a financial analysis, ratios based solely on governmental fund financial statements would not be considered sufficient for assessing economic condition. Explain why this statement would be true or false.
CCN Health & Medical Quality Healthcare Effectiveness of Care Paper
Week 3: Quality Healthcare: Measuring NP Performance
Requirements:
The National Committee for Quality Assurance ( ...
CCN Health & Medical Quality Healthcare Effectiveness of Care Paper
Week 3: Quality Healthcare: Measuring NP Performance
Requirements:
The National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) was formed to ensure quality of patient care and measurement of patient outcomes with set standards.
Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) is a performance measurement tool used by millions of health insurance plans. There are 6 domains of care:
Effectiveness of Care.
Access/Availability of Care.
Experience of Care.
Utilization and Risk Adjusted Utilization.
Health Plan Descriptive Information.
Measures Collected Using Electronic Clinical Data Systems
(NCQA, n.d. https://www.ncqa.org/hedis/ (Links to an external site.))
As an APN, productivity will be an important measurement for the practice to determine reimbursement and salary. Fee-for-service practices will require a set number of patients per day to maintain productivity. A capitated practice will require the APN to have a large panel of patients but also will focus on controlling costs. This can be accomplished through effective primary care that is accessible, convenient for the patients and has a method of measuring quality of care.
Write a formal paper in APA format with title page, introduction, the three required elements below, conclusion and reference page.
You are now employed as an FNP in primary care. Choose one performance measure from one of the six domains of care, i.e. Adult BMI Assessment, Prenatal and Postpartum care, etc.
Develop three different patient interventions for that one performance measure and how you would specifically implement the intervention and measure the outcomes for that particular performance measure in clinical practice.
How would these primary care interventions result in improved patient outcomes and cost savings for the practice?
How can these interventions result in improved NP patient ratings?
4 pages
Regional Economic Impact Of Aviation
Of the six worldwide regions displayed, which one do you think has the greatest potential The International Air Transport ...
Regional Economic Impact Of Aviation
Of the six worldwide regions displayed, which one do you think has the greatest potential The International Air Transport Association (IATA) estimates ...
Albany State University The Debate over Independence
Before embarking on the study of history, understanding how to “do” history can be useful. To most people, the definit ...
Albany State University The Debate over Independence
Before embarking on the study of history, understanding how to “do” history can be useful. To most people, the definition of history is simple – it is what happened in the past. However, it is really not that simple. Since we cannot revisit the past (except if you are Dr. Who), the main tasks of the historian is to interpret the artifacts that have been left behind. These artifacts from the past are what historians call “primary sources.” Primary sources are the raw materials of history--original documents and material objects which were created in the past. You have probably experienced primary sources in your own life. For example, many of you have visited museums, and the objects found in a museum are primary source objects – things created by those people living in the past. Another example is a book that may have been assigned in a class like one from Shakespeare or Jane Austin; those too are considered primary sources because they are written by authors from the past.When historians write about the past, they interpret the meaning of those objects. Interpretations of history are known as “secondary sources” and you have also encountered these in your life. A textbook, for example, is a secondary source because it was written by a historian living today. Other examples of secondary sources (which again, are interpretations of the past) include most history books at Barnes and Noble, documentaries on TV, and even movies (think of Twelve Years a Slave). One of the problems that historians face is the biased nature of sources. It is important to consider who created the object, why they created it, and what message was it intended to convey. Even historians can be biased based on their personal beliefs (politics, religion, race, gender, etc.). A good historian attempts to understand these biases and write accounts that are based on sound logic and supported with evidence (sorry fans of Ancient Aliens, that show doesn’t meet the threshold).INSTRUCTIONSThere are two parts to this assignment: an initial posting and a response. You are required to read all of the primary source assigned, take notes, and then present your findings to the class. Here is how it will work:1. INITIAL POSTING: YOU WILL TAKE ONE POSITION BELOW BASED ON YOUR LAST NAME:-Last names beginning with A-L: Read Thomas Paine’s Common Sense.-Last names beginning with M-Z: Read Charles Inglis’s The True Interest of America Impartially Stated. If you last name begins with M-Z your initial posting will attempt to convince the American colonies that independence is a terrible idea. You are what they call "role-playing" that you are a loyalist living in 1776. You will read the document by Charles Inglis, then use his arguments to present a compelling case against independence. Your posting should convey at least three of the main themes conveyed by Inglis, as well as include quotes from the reading to illustrate your main points. It should be a minimum of three paragraphs (each paragraph should be a minimum of 5 sentences).
Similar Content
GEO 2400 Pop Music and American Culture Questions
GEO2400: Human Geography Writing Assignment: Pop Music and American Culture
Diffusion occurs when ideas and beliefs spread...
University of South Alabama Life of Prophet Muhammad and His Role in Establishing Islam Paper
The second paper is a short research paper. I will select one of the more popular "want to know more" topics from your 3-2...
Types of Sketchbooks Discussion
Topics:
Sketchbook: Various ways of using sketchbook
Types of sketchbooks: Travelling sketchbook/Studio sketchbook
...
english project 1
The ceremonies and rituals involved with a marriage are important in many cultures. In each culture, the events surroundin...
UOPX Quality Care the Essential Aspects of Healthcare Organizations Essay
Imagine you are a quality leader for a health care organization, and you have been asked to create a document for new empl...
Aberystwyth University Expansion of The Company Into Foreign Markets Essay
PART 1.The CEO calls around lunch time on a Friday wanting some more information about sustainability. She would like an o...
Response Paper
I agree with Abdul that the Christian Universities in the modern world are encountering diverse challenges based on compet...
Reply..
I agree with the author regarding the importance of planning. Planning is not only important when it comes to classroom af...
Principles Of Personal And Organizational Leadership
Today, I have been absorbed into what kind of a leader I am. I really want to understand and enhance my self-awareness so ...
Related Tags
Book Guides
The 48 Laws of Power
by Robert Greene
Ezperanza Rising
by Pam Muñoz Ryan
The President is Missing
by James Patterson, Bill Clinton
The Trial
by Franz Kafka
Pride and Prejudice
by Jane Austen
The Catcher in the Rye
by J. D. Salinger
Big Magic
by Elizabeth Gilbert
The Old Man and the Sea
by Ernest Hemmingway
The Road
by Cormac McCarthy
Get 24/7
Homework help
Our tutors provide high quality explanations & answers.
Post question
Most Popular Content
Lamar University Outsourcing Research Paper
Pick one of the following terms for your research: collaboration, divisional structure, functional structure, horizontal s ...
Lamar University Outsourcing Research Paper
Pick one of the following terms for your research: collaboration, divisional structure, functional structure, horizontal structure, matrix structure, outsourcing, reengineering, teams, vertical linkages, or virtual team.
PBSC Wk 10 Trustworthiness & Credibility of Your Qualitative Research Paper
Section A Post an explanation of how you ensure the quality, trustworthiness, and credibility of your qualitative researc ...
PBSC Wk 10 Trustworthiness & Credibility of Your Qualitative Research Paper
Section A Post an explanation of how you ensure the quality, trustworthiness, and credibility of your qualitative research. Provide examples of specific techniques and strategies. Use your Learning Resources as well as the article you found in your search to support your explanation. Use proper APA format, citations, and referencing. Sample Quality Qualitative investigations are commonly compared with quantitative investigations and ethical concerns are not an exception. The concepts of validity and reliability are common to both methodologies but are addressed differently (Shenton, 2004). According to Shenton (2004) qualitative researchers can incorporate measures to address risks to trustworthiness by carefully planning and executing according to the following concepts: credibility (instead of internal validity); transferability (instead of external validity/generalizability); dependability (instead of reliability); and confirmability (instead of objectivity). A quality qualitative study aims to address all issues listed above. Trustworthiness To ensure trustworthiness, qualitative research ethical concerns should be addressed in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Credibility Credibility addresses the central issue of how congruent the findings of the research are with reality (Shenton, 2004). In order to ensure credibility, Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Shenton (2014) details 14 mechanisms to ensure credibility: 1) the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in general and in information science in particular; 2) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection dialogues take place; 3) random sampling of individuals to serve as informants; 4)triangulation; 5)tactics to help ensure honesty in informants when contributing data; 6) iterative questioning; 7) negative case analysis; 8) frequent debriefing sessions between the researcher and his or her superiors; 9) peer scrutiny; 10) the researcher’s reflective commentary; 11) background, qualifications and experience of the investigator; 12) member checks; 13)detailed description of the phenomenon under scrutiny; and 14) examination of previous research findings to assess the degree to which the project’s results are congruent with those of past studies. Examples The research purpose of my project would be to explore in depth, through a qualitative methodology, the experience of persons living in the Bahamas that have symptoms of anxiety and how they were able or not to find access to a diagnosis and treatment options, according to their socioeconomic status and culturally shaped beliefs regarding mental health. My sample is composed by university students and I would gather data through focus groups. I would like to focus my investigation into the society where I live and work in the past 9 years: Nassau, the Bahamas. In order to ensure quality through credibility and trustworthiness, I would carefully consider researcher bias and my rapport with students and also gatekeepers. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). I have been living and working as a psychotherapist in the country for the last 9 years with a certain extensive exposure due to my work in a non-profit organization that allows me to conduct large community groups (Abernethy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), my private practice and some speaking engagements (including TV interviews). I also personally and professionally interact with persons of the University Psychology Department as well as some students, although I have never worked there. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Shenton (2004) list of 14 strategies to increase credibility are helpful and I can see that I already have some of them, as for example, the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in general and in information science in particular, and the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection dialogues take place (Shenton, 2004). Reflections Another challenge to be considered is researcher bias and my rapport with students and also gatekeepers. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). I have been living and working as a psychotherapist in the country for the last 9 years with a certain extensive exposure due to my work in a non-profit organization that allows me to conduct large community groups (Abernethy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), my private practice and some speaking engagements (including TV interviews). I also personally and professionally interact with persons of the University Psychology Department as well as some students, although I have never worked there. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). My positionality also must be considered, as I am part of the racial minority (Caucasian), I am female, married, a mother, a foreigner (from South America) and I have lived and worked in three different countries and in three different languages. I have had the opportunity to accompany, professionally and personally, many persons struggling with depression and anxiety. I am constantly put in the position of being simultaneously an insider and an outsider to the phenomena I am engaged with and I have developed a heightened awareness of the role my positionality could play on my investigations. Is there anything else I should be aware of or plan accordingly in regard to my positionality that would enrichen my investigation and not compromise it? References Abernethy, A. D., Allen, D. F., & Carroll, M. A. (2018). Adapting Group Therapy to Address Real World Problems: Insights from Groups Offered in the Bahamas. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 68(1), 17-34. Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. Section B For this Discussion, you will explore the ethical challenges you will encounter as a qualitative researcher. Review Chapter 11 of the Ravitch and Carl course text and consider ethics in qualitative research.Use the Course Guide and Assignment Help to search for an article related to protecting privacy, minimizing harm, or respecting the shared experience of others. Post an explanation of the unique ethical challenges of protecting privacy, minimizing harm, and respecting the shared experience of others. Use your Learning Resources to support your explanation as well as the article you found in your search. Use proper APA format, citations, and referencing. Sample Protecting Privacy Protecting privacy has always been a central ethical issue, but it is even more relevant nowadays due to the new opportunities and challenges due to the use of the internet as a way of collecting data (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Although I am not planning on collecting data through the internet, I may find challenges in assuring anonymity. A common challenge for qualitative investigations is how to deal withconfidentiality and anonymity issues, but it could be even more relevant in smaller communities. New Providence, the capital of The Bahamas is home for 90% of the countries’ population of approximately 400 thousand people and the University of The Bahamas have less than 5 thousand students (University of The Bahamas, 2017). According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) while confidentiality refers to an individual’s privacy (how and what data related to participants will be revealed), anonymity refers to the impossibility for anyone to identify an individual within a sample of participants (data is aggregated and not individually contextualized or displayed). A practical way I could ensure confidentiality is through the use of pseudonyms, but it does not ensure anonymity, once many other details could reveal the participants identity. To ensure both, I should be careful not associate pseudonyms identifying information or associated it with data. But, as highlighted by Ravitch and Carl (2016), sometimes this is only possible in large sample study. If I only use pseudonyms but are not careful with other identifying characteristics, it would not be so difficult for participants to lose their anonymity. The use of focus group could add to those challenges and the only way to abide to ethical standards would be to discuss in a transparent way those challenges and explain how I am planning to deal with them with the participants (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Minimizing Harm The research purpose would be to explore in depth, through a qualitative methodology, the experience of persons living in the Bahamas that have symptoms of anxiety and how they were able or not to find access to a diagnosis and treatment options, according to their socioeconomic status and culturally shaped beliefs regarding mental health. My sample is composed by university students and I would gather data through focus groups. I would like to focus my investigation into the society where I live and work in the past 9 years: Nassau, the Bahamas.Changes in society have accelerated, creating different challenges and possibly impacting traditional lifestyles, including the area of mental health. According to Abernathy, Allen and Carroll (2018). The Bahamas has undergone a serious social fragmentation process, due to the widespread cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and significant international financial downturn since 2008. This social fragmentation would be manifested by burgeoning murder and violent crime rates, widespread angry outbursts and destruction of the family and community. Due to this worrisome scenario, investigations into the experiences of adults suffering from anxiety and depression symptomatologywould allow a better picture of the problems to be addressed for more effective design, implementation and evaluation of social and health programs for this population. But I must be careful with this population as not cause more harm, as for example, not to exacerbate the anxiety symptoms. I should create an experience through data collection that is very respectful and reassuring for participants. I also need to ensure that possibilities of access to mental health care would be available for participants that are suffering from anxiety symptoms and would like to do so. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Respecting Shared Experiences Another challenge to be considered is that my rapport participants are done with respect to the shared experiences. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). In dealing with mental health issues and possible stigma attached to it, the researcher has to be extra careful, especially when focus group are thought as the data collection method. To counterbalance the risks I would like to count on my experience with groups in the context of the Bahamas for the last 9 years (Abernathy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), as according to Shenton (2004) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection, as well as with the data collection methodology could prove protective and respectful of participants experiences. References Abernethy, A. D., Allen, D. F., & Carroll, M. A. (2018). Adapting Group Therapy to Address Real World Problems: Insights from Groups Offered in the Bahamas. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 68(1), 17-34 Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. University of The Bahamas (2017). UB at a glance. Retrieved from: http://www.ub.edu.bs/about-us/ub-at-a-glance/#1480568452998-07e893f1-7057 Please use the subheadingSection A Post an explanation of how you ensure the quality, trustworthiness, and credibility of your qualitative research. Provide examples of specific techniques and strategies. Use your Learning Resources as well as the article you found in your search to support your explanation. Use proper APA format, citations, and referencing. Sample Quality Qualitative investigations are commonly compared with quantitative investigations and ethical concerns are not an exception. The concepts of validity and reliability are common to both methodologies but are addressed differently (Shenton, 2004). According to Shenton (2004) qualitative researchers can incorporate measures to address risks to trustworthiness by carefully planning and executing according to the following concepts: credibility (instead of internal validity); transferability (instead of external validity/generalizability); dependability (instead of reliability); and confirmability (instead of objectivity). A quality qualitative study aims to address all issues listed above. Trustworthiness To ensure trustworthiness, qualitative research ethical concerns should be addressed in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Credibility Credibility addresses the central issue of how congruent the findings of the research are with reality (Shenton, 2004). In order to ensure credibility, Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Shenton (2014) details 14 mechanisms to ensure credibility: 1) the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in general and in information science in particular; 2) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection dialogues take place; 3) random sampling of individuals to serve as informants; 4)triangulation; 5)tactics to help ensure honesty in informants when contributing data; 6) iterative questioning; 7) negative case analysis; 8) frequent debriefing sessions between the researcher and his or her superiors; 9) peer scrutiny; 10) the researcher’s reflective commentary; 11) background, qualifications and experience of the investigator; 12) member checks; 13)detailed description of the phenomenon under scrutiny; and 14) examination of previous research findings to assess the degree to which the project’s results are congruent with those of past studies. Examples The research purpose of my project would be to explore in depth, through a qualitative methodology, the experience of persons living in the Bahamas that have symptoms of anxiety and how they were able or not to find access to a diagnosis and treatment options, according to their socioeconomic status and culturally shaped beliefs regarding mental health. My sample is composed by university students and I would gather data through focus groups. I would like to focus my investigation into the society where I live and work in the past 9 years: Nassau, the Bahamas. In order to ensure quality through credibility and trustworthiness, I would carefully consider researcher bias and my rapport with students and also gatekeepers. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). I have been living and working as a psychotherapist in the country for the last 9 years with a certain extensive exposure due to my work in a non-profit organization that allows me to conduct large community groups (Abernethy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), my private practice and some speaking engagements (including TV interviews). I also personally and professionally interact with persons of the University Psychology Department as well as some students, although I have never worked there. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Shenton (2004) list of 14 strategies to increase credibility are helpful and I can see that I already have some of them, as for example, the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in general and in information science in particular, and the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection dialogues take place (Shenton, 2004). Reflections Another challenge to be considered is researcher bias and my rapport with students and also gatekeepers. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). I have been living and working as a psychotherapist in the country for the last 9 years with a certain extensive exposure due to my work in a non-profit organization that allows me to conduct large community groups (Abernethy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), my private practice and some speaking engagements (including TV interviews). I also personally and professionally interact with persons of the University Psychology Department as well as some students, although I have never worked there. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). My positionality also must be considered, as I am part of the racial minority (Caucasian), I am female, married, a mother, a foreigner (from South America) and I have lived and worked in three different countries and in three different languages. I have had the opportunity to accompany, professionally and personally, many persons struggling with depression and anxiety. I am constantly put in the position of being simultaneously an insider and an outsider to the phenomena I am engaged with and I have developed a heightened awareness of the role my positionality could play on my investigations. Is there anything else I should be aware of or plan accordingly in regard to my positionality that would enrichen my investigation and not compromise it? References Abernethy, A. D., Allen, D. F., & Carroll, M. A. (2018). Adapting Group Therapy to Address Real World Problems: Insights from Groups Offered in the Bahamas. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 68(1), 17-34. Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. Section B For this Discussion, you will explore the ethical challenges you will encounter as a qualitative researcher. Review Chapter 11 of the Ravitch and Carl course text and consider ethics in qualitative research.Use the Course Guide and Assignment Help to search for an article related to protecting privacy, minimizing harm, or respecting the shared experience of others. Post an explanation of the unique ethical challenges of protecting privacy, minimizing harm, and respecting the shared experience of others. Use your Learning Resources to support your explanation as well as the article you found in your search. Use proper APA format, citations, and referencing. Sample Protecting Privacy Protecting privacy has always been a central ethical issue, but it is even more relevant nowadays due to the new opportunities and challenges due to the use of the internet as a way of collecting data (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Although I am not planning on collecting data through the internet, I may find challenges in assuring anonymity. A common challenge for qualitative investigations is how to deal withconfidentiality and anonymity issues, but it could be even more relevant in smaller communities. New Providence, the capital of The Bahamas is home for 90% of the countries’ population of approximately 400 thousand people and the University of The Bahamas have less than 5 thousand students (University of The Bahamas, 2017). According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) while confidentiality refers to an individual’s privacy (how and what data related to participants will be revealed), anonymity refers to the impossibility for anyone to identify an individual within a sample of participants (data is aggregated and not individually contextualized or displayed). A practical way I could ensure confidentiality is through the use of pseudonyms, but it does not ensure anonymity, once many other details could reveal the participants identity. To ensure both, I should be careful not associate pseudonyms identifying information or associated it with data. But, as highlighted by Ravitch and Carl (2016), sometimes this is only possible in large sample study. If I only use pseudonyms but are not careful with other identifying characteristics, it would not be so difficult for participants to lose their anonymity. The use of focus group could add to those challenges and the only way to abide to ethical standards would be to discuss in a transparent way those challenges and explain how I am planning to deal with them with the participants (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Minimizing Harm The research purpose would be to explore in depth, through a qualitative methodology, the experience of persons living in the Bahamas that have symptoms of anxiety and how they were able or not to find access to a diagnosis and treatment options, according to their socioeconomic status and culturally shaped beliefs regarding mental health. My sample is composed by university students and I would gather data through focus groups. I would like to focus my investigation into the society where I live and work in the past 9 years: Nassau, the Bahamas.Changes in society have accelerated, creating different challenges and possibly impacting traditional lifestyles, including the area of mental health. According to Abernathy, Allen and Carroll (2018). The Bahamas has undergone a serious social fragmentation process, due to the widespread cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and significant international financial downturn since 2008. This social fragmentation would be manifested by burgeoning murder and violent crime rates, widespread angry outbursts and destruction of the family and community. Due to this worrisome scenario, investigations into the experiences of adults suffering from anxiety and depression symptomatologywould allow a better picture of the problems to be addressed for more effective design, implementation and evaluation of social and health programs for this population. But I must be careful with this population as not cause more harm, as for example, not to exacerbate the anxiety symptoms. I should create an experience through data collection that is very respectful and reassuring for participants. I also need to ensure that possibilities of access to mental health care would be available for participants that are suffering from anxiety symptoms and would like to do so. My choice would be to conduct my investigations in the context of a relational approach. According to Ravitch and Carl (2016) a relational approach is based on a conscient effort form the researcher to be open to critical self-reflection and change, by always taking into consideration the contexts, including language and power struggles. It is described as a person centered and socially contextualized approach and all findings from such investigations are process driven (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Respecting Shared Experiences Another challenge to be considered is that my rapport participants are done with respect to the shared experiences. Ravitch and Carl (2016) encourage researchers to go beyond the mandatory following codes of ethics of Institutional Review Board (IRB) committees by carefully screening the processes of “negotiating entrée” (informed consent and assent) and “building rapport” (with participants and gatekeepers) as well as the establishment of boundaries (differences between rapport and friendship) and the careful planning on how to build reciprocity with participants and gatekeepers (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). In dealing with mental health issues and possible stigma attached to it, the researcher has to be extra careful, especially when focus group are thought as the data collection method. To counterbalance the risks I would like to count on my experience with groups in the context of the Bahamas for the last 9 years (Abernathy, Allen & Carroll, 2018), as according to Shenton (2004) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organizations before the first data collection, as well as with the data collection methodology could prove protective and respectful of participants experiences. References Abernethy, A. D., Allen, D. F., & Carroll, M. A. (2018). Adapting Group Therapy to Address Real World Problems: Insights from Groups Offered in the Bahamas. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 68(1), 17-34 Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. University of The Bahamas (2017). UB at a glance. Retrieved from: http://www.ub.edu.bs/about-us/ub-at-a-glance/#1480568452998-07e893f1-7057 Please use the subheading
Colorado State University Evaluating and Assigning Appropriate Funds Discussion
Below is a list of items that could appear in a CAFR report.
Legal debt limits and debt margins
10-year trend data
Note ...
Colorado State University Evaluating and Assigning Appropriate Funds Discussion
Below is a list of items that could appear in a CAFR report.
Legal debt limits and debt margins
10-year trend data
Notes to financial reports
Property tax levy and collection information
Budgetary schedules
Auditor's report
Letter of transmittal
Description of the government's financial condition
Financial highlights for the fiscal year
Defined benefit pension plan schedules
Required:
The GASB requires that information be reported in certain sections of the CAFR. For each of the items listed, indicate whether the item would be reported in the following sections and the reason for doing so:
I - Introductory section
F - Financial section
S - Statistical section
MDA - MDA portion of the Financial section
RSI - RSI portion of the Financial section
Part B:
Assuming that a government has governmental, proprietary, and fiduciary funds, identify and briefly explain the nine financial statements that must be prepared for the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
When conducting a financial analysis, ratios based solely on governmental fund financial statements would not be considered sufficient for assessing economic condition. Explain why this statement would be true or false.
CCN Health & Medical Quality Healthcare Effectiveness of Care Paper
Week 3: Quality Healthcare: Measuring NP Performance
Requirements:
The National Committee for Quality Assurance ( ...
CCN Health & Medical Quality Healthcare Effectiveness of Care Paper
Week 3: Quality Healthcare: Measuring NP Performance
Requirements:
The National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) was formed to ensure quality of patient care and measurement of patient outcomes with set standards.
Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) is a performance measurement tool used by millions of health insurance plans. There are 6 domains of care:
Effectiveness of Care.
Access/Availability of Care.
Experience of Care.
Utilization and Risk Adjusted Utilization.
Health Plan Descriptive Information.
Measures Collected Using Electronic Clinical Data Systems
(NCQA, n.d. https://www.ncqa.org/hedis/ (Links to an external site.))
As an APN, productivity will be an important measurement for the practice to determine reimbursement and salary. Fee-for-service practices will require a set number of patients per day to maintain productivity. A capitated practice will require the APN to have a large panel of patients but also will focus on controlling costs. This can be accomplished through effective primary care that is accessible, convenient for the patients and has a method of measuring quality of care.
Write a formal paper in APA format with title page, introduction, the three required elements below, conclusion and reference page.
You are now employed as an FNP in primary care. Choose one performance measure from one of the six domains of care, i.e. Adult BMI Assessment, Prenatal and Postpartum care, etc.
Develop three different patient interventions for that one performance measure and how you would specifically implement the intervention and measure the outcomes for that particular performance measure in clinical practice.
How would these primary care interventions result in improved patient outcomes and cost savings for the practice?
How can these interventions result in improved NP patient ratings?
4 pages
Regional Economic Impact Of Aviation
Of the six worldwide regions displayed, which one do you think has the greatest potential The International Air Transport ...
Regional Economic Impact Of Aviation
Of the six worldwide regions displayed, which one do you think has the greatest potential The International Air Transport Association (IATA) estimates ...
Albany State University The Debate over Independence
Before embarking on the study of history, understanding how to “do” history can be useful. To most people, the definit ...
Albany State University The Debate over Independence
Before embarking on the study of history, understanding how to “do” history can be useful. To most people, the definition of history is simple – it is what happened in the past. However, it is really not that simple. Since we cannot revisit the past (except if you are Dr. Who), the main tasks of the historian is to interpret the artifacts that have been left behind. These artifacts from the past are what historians call “primary sources.” Primary sources are the raw materials of history--original documents and material objects which were created in the past. You have probably experienced primary sources in your own life. For example, many of you have visited museums, and the objects found in a museum are primary source objects – things created by those people living in the past. Another example is a book that may have been assigned in a class like one from Shakespeare or Jane Austin; those too are considered primary sources because they are written by authors from the past.When historians write about the past, they interpret the meaning of those objects. Interpretations of history are known as “secondary sources” and you have also encountered these in your life. A textbook, for example, is a secondary source because it was written by a historian living today. Other examples of secondary sources (which again, are interpretations of the past) include most history books at Barnes and Noble, documentaries on TV, and even movies (think of Twelve Years a Slave). One of the problems that historians face is the biased nature of sources. It is important to consider who created the object, why they created it, and what message was it intended to convey. Even historians can be biased based on their personal beliefs (politics, religion, race, gender, etc.). A good historian attempts to understand these biases and write accounts that are based on sound logic and supported with evidence (sorry fans of Ancient Aliens, that show doesn’t meet the threshold).INSTRUCTIONSThere are two parts to this assignment: an initial posting and a response. You are required to read all of the primary source assigned, take notes, and then present your findings to the class. Here is how it will work:1. INITIAL POSTING: YOU WILL TAKE ONE POSITION BELOW BASED ON YOUR LAST NAME:-Last names beginning with A-L: Read Thomas Paine’s Common Sense.-Last names beginning with M-Z: Read Charles Inglis’s The True Interest of America Impartially Stated. If you last name begins with M-Z your initial posting will attempt to convince the American colonies that independence is a terrible idea. You are what they call "role-playing" that you are a loyalist living in 1776. You will read the document by Charles Inglis, then use his arguments to present a compelling case against independence. Your posting should convey at least three of the main themes conveyed by Inglis, as well as include quotes from the reading to illustrate your main points. It should be a minimum of three paragraphs (each paragraph should be a minimum of 5 sentences).
Earn money selling
your Study Documents