This assignment is due at the end of Week 3, Sunday at 11:59 p.m. MT. The guidelines and rubric for this assignment are located and listed below.Week 3: Quality Improvement Model Application (Links to an external site.)PurposeThe purpose of this assignment is to (a) provide examples of a quality improvement initiative or patient safety issue in any healthcare delivery setting, (b) explore the contributing factors for this adverse medical outcome, (c) apply quality improvement theories and philosophies to a healthcare management project, (d) demonstrate an understanding of quality improvement tools by correctly choosing and using them in specific cases, and (e) recognize the extent of problems of patient safety in medical care.Course OutcomesThrough this assignment, the student will demonstrate the ability to do the following.Apply frameworks and theories for improving quality of care in various healthcare systems. (CO 1)Use critical inquiry to evaluate the design, implementation, and outcomes of quality and safety improvement strategies. (CO 3)Advance knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary for the continuous improvement of quality and safety in healthcare. (CO 5)Due Date: Submit by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 3.Students are given the opportunity to request an extension on assignments for emergent situations. Supporting documentation must be submitted to the assigned faculty. If the student's request is not approved, the assignment is graded and a late penalty is applied as follows:Monday = 10% of total possible point reductionTuesday = 20% of total possible point reductionWednesday = 30% of total possible point reductionIf the student's request is approved, the student will be informed of the revised due date. Should the student fail to meet the revised due date, the assignment is graded and a late penalty is applied as follows:Monday = 10% of total possible point reductionTuesday = 20% of total possible point reductionWednesday = 30% of total possible point reductionTotal Points Possible: 230RequirementsAssignment Criteria for the Paper1. Identify any existing quality concern or an existing patient safety issue and provide the rationale for choosing this issue.2. Explain the background and scope of the problem.3. Analyze the issue based on the appropriate quality philosophy.4. Identify the regulatory guidelines, internal and/or external benchmarks, or evidence-based practice standards surrounding the issue—explain what that expectation is and why. 5. Use the appropriate quality improvement tools to improve the quality outcome.6. Describe how you could or will get involved in this initiative to make a difference and move it forward to enactment.7. Summarize the content in concluding statements.8. The body of the scholarly paper is to be 3–5 pages in length, excluding title and reference pages.9. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, references, and citations are consistent with formal academic writing and APA format as expressed in the current edition.10. Include a minimum of four references published within the past 5 years, not including your textbook. References may include scholarly websites of organizations or government agencies and must be presented using APA current edition format for electronic media.Preparing the PaperCategoryPoints%DescriptionIntroduction and quality concern2511%Identify a quality issue/patient safety issue and provide a rationale.Background and scope of the problem209%Analyze the problem from a literature review and a practical point of view.Goals of improvement209%Identify three goals to improve the problem.Quality philosophy application3515%Using a quality model, analyze the patient safety concern and the intervention to bridge the gaps.Identification of the regulatory guidelines and internal/external benchmarks or EBP standards for this issue4017%Discuss all related factors to this problem and explain what the expectation is and why.Quality process tool and improvement recommendation4017%Apply appropriate quality improvement tools to improve the quality outcome; provide illustrations for all tools used (flowchart, gap analysis, root cause analysis, etc.). Choose at least two tools for implementation.Conclusion157%Provide summary and concluding statements.APA style104%Text, title page, and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA current edition format.Scholarly references157%Paper is 3–5 pages in length, excluding the cover and reference pages. References include a minimum of 4 scholarly references, excluding the course text.Grammar and spelling104%Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work.Total230100%A quality assignment will meet or exceed all of the above requirements.RubricQuality Improvement Model Application Guidelines With Scoring RubricQuality Improvement Model Application Guidelines With Scoring RubricCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction and quality concern25 ptsExceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performanceIntroduction offers broad overview of topic narrowing to key concepts to be presented. Purpose statement is clear. All elements provided.20 ptsExceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performanceIntroduction includes issue and purpose. Statement present but may lack a key component.16 ptsMeets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performanceIntroduction of topic issue lacks occasional important element or specificity. One element provided.10 ptsNeeds Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performanceIntroduction of topic issue has multiple instances of inaccuracies. None of the required elements present or no introduction.0 ptsDeveloping (0) Unsatisfactory level of performanceIntroduction is not present.25 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBackground and scope of the problem20 ptsExceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performanceSuccinctly defines problem and population with significant demographics; describes depth of the problem and numbers affected.18 ptsExceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performanceDefines problem, some elements may not be fully developed; rare inaccuracy.16 ptsMeets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performanceIdentifies problem with lack of depth and occasional important elements or specificity.8 ptsNeeds Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performanceIdentifies problem with multiple instances of inaccuracies or one or more elements missing.0 ptsDeveloping (0) Unsatisfactory level of performanceOverview of health problem is not present.20 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGoals of improvement20 ptsExceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performanceComprehensive and realistic benefits to nursing profession presented.18 ptsExceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performanceBenefits to nursing profession stated with adequate clarity or realism.16 ptsMeets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performanceBenefits to nursing profession stated but lack clarity or realism.8 ptsNeeds Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performanceBenefits to nursing profession stated but unrealistic.0 ptsDeveloping (0) Unsatisfactory level of performanceBenefits to nursing profession absent.20 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality philosophy application35 ptsExceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performanceApplication to problem/concern is fully developed and comprehensive.25 ptsExceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performanceApplication to problem/concern is adequately present or model mostly linked to project.20 ptsMeets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performanceApplication to problem/concern is minimally present or model not always linked to project.15 ptsNeeds Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performanceModel is not linked to project.0 ptsDeveloping (0) Unsatisfactory level of performanceApplication to problem/concern is absent.35 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify regulatory guidelines, internal/external benchmarks and EBP standards40 pts(100%) Outstanding or highest level of performanceAble to discuss all related factors.32 ptsExceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performanceAble to discuss all related factors but there are some missing details.25 ptsMeets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performanceDiscussed some related factors but there are some that are missing.15 ptsNeeds Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performanceDiscussion is minimal and most of the factors are missing.0 ptsDeveloping (0) Unsatisfactory level of performanceNo discussion of related factors.40 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeImprovement process and recommendations40 ptsExceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performanceDecision recommendation thoroughly discussed. Discusses at least two tools.32 ptsExceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performanceDecision recommendation developed with rare inaccuracies; Discusses at least one tool.25 ptsMeets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performanceDiscussion of the decision recommendation lacks occasional important elements or specificity but one tool is discussed.15 ptsNeeds Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performanceDiscussion of the decision recommendation has multiple instances of inaccuracies and/or is vague. One tool discussed.0 ptsDeveloping (0) Unsatisfactory level of performanceDiscussion of the decision recommendation is absent. No tools discussed.40 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion15 ptsExceptional (100%) Outstanding or highest level of performanceProvides distinct summary with concluding statements regarding the future direction and focus of the project; reflects key elements of the paper.12 ptsExceeds (88%) Very good or high level of performanceProvides distinct summary with concluding statements regarding the future direction and focus of the project; does not summarize key elements of the paper.8 ptsMeets (80%) Competent or satisfactory level of performanceProvides distinct summary with no concluding statements; no summarization of key elements of the paper.4 ptsNeeds Improvement (38%) Poor or failing level of performanceNo distinct summary; concluding statements found at the end in the general body of the paper.0 ptsDeveloping (0) Unsatisfactory level of performanceNo distinct summary or conclusion provided.15 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA10 ptsThere are no APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).8 ptsThere are 1–2 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).6 ptsThere are 3–4 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).4 ptsThere are 5 APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).0 ptsThere are 6 or more APA format errors in the text, title page, and/or reference page(s).10 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScholary15 ptsThe table provided is utilized. References include 2 or more scholarly resources, excluding the course text, and may include scholarly websites.12 ptsThe table provided is utilized. References include a minimum of 2 scholarly resources, excluding course text. One of the references utilized was not scholarly.8 ptsThe table provided is not utilized and/or references contain a minimum of 2 resources, excluding course text. One or more references utilized is not a scholarly resource.4 ptsThe table provided is not utilized and/or references utilized are not scholarly and/or fewer than 2 resources were utilized.0 ptsOnly one resource was utilized.15 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work.10 ptsRules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with no exceptions.8 ptsRules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with 1–2 exceptions.6 ptsRules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work with 3–4 exceptions.4 ptsgrammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are not followed with errors.0 ptsRules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are not followed with 6 or more errors.10 pts

Activity 3Maintaining StandardsChoose a topic and discuss the standards in detail. Analyze how these concepts/ processes influence the standards in your organization, including staffing, decision making or workplace issues, both positively and negatively. Affordable Care ActAgency for Healthcare, Quality and ResearchBenchmarking Tools and OrganizationsCertification for NursingElectronic Health Care RecordElectronic prescribing / TelehealthInstitute for Healthcare, Quality ImprovementLean Project ManagementOutcomes Management Patient Care PathwaysPopulation Health Management Practice GuidelinesQuality ManagementRisk ManagementSentinel Event ManagementStandards of Nursing PracticeStandards of Patient CareStructure StandardsTJC AccreditationUtilization ManagementValue based careSupport your discussion and opinions with facts and relevant examples from personal nursing practice.Reading and ResourcesReview chapter 13 & 23 in Marquis, B. L., & Huston, C. J. (2017). Leadership roles and management functions in nursing: Theory and application. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.Aroh, D., Colella, J., Douglas, C., & Eddings, A. (2015). An example of translating value-based purchasing into value-based care. Urologic Nursing, 35(2), 61-74. doi:10.7257/1053-816X.2015.35.2.61Boyle, D. K., Cramer, E., Potter, C., Gatua, M. W., & Stobinski, J. X. (2014). The relationship between direct-care RN specialty certification and surgical patient outcomes. AORN Journal, 100(5), 511-528. doi:10.1016/j.aorn.2014.04.018Kizer, K. W. (2015). Clinical integration: A cornerstone for population health management. Journal of Healthcare Management, 60(3), 164-168.Marmor, T. R., & Gordon, R. W. (2014). Commercial pressures on professionalism in American medical care: From Medicare to the Affordable Care Act. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 42(4), 412-419. doi:10.1111/jlme.12164Spruce, L. (2015). Back to basics: Implementing evidence-based practice. AORN Journal, 101(1), 106-112. doi:10.1016/j.aorn.2014.08.009Visit the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)Visit the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Visit the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC)Visit The Joint Commission Visit Affordable Care Act Additional Instructions:All submissions should have a title page and reference page.Utilize a minimum of two scholarly resources.Adhere to grammar, spelling and punctuation criteria.Adhere to APA compliance guidelines.Adhere to the chosen Submission Option for Delivery of Activity guidelines.