Week 6: Evidence-Based Practice Change Process (graded)Submit AssignmentDue Aug 18 by 11:59pm Points 225 Submitting a file uploadUpdated 01/2019PurposeThe purpose of this assignment is:To apply a change process using the ACE Star Model of Knowledge Transformation and a systematic review after identifying a clinical topic of concern and related nursing practice issue.The information from the 'Illustration' part of our lessons in Weeks 1-6 will mentor you through this process. Your change process is to be set up as a pilot project.Course OutcomesThis assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:CO2: Proposes leadership and collaboration strategies for use with consumers and other healthcare providers in managing care and/or delegating responsibilities for health promotion, illness prevention, health restoration and maintenance, and rehabilitative activities. (PO#2)CO8: Selects evidence for best practices when planning professional nursing care involving systems, processes, and devices for individuals, families, aggregates and communities. (PO#8)PointsThe assignment is worth 225 points.Due DateSubmit your completed assignment by Sunday end of Week 6 by 11:59 p.m. MT.DirectionsA short tutorial with tips for completing this assignment may be viewed here: Evidence-Based Practice Change Process (Links to an external site.)EBP Change Process (form)Download the EBP Change Process form (Links to an external site.) during Week 1.The use of this specific form is REQUIRED and is due at the end of Week 6.A short tutorial with tips for completing this assignment may be viewed in the short video above.Identify a clinical topic and related nursing practice issue you think needs to be changed.Locate a systematic review on your topic from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews located in the Chamberlain Library. Be sure this involves nursing actions.Work through each step of the ACE Star Model as outlined on the assignment form (Star Points 1-5: Discovery, Summary, Translation, Implementation, and Evaluation). Respond to the instructions provided on the form.Follow the activities and thinking of Nurse Daniel in Weeks 1-6 in the 'Illustration' part of each lesson. He will be working through a clinical topic and nursing practice issue to demonstrate a change (ACE Star Model and systematic review).Work on a portion of the process each week, as the illustration unfolds.Please reach out to your instructor for feedback or assistance with your PICOT question as needed.Required and Additional Background Reading in Weeks 1 and 2 under Readings is available for more information on the ACE Star Model and the use of systematic reviews.Please cite any references (in APA format) of your systematic review or other scholarly document (optional) as needed. Paraphrasing information, rather than quoting, is expected. No quotes for this assignment please!For questions about this assignment, please contact your instructor.Use the grading rubric as a final way to check that all components of the form have been completed. The rubric is the tool your instructor will use to assess your content.**Academic Integrity Reminder**Chamberlain College of Nursing values honesty and integrity. All students should be aware of the Academic Integrity policy and follow it in all discussions and assignments.By submitting this assignment, I pledge on my honor that all content contained is my own original work except as quoted and cited appropriately. I have not received any unauthorized assistance on this assignment. Please see the grading criteria and rubrics on this page.NOTE: Please use your browser's File setting to save or print this page.RubricWeek 6: EBP Change Process Assignment Grading RubricWeek 6: EBP Change Process Assignment Grading RubricCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeA systematic review from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was selected, identified, and was appropriate for the selected nursing change process.25.0 ptsOne systematic review from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was identified and was clearly appropriate.22.0 ptsA systematic review was selected from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and was mostly appropriate for a nursing change process.20.0 ptsA systematic review was selected from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and was fairly appropriate for a nursing change process.10.0 ptsA systematic review was selected, but not from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and/or was not appropriate for this assignment.0.0 ptsNo systematic review selected or used.25.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStar Point 1 (Discovery) The topic, nursing practice issue, rationale and scope of practice were clearly identified and described.25.0 ptsStar Point 1 elements in the first column were thoroughly addressed.22.0 ptsStar Point 1 elements in the first column were mostly well addressed.20.0 ptsStar Point 1 was missing one element in the first column or one lacked detail.10.0 ptsStar Point 1 was missing more than one element in the first column and others lacked detail.0.0 ptsThe ACE Star Model Star Point 1 was not completed.25.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStar Point 2 (Summary) The NURSING practice problem, NURSING related PICOT question, Cochrane systematic review, and other optional references, evidence summary, strength, and solutions, are listed and described.35.0 ptsStar Point 2 elements in the first column were thoroughly addressed.31.0 ptsStar Point 2 elements in the first column were mostly well addressed.28.0 ptsStar Point 2 was missing one element in the first column or one lacked detail.13.0 ptsStar Point 2 was missing more than one element in the first column and others lacked detail. or were inappropriate.0.0 ptsThe ACE Star Model Star Point 2 was not completed.35.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStar Point 3 (Translation) Care standards, practice guidelines, or protocols; stakeholders and their roles and responsibilities; the nursing role; rationale for including certain stakeholders, and cost analysis plan are addressed.35.0 ptsStar Point 3 elements in the first column were thoroughly addressed.31.0 ptsStar Point 3 elements in the first column were mostly well addressed.28.0 ptsStar Point 3. was missing one element in the first column or one lacked detail.13.0 ptsStar Point 3 was missing more than one element in the first column and others lacked detail.0.0 ptsThe ACE Star Model Star Point 3 was not completed.35.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStar Point 4 (Implementation) Permission process, education plan, timeline, measurable outcomes, forms, resources, and stakeholder meetings, are addressed.35.0 ptsStar Point 4 elements in the first column were thoroughly addressed.31.0 ptsStar Point 4 elements in the first column were mostly well addressed28.0 ptsStar Point 4 was missing one element in the first column or one lacked detail.13.0 ptsStar Point 4 was missing more than one element in the first column and others lacked detail.0.0 ptsThe ACE Star Model Star Point 4 was not completed.35.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStar Point 5 (Evaluation) Reporting results, process and next steps are addressed.35.0 ptsStar Point 5 elements in the first column were thoroughly addressed.31.0 ptsStar Point 5 elements in the first column were mostly well addressed28.0 ptsStar Point 5 was missing one element in the first column or one lacked detail.13.0 ptsStar Point 5 was missing more than one element in the first column and others lacked detail.0.0 ptsThe ACE Star Model Star Point 5 was not completed.35.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInformation was presented clearly and thoughts were well organized and logical.20.0 ptsInformation was presented clearly and thoughts were well organized and logical throughout.18.0 ptsInformation was presented clearly and thoughts were mainly organized and logical throughout.16.0 ptsInformation was presented clearly and thoughts were somewhat organized and logical throughout.8.0 ptsInformation was not consistently clear and/or was not consistently organized and logical.0.0 ptsInformation was disorganized and difficult to understand.20.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe systematic review and any other scholarly resources were properly listed in APA format. The writing includes error free grammar and spelling, and complete sentence structure.15.0 ptsExcellent mechanics and APA formatting with minimal errors in grammar, spelling, and sentence structure.13.0 ptsGood mechanics and formatting considering the elements listed in the first column12.0 ptsFair mechanics and formatting considering the elements listed in the first column6.0 ptsPoor mechanics and formatting considering the elements listed in the first column0.0 ptsVery poor mechanics and formatting such that information is difficult to read.15.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAssignment Form Used0.0 pts10% deduction for incorrect form used Incorrect or no form used results in 22.5 points lost0.0 ptsCorrect Assignment Form Used results in 0 points lost0.0 ptsTotal Points: 225.0PreviousNext

Write a 4-6-page report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance, with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.IntroductionIn the era of health care reform, many of the laws and policies set forth by government at the local, state, and federal levels have specific performance benchmarks related to care delivery outcomes that organizations must achieve. It is critical for organizational success that the interprofessional care team is able to understand reports and dashboards that display the metrics related to performance and compliance benchmarks.Maintaining standards and promoting quality in modern health care are crucial, not only for the care of patients, but also for the continuing success and financial viability of health care organizations. In the era of health care reform, health care leaders must understand what quality care entails and how quality in health care connects to the standards set forth by relevant federal, state, and local laws and policies. An understanding of relevant benchmarks that result from these laws and policies, and how they relate to quality care and regulatory standards, is also vitally important.Health care is a dynamic, complex, and heavily regulated industry. For this reason, you will be expected to constantly scan the external environment for emerging laws, new regulations, and changing industry standards. You may discover that as new policies are enacted into law, ambiguity in interpretation of various facets of the law may occur. Sometimes, new laws conflict with preexisting laws and regulations, or unexpected implementation issues arise, which may warrant further clarification from lawmakers. Adding partisan politics and social media to the mix can further complicate understanding of the process and buy-in from stakeholders.Note: Your evaluation of dashboard metrics for this assessment is the foundation on which all subsequent assessments are based. Therefore, you must complete this assessment first.Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.Review the performance dashboard metrics, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.Note: Remember that you can submit all, or a portion of, your draft report to Smarthinking for feedback, before you submit the final version for this assessment. If you plan on using this free service, be mindful of the turnaround time of 24–48 hours for receiving feedback.PreparationChoose one of the following three options for a performance dashboard to use as the basis for your evaluation:Option 1: Dashboard Metrics Evaluation SimulationUse the data presented in the Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation multimedia activity as the basis for your evaluation.Note: The writing that you do as part of the simulation could serve as a starting point to build upon for this assessment.Option 2: Actual DashboardUse an actual dashboard from a professional practice setting for your evaluation. If you decide to use actual dashboard metrics, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.The specific type of care delivery.The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.Note: Ensure your data are Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.Option 3: Hypothetical DashboardIf you have a sophisticated understanding of dashboards relevant to your own practice, you may also construct a hypothetical dashboard for your evaluation. Your hypothetical dashboard must present at least four different metrics, at least two of which must be underperforming the prescribed benchmark set forth by a federal, state, or local laws or policies. In addition, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.The specific type of care delivery.The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.Note: Ensure your data are HIPAA compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.InstructionsNote: Your evaluation of dashboard metrics for this assessment is the foundation on which all subsequent assessments are based. Therefore, you must complete this assessment first.Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.Review the performance dashboard metrics, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.RequirementsThe report requirements outlined below correspond to the scoring guide criteria, so be sure to address each main point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each criterion to see how your work will be assessed. In addition, be sure to note the requirements for document format and length and for supporting evidence.Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.Which metrics are not meeting the benchmark for the organization?What are the local, state, or federal health care policies or laws that establish these benchmarks?What conclusions can you draw from your evaluation?Are there any unknowns, missing information, unanswered questions, or areas of uncertainty where additional information could improve your evaluation?Analyze one challenge that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or interprofessional team.Consider the following examples:Strategic direction.Organizational mission.Resources.Staffing.Financial: Operational and capital funding.Logistical considerations: Physical space.Support services (any ancillary department that gives support to a specific care unit in the organization, such as pharmacy, cleaning services, dietary, et cetera).Cultural diversity in the organization and community.Procedures and processes.Address the following:Why do the challenges you identified contribute, potentially, to benchmark underperformance?What assumptions underlie your conclusions?Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.Focus on the benchmark you chose to target for improvement. Which metric is underperforming its benchmark by the greatest degree?State the benchmark underperformance that is the most widespread throughout the organization or interprofessional team.State the benchmark that affects the greatest number of patients. Which benchmark affects the greatest number of staff?Include how this underperformance affect the community that the organization serves.Include the greatest opportunity to improve the overall quality of care or performance of the organization or interpersonal team and, ultimately, to improve patient outcomes, as you think about the issue and the current poor benchmark outcomes.Advocate for ethical action, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, to address a benchmark underperformance.Who would be an appropriate group of stakeholders to act on improving your identified benchmark metric?Why should the stakeholder group take action?What are some ethical actions the stakeholder group could take that support improved benchmark performance?Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.Proofread your report, before you submit it, to minimize errors that could distract readers and make it more difficult for them to focus on the substance of your evaluation and analysis.Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.Be sure to apply correct APA formatting to source citations and references.Example Assessment: You may use the following to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the scoring guide would look like:Assessment 1 Example [PDF].Report Format and LengthFormat your report using APA style.Use the APA Style Paper Template [DOCX]. An APA Style Paper Tutorial [DOCX] is also provided to help you in writing and formatting your report. Be sure to include: A title page and references page. An abstract is not required.A running head on all pages.Appropriate section headings.Be sure your report is 4–6 pages in length, not including the title page and references page.Supporting EvidenceCite 4–6 credible sources from peer-reviewed journals or professional industry publications to support your analysis of challenges, evaluation of potential for improvement, and your advocacy for ethical action.Note: Faculty may use the Writing Feedback Tool when grading this assessment. The Writing Feedback Tool is designed to provide you with guidance and resources to develop your writing based on five core skills. You will find writing feedback in the Scoring Guide for the assessment, once your work has been evaluated.Portfolio Prompt: You may choose to save your report to your ePortfolio.Competencies MeasuredBy successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the course competencies through the following assessment scoring guide criteria:Competency 1: Analyze relevant health care laws, policies, and regulations; their application; and their effects on organizations, interprofessional teams, and professional practice.Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or interprofessional team.Competency 2: Lead the development and implementation of ethical and culturally sensitive policies that improve health outcomes for individuals, organizations, and populations.Advocate for ethical action, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, to address a benchmark underperformance.Competency 3: Evaluate relevant indicators of performance, such as benchmarks, research, and best practices, to inform health care laws and policies for patients, organizations, and populations.Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.Competency 5: Produce clear, coherent, and professional written work, in accordance with Capella's writing standards.Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.