DNP 835 Part 2 Assignment: Quality and Sustainability Paper GCU

DNP 835 Part 2 Assignment: Quality and Sustainability Paper GCU

DNP 835 Part 2 Assignment: Quality and Sustainability Paper GCU

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to determine what is needed to promote successful implementation and sustainability of a quality or safety program for your selected health care entity/issue.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE ON: DNP 835 Part 2 Assignment: Quality and Sustainability Paper GCU

Thanks for stopping by this assessment. We can assist you in completing it and other subsequent ones. Our expert writers will comprehensively review instructions, synthesize external evidence sources, and customize an A-grade paper for YOU!!!

General Guidelines:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

• This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
• Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
• This assignment requires that you support your position by referencing six to eight scholarly resources. At least three of your supporting references must be from scholarly sources other than the assigned readings.
• You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
• Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the digital classroom. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.

Directions:

Write a paper (2,000-2,500 words) that provides the following:

1. Incorporate all necessary revisions and corrections suggested by your instructor for Part 1. Synthesize the different elements of Part 1 and Part 2 into one paper using transitions to connect ideas and concepts.
2. Evaluate current evidenced-based quality and/or safety program designs that can be implemented to improve the quality and/or safety outcomes for your selected quality and/safety issue at your identified health care entity. Based on this evaluation, propose an evidence-based quality and/or safety program to address your selected issue from Part 1. Explain how your proposed design will better improve the outcomes for the selected quality and/or safety issue as compared to the program currently in place at the health care entity.
3. Identify potential obstacles (such as economics or ethical issues) that may hinder the implementation of the proposed quality and/or safety program and suggest ways to overcome these.
4. Identify stakeholders within the selected health care entity with whom you may need to collaborate and discuss the role of each stakeholder in the implementation of the proposed program. In the identification of stakeholders, also include specific groups and leaders that are needed.
5. Identify a change management theory you will use to support the implementation of your quality and/or safety program. Provide evidence that supports the use of this theory within the program you designed.
6. Discuss the expected outcomes of the implementation of your proposed quality and/or safety program and ways to ensure sustainability of the expected outcomes.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE ON: DNP 835 Part 2 Assignment: Quality and Sustainability Paper GCU

Rubric Criteria

Total

180 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Insufficient

3. Approaching

4. Acceptable

5. Target

Six to Eight Scholarly Research Sources

Six to Eight Scholarly Research Sources

0 points

None of the required elements (minimum of six topic-related scholarly research sources and six in-text citations) are present.

7.2 points

Not all required elements are present. One or more elements are missing, or sources are not scholarly research or topic-related.

7.92 points

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, but the source and quality of one or more references is questionable.

8.28 points

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related and obtained from reputable, professional sources.

9 points

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources.

Proposed Evidence-Based Quality and/or Safety Program

Evidenced-based quality and/or safety program design proposed to improve quality or safety outcomes in the selected health care entity. Explanation for how proposed program design will improve outcomes for the safety and/or quality issue better than current program.

0 points

The proposal for an evidenced-based quality and/or safety program design that can be implemented to improve quality or safety outcomes for the selected health care entity is omitted.

18.72 points

The proposal for an evidenced-based quality and/or safety program design that can be implemented to improve quality or safety outcomes for the selected health care entity is incomplete. It is unclear how the proposed program design will improve outcomes better than the current program in place.

20.59 points

An evidenced-based quality and/or safety program design that can be implemented to improve quality or safety outcomes for the selected health care entity is proposed. A general explanation for how the proposed program design will improve outcomes for the safety and/or quality issue better than the current program is outlined. Some aspects are vague. Additional support is needed in some areas.

21.53 points

An evidenced-based quality and/or safety program design that can be implemented to improve quality or safety outcomes for the selected health care entity is proposed. An explanation for how the proposed program design will improve outcomes for the safety and/or quality issue better than the current program is presented. The proposal contains adequate support, but some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

23.4 points

An evidenced-based quality and/or safety program design that can be implemented to improve quality or safety outcomes for the selected health care entity is proposed. A well-supported explanation for how the proposed program design will improve outcomes for the safety and/or quality issue better than the current program is presented. The proposal is well developed and contains sufficient support.

Revision and Synthesis

Incorporates instructor feedback or required changes into Part 1; Part 2 is based on revisions or potential changes accordingly. Parts 1 and 2 are synthesized into a final paper; transitions are used to connect ideas and concepts.

0 points

The required corrections or revisions indicated by the instructor are not made. Part 1 is omitted or is a copy-and-paste of the original paper. The final paper lacks synthesis.

7.2 points

Instructor feedback or required changes are incorporated into Part 1, there are still significant errors. Part 2 does not reflect the revisions or potential changes in Part 1. Transitions are seldom used to connect ideas and concepts.

7.92 points

Instructor feedback or required changes are incorporated into Part 1, but there are one or two minor errors. Overall, Part 2 is based on revisions or potential changes. The two sections are generally synthesized into one paper. Some areas need transitions to connect ideas and concepts.

8.28 points

Instructor feedback or required changes are incorporated into Part 1. Part 2 is based on revisions or potential changes accordingly. The two sections are adequately synthesized into one paper with transitions to connect ideas and concepts.

9 points

Instructor feedback or required changes are successfully incorporated into Part 1. Part 2 is based on revisions or potential changes accordingly. The two sections are synthesized into one paper with transitions to connect ideas and concepts.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

7.2 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

7.92 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

8.28 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

9 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

Stakeholders

Stakeholders within the selected health care entity needed for collaboration, including leaders and groups. Roles of each stakeholder in the implementation.

0 points

The discussion of stakeholders within the selected health care entity needed for collaboration is omitted.

17.28 points

Many key stakeholders, including leaders and groups, are omitted. The discussion of stakeholders within the selected health care entity needed for collaboration is incomplete.

19.01 points

Most of the main stakeholders within the selected health care entity needed for collaboration are identified. A key stakeholder, leader, or group is missing. Their roles in the implementation of the proposed program are generally discussed. Some aspects are vague. Additional support or rationale is needed.

19.87 points

The main stakeholders, including leaders and groups, within the selected health care entity needed for collaboration are identified. Their roles in the implementation of the proposed program, are adequately discussed. Some detail is needed for clarity.

21.6 points

All stakeholders, including leaders and groups, within the selected health care entity needed for collaboration, are clearly identified and their roles in the implementation of the proposed program are thoroughly discussed.

Change Management Theory

Change management theory to support implementation of proposed quality and/or safety program. Evidence supports the use of selected theory for the proposed program.

0 points

A change management theory is omitted.

14.4 points

Theoretical support is discussed, but a specific theory is not identified to support implementation of the quality and/or safety program. Evidence that supports the use of this theory in the proposed program is not presented.

15.84 points

Theoretical support is discussed that references a specific theory. It is unclear how this theory supports implementation of the quality and/or safety program. Evidence that supports the use of this theory in the proposed program is not presented.

16.56 points

A change management theory to support implementation of proposed quality and/or safety program is identified. Adequate evidence supports the use of the selected theory for the proposed program.

18 points

A change management theory to support implementation of the proposed quality and/or safety program is identified. Clear and strong evidence supports the use of the selected theory for the proposed program.

Expected Outcomes

Expected outcomes for implementation of proposed quality and/or safety program and ways to ensure sustainability of expected outcomes.

0 points

Expected outcomes for implementation of proposed quality and/or safety program and ways to ensure sustainability of expected outcomes are omitted.

17.28 points

The discussion on expected outcomes for implementation of proposed quality or safety program and ways to ensure sustainability of expected outcomes is incomplete.

19.01 points

Expected outcomes for implementation of proposed quality or safety program and ways to ensure sustainability of expected outcomes are generally discussed. Some aspects are vague. More rationale or support is needed.

19.87 points

Expected outcomes for implementation of proposed quality or safety program and ways to ensure sustainability of expected outcomes are adequately discussed. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.

21.6 points

Expected outcomes for implementation of proposed quality or safety program and ways to ensure sustainability of expected outcomes are thoroughly discussed. The narrative is well-supported and demonstrates insight into creating sustainability for expected outcomes.

Potential Obstacles and Solutions for Overcoming

Potential obstacles that may hinder the implementation of the quality and/or safety program and suggestions for overcoming obstacles.

0 points

The discussion of potential obstacles, including economics or ethical issues, that may hinder the implementation of the quality and/or safety program is omitted.

18.72 points

The discussion of potential obstacles, including economics or ethical issues, that may hinder the implementation of the quality and/or safety program is incomplete. Suggestions for overcoming obstacles are unclear.

20.59 points

Some potential obstacles, including economics or ethical issues, that may hinder the implementation of the quality and/or safety program are summarized. General suggestions for overcoming the obstacles are presented. Some aspects are vague. Additional support is needed.

21.53 points

Potential obstacles, including economics or ethical issues, that may hinder the implementation of the quality and/or safety program are adequately discussed. Suggestions for overcoming the obstacles are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity.

23.4 points

Potential obstacles, including economics or ethical issues, that may hinder the implementation of the quality and/or safety program are thoroughly discussed. Clear suggestions for overcoming the obstacles are detailed.

Format/Documentation

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

10.08 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

11.09 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

11.59 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

12.6 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

Mechanics of Writing

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

11.52 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

12.67 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

13.25 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

14.4 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Evidence

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.

0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

7.2 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

7.92 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

8.28 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

9 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

7.2 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

7.92 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

8.28 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

9 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.