APA, format

Benchmark – Hospital-Associated Infections Data – Rubric

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
APA, format
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Conclusions 9.6 points

Criteria Description

Conclusions

5. Target 9.6 points

Conclusions that can be drawn for each quality measure over the 5-year period are

appropriate. The conclusions are supported by the

data.

4. Acceptable 8.83 points

Conclusions that can be drawn for each quality measure over the 5-year period are

appropriate. The conclusions are mostly supported with data.

3. Approaching 8.45 points

Conclusions that can be drawn for each quality measure over the 5-year period are

present.

2. Insufficient 7.68 points

Conclusions that can be drawn for each quality measure over the 5-year period are

present, but the conclusions are not supported with data.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Conclusions that can be drawn for each quality measure over the 5-year period are

not present.

Trends 9.6 points

Criteria Description

Trends

5. Target 9.6 points

A description of the trends that can be seen in the data is present. The trends

discussed are accurate.

4. Acceptable 8.83 points

Collapse All

A description of the trends that can be seen in the data is present. The trends

discussed are mostly accurate.

3. Approaching 8.45 points

A description of the trends that can be seen in the data is present.

2. Insufficient 7.68 points

A description of the trends that can be seen in the data is present, but lacks detail

or is

incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A description of the trends that can be seen in the data is not present.

Quality Measure and National Benchmarks 7.2 points

Criteria Description

Quality Measure and National Benchmarks

5. Target 7.2 points

A comparison of each quality measure to the national benchmark is present and all

comparisons are accurate.

4. Acceptable 6.62 points

NA

3. Approaching 6.34 points

NA

2. Insufficient 5.76 points

A comparison of each quality measure to the national benchmark is present, but

some comparisons are not accurate.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A comparison of each quality measure to the national benchmark is not present.

Prioritization of Quality Measures 7.2 points

Criteria Description

Prioritization of Quality Measures

5. Target 7.2 points

Prioritization of the quality measures is present and is appropriate based on the

data.

4. Acceptable 6.62 points

NA

3. Approaching 6.34 points

NA

2. Insufficient 5.76 points

Prioritization of the quality measures is present, but is not appropriate based on

the data.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Prioritization of Quality Measures

Quality Improvement Metric 7.2 points

Criteria Description

Quality Improvement Metric

5. Target 7.2 points

A quality improvement metric is present and thorough. The metric is appropriate

for the quality measure.

4. Acceptable 6.62 points

A quality improvement metric is present and detailed. The metric is mostly

appropriate for the quality measure.

3. Approaching 6.34 points

A quality improvement metric is present.

2. Insufficient 5.76 points

A quality improvement metric is present, but some portions may not be

appropriate for the quality measure.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A quality improvement metric is not present.

Monitoring the Quality Improvement Metric (B) 7.2 points

Criteria Description

Monitoring the Quality Improvement Metric (C6.6)

5. Target 7.2 points

An explanation of how to monitor the metric and related measures to improve care

processes, outcomes, and the patient experience is present and thorough.

4. Acceptable 6.62 points

An explanation of how to monitor the metric and related measures to improve care

processes, outcomes, and the patient experience is present and detailed.

3. Approaching 6.34 points

An explanation of how to monitor the metric and related measures to improve care

processes, outcomes, and the patient experience is present.

2. Insufficient 5.76 points

An explanation of how to monitor the metric and related measures to improve care

processes, outcomes, and the patient experience is present, but lacks detail or is

incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

An explanation of how to monitor the metric and related measures to improve care

processes, outcomes, and the patient experience is not present.

Presentation of Content

36 points

Criteria Description

Presentation of Content

5. Target 36 points

The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to

each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers.

The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.

4. Acceptable 33.12 points

The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting

information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes persuasive

information from reliable sources.

3. Approaching 31.68 points

The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some

inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other.

2. Insufficient 28.8 points

The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong

sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes

little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.

Layout 12 points

Criteria Description

Layout

5. Target 12 points

The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with

appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in

length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance

the readability of the text.

4. Acceptable 11.04 points

The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to

be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for

headings and text.

3. Approaching 10.56 points

The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the

fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long

paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.

2. Insufficient 9.6 points

The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting

with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is

difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy

background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and

subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with

long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors.

Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.

Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction,

word choice,

etc.)

12 points

Criteria Description

Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice,

etc.)

5. Target 12 points

The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word

choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline,

and scope.

4. Acceptable 11.04 points

The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for

the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.

3. Approaching 10.56 points

Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.

2. Insufficient 9.6 points

Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are

present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech

appropriately.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer

appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either

does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language

use)
6 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. Target 6 points

Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.

4. Acceptable 5.52 points

Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.

3. Approaching 5.28 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to

the reader.

2. Insufficient 4.8 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Documentation of Sources 6 points

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as

appropriate to assignment and style)

5. Target 6 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment

and style, and format is free of error.

4. Acceptable 5.52 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is

mostly correct.

3. Approaching 5.28 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some

formatting errors may be present.

2. Insufficient 4.8 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to

assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 120 points

Benchmark

– Hospital-Associated Infections Data

Start Date & Time

Feb 9, 2023, 12:00 AM

Upcoming

Rubric

View Rubric

Assessment Traits

Benchmark

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to examine health care data on hospital-associated infections and determine the best methods for presenting the data to stakeholders. Use the scenario below and the “Hospital Associated Infections Data” Excel spreadsheet to complete the assignment.


Scenario

You have been tasked with displaying Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) hospital quality measures data for a 5-year period on four quality measures at your site. After examining the data, identify trends and determine the best way to present the actionable information to stakeholders.


Assignment

Create a 12-15-slide PowerPoint (not including title and reference slides) presenting the data to the stakeholders. Address the following in your PowerPoint:

1. What conclusions can be drawn for each quality measure over the 5-year period?

2. What trends do you see for each quality measure over the 5-year period?

3. When comparing each quality measure, is the quality measure better than, worse than, or no different from the national benchmark over time?

4. Based on your examination of the data, which of the quality measures should you prioritize and why?

5. Develop a quality improvement metric and related measures to improve care processes, outcomes, and the patient experience relating to the identified area of opportunity.

6. Explain how you would monitor the metric and use collected data for improvement.  

Include a title slide, references slide, and comprehensive speaker notes.

Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” located in the Student Success Center, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.

Use a minimum of two peer-reviewed, scholarly sources as evidence.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.


Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency:

MSN Leadership in Health Care Systems

6.6: Develop and monitor continuous quality improvement metrics and measures to improve care processes, outcomes, and the patient experience.

Attachments

NUR-630-RS-HospitalAssociatedInfectionsData.xlsx

Calculate your order
Pages (275 words)
Standard price: $0.00
Client Reviews
4.9
Sitejabber
4.6
Trustpilot
4.8
Our Guarantees
100% Confidentiality
Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.
Original Writing
We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.
Timely Delivery
No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.
Money Back
If you're confident that a writer didn't follow your order details, ask for a refund.

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
$0.00
Power up Your Academic Success with the
Team of Professionals. We’ve Got Your Back.
Power up Your Study Success with Experts We’ve Got Your Back.
Live Chat+1(978) 822-0999EmailWhatsApp

Order your essay today and save 20% with the discount code ORIGINAL

seo