IHP 604 Module Three Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric

Overview

Dashboards are data visualizations that healthcare organizations use to measure and analyze data. The Joint Commission (E-dition) sets standards for healthcare quality and safety. One set of

standards The Joint Commission created is the National Patient Safety Goals (NPSG), which are designed for different facilities and are critical to maintain accreditation. In this assignment,

you will explore the NPSG standards related to patient identi�cation, which states facilities will use at least two patient identi�ers before procedures.

This assignment will help prepare you for your course project through the analysis of data, dashboards, and industry standards.

Please note: The Joint Commission standards you have access to are the standards for acute care facilities and not long-term care. In this assignment, the standards for patient identi�cation

are the same for acute care and long-term care facilities.

Prompt

Examine the dashboard for ABC Residential Center, which is a long-term care center. Analyze the facility metrics against the national benchmarks and address the following areas. Provide at

least two scholarly sources to support your claims.



A text-only version is available: Module Three Short Paper Graphic Text-Only Version Word Document

Speci�cally, you must address the following rubric criteria:

1. Insights from dashboards: Describe how the data in the dashboard could be used by ABC Residential Center to �nd insights related to their operations or quality of care.

2. Dashboard techniques: Discuss what visualization techniques (such as using charts and graphs; color coding the data red, yellow, and green; and combining multiple sets of data into one

graph) were used by the dashboard to provide a quick, visual way to understand the data presented, and if there are additional techniques you would recommend for the dashboard to

use to make the data easier and quicker to understand.

3. Determining benchmarks: Determine a benchmark for patient identi�cation for ABC (you should review the NPSG standards).

4. Defend selection: Provide a rationale for your selection of a benchmark.

If you chose a benchmark less than 100%, how would you defend that benchmark to the public?

5. Meeting the benchmark: Analyze the data in the dashboard to determine if ABC is meeting the benchmark.

6. Implications: Discuss the implications of not meeting the benchmark.

7. Justify creating a quality improvement initiative: Justify the creation of a quality improvement initiative using the dashboard and NPSG standards if ABC is not meeting the benchmark

(you don’t need to create the quality improvement initiative, rather you need to justify the need for one to meet the benchmark if it is not being met).

What to Submit

Submit this assignment as a 2-to 3-page Microsoft Word document. You must also include an APA-style title page. Use 12-point Times New Roman font, double spacing, and one-inch margins.

If you need writing support, you can access the Online Writing Center through the Academic Support module of your course.

Citations

2021 Comprehensive Accreditation Manual for Hospitals (Camh Hard Copy). (2020). [E-book]. JCR Publishing. https://e-dition.jcrinc.com/MainContent.aspx

Module Three Short Paper Rubric

Criteria Exemplary (100%) Pro�cient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Insights from Dashboard Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Describes how data in the

dashboard could be used by

ABC Residential Center to �nd

insights related to their

operations or quality of care

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 15

Dashboard Techniques Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Discusses visualization

techniques used by the

dashboard to provide a quick,

visual way to understand the

data presented and any

additional techniques

recommended for the

dashboard to use to make the

data easier and quicker to

understand

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 10

Determining Benchmarks Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Determines benchmark for

patient identi�cation for ABC

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 10

Criteria Exemplary (100%) Pro�cient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Defend Selection Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Provides rationale for selection

of benchmark

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 10

Meeting Benchmark Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Analyzes data in the dashboard

to determine if ABC is meeting

benchmark

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 10

Implications Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Discusses implications of not

meeting benchmark

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 15

Justify Creating Quality

Improvement Initiative

Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner, using

industry-speci�c language

Justi�es creation of quality

improvement initiative using

dashboard and NPSG standards

if ABC is not meeting

benchmark

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors or

omissions

Does not attempt criterion 15

Articulation of Responses Exceeds pro�ciency in an

exceptionally clear and

insightful manner

Clearly conveys meaning with

correct grammar, sentence

structure, and spelling,

demonstrating an

understanding of audience and

purpose

Shows progress toward

pro�ciency, but with errors in

grammar, sentence structure,

and spelling, negatively

impacting readability

Submission has critical errors in

grammar, sentence structure,

and spelling, preventing

understanding of ideas

5

Scholarly Sources Incorporates more than two

scholarly, current (within the

last �ve years) sources, or use

of sources is exceptionally

insightful

Incorporates two scholarly,

current (within the last �ve

years) sources that support

claims

Incorporates fewer than two

scholarly, current (within the

last �ve years) sources, or not

all sources support claims

Does not incorporate sources 5

APA Style Formats in-text citations and

reference list according to APA

style with no errors

Formats in-text citations and

reference list according to APA

style with fewer than �ve

errors

Formats in-text citations and

reference list according to APA

style with �ve or more errors

Does not format in-text

citations and reference list

according to APA style

5

Total: 100%