Course Project: Developing a Strategic Plan • • • • • • • • • o o o o • • Section 1: Summary of the Issue Has to be hospital based SWOT anaylsis To prepare for and set the stage for your Course Project, this week you begin to develop a summary of the issue you will address through the creation of a strategic plan. You may wish to review the Course Project Overview, which outlines the project components and due dates. To prepare: Consider the information on strategic planning presented by Dr. Huston in this week’s media program, as well as in the other Learning Resources. Reflect on the unmet need you identified in this week’s Discussion, and consider any feedback you have received to your posting from your Instructor and colleagues. If appropriate, refine your focus to clarify the unmet need. In addition to the steps you took in preparation for the Discussion, proceed as follows: Investigate the background related to this unmet need. What conditions have contributed to this situation? Is there data (beyond what you identified for the Discussion) that should be examined? Conduct research to assess what has been attempted in the past, by various individuals or organizations, to address this unmet need. Think about any broader issues that should be examined to better understand this unmet need. For instance, consider economic, political, and/or social considerations. Begin to draft your 2- to 3-page summary of the Issue (which will be submitted next week). In your summary, identify and/or describe: The unmet need and how it is evident in the specific group, unit, or organization The mission, vision, and values of the group, unit, or organization Background, including: Data from historical analysis and forecasting Evidence from the literature What has been attempted in the past by various individuals and groups to address this need Which stakeholders should be included in the strategic planning process Initial vision for addressing this need at the organizational or systems level, including at least one strategic goal Broader issues to be considered Required Readings Learning Resources Balicer, R. D., Shadmi, E., Lieberman, N., Greenberg-Dotan, S., Goldfracht, M., Jana, L., . . . Jacobson, O. (2011). Reducing health disparities: Strategy planning and implementation in Israel’s largest health care organization. Health Services Research, 46(4), 1281–1299. The authors examine the planning, implementation, and evaluation of an organization-wide strategy to address the need to reduce health care inequalities and improve quality in Israel. Schaffner, J. (2009). Roadmap for success: The 10-step nursing strategic plan. Journal of Nursing Administration, 39(4), 152–155. The author outlines a 10-step strategic planning process for nursing. Strubhar, A. J. (2011). The application of an environmental scanning and strategic planning framework in an academic department of physical therapy. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 25(3), 53–59. The author examines strategic planning, including environmental scanning, within a physical therapy department in an academic institution. Authenticity Consulting. (n.d.b). Basic description of strategic planning. Retrieved March 13, 2013, from http://managementhelp.org/strategicplanning/basics.htm This online article provides an overview of the strategic planning. Authenticity Consulting. (n.d.c). Basic overview of various strategic planning models. Retrieved March 13, 2013, from http://managementhelp.org/strategicplanning/models.htm This online article describes different models of strategic planning, including issues-based planning. PlanWare. (n.d.). Business planning papers: Developing a strategic plan. Retrieved March 13, 2013, from http://www.planware.org/strategicplan.htm View the strategic planning information on this website. Required Media Laureate Education (Producer). (2013d). Elements of a strategic plan model [Video file]. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 6 minutes. Dr. Carol Huston describes elements common to strategic planning models and discusses ways to approach the development of a strategic plan. Accessible player Credit: Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities. Optional Resources Authenticity Consulting. (n.d.a). All about strategic planning. Retrieved March 13, 20 Course Project: Developing a Strategic Plan • • • o o o o • • In Week 6, you began to develop a summary of the issue you are addressing through your Course Project. This week, you continue to refine the summary and engage in a SWOT analysis related to the identified unmet need. Section 1: Summary of the Issue As introduced in Week 6,continue to develop, write, and refine a 2- to 3-page summary of the issue you are addressing through the creation of a strategic plan. (Refer to Week 6 for the preparatory instructions as necessary). To complete: Create a 2- to 3-page summary of the issue, in which you identify and/or describe: The unmet need and how it is evident in the specific group, unit, or organization The mission, vision, and values of the group, unit, or organization Background, including: Data from historical analysis and forecasting Evidence from the literature What has been attempted in the past by various individuals and groups to address this need Which stakeholders should be included in the strategic planning process Initial vision for addressing this need at the institutional or systems level, including at least one strategic goal Broader issues to be considered Rubric Detail Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout. Content Name: NURS_6241_Week_7_Assignment_1_Rubric Exit Grid View List View Excellent Points: Points Range: 27 (27%) – 30 (30%) Quality of Work Submitted: The extent of which work meets the assigned criteria and work reflects graduate level critical and analytic thinking. %7B%220.27000 Fair Poor Points: Points Range: 24 (24%) – 26 (26%) %7B%220.24000 Points: Points: Points Range: 21 (21%) – 23 (23%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 20 (20%) %7B%220.00000 %7B%220.21000 Assignment exceeds expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 75% containing exceptional breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics. Feedback: Quality of Work Submitted: The purpose of the paper is clear. Good Assignment meets expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 50% containing good breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics. Assignment meets most of the expectations. One required topic is either not addressed or inadequately addressed. Feedback: Feedback: Feedback: Points: Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Assignment superficially meets some of the expectations. Two or more required topics are either not addressed or inadequately addressed. Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Excellent %7B%220.05000 A clear and comprehensive purpose statement is provided which delineates all required criteria. Good %7B%220.04000 Purpose of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. Fair Poor %7B%220.03500 Purpose of the assignment is vague or off topic. %7B%220.00000 No purpose statement was provided. Feedback: Feedback: Feedback: Feedback: Points: Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to: Understand and interpret the assignment’s key concepts. Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%) %7B%220.09000 Demonstrates the ability to critically appraise and intellectually explore key concepts. Points: Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) %7B%220.08000 Demonstrates a clear understanding of key concepts. Feedback: Points: Points: Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) %7B%220.00000 %7B%220.07000 Shows some degree of understanding of key concepts. Feedback: Shows a lack of understanding of key concepts, deviates from topics. Feedback: Feedback: Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to: Points: Points: Points: Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) Excellent %7B%220.18000 Apply and integrate material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, and textbook) and credible outside resources. Demonstrates and applies exceptional support of major points and integrates 2 or more credible outside sources, in addition to 2-3 course resources to suppport point of view. Good %7B%220.16000 Integrates specific information from 1 credible outside resource and 2-3 course resources to support major points and point of view. Fair Poor %7B%220.14000 Minimally includes and integrates specific information from 2-3 resources to support major points and point of view. %7B%220.00000 Includes and integrates specific information from 0 to 1 resoruce to support major points and point of view. Feedback: Feedback: Feedback: Feedback: Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to: Synthesize (combines various components or different ideas into a new whole) material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, Points: Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) %7B%220.14000 %7B%220.18000 %7B%220.16000 Synthesizes and justifies (defends, explains, validates, confirms) information gleaned from sources to support major points presented. Summarizes information gleaned from sources to support major points, but does not synthesize. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) %7B%220.00000 Identifies but does not interpret or apply concepts, and/or strategies correctly; ideas unclear and/or underdevelope d. Feedback: Rarely or does not interpret, apply, and synthesize concepts, and/or strategies. Feedback: Excellent textbook) and outside, credible resources by comparing different points of view and highlighting similarities, differences, and connections. Good Fair Poor Applies meaning to the field of advanced nursing practice. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting Paragraph and Sentence Structure: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused-neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. Points: Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity Feedback: Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 80% of the time. Feedback: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 60%79% of the time. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity < 60% of the time. Feedback: Excellent Good Fair Poor Points: Written Expression and Formatting Points: Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) %7B%220.05000 English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation %7B%220.04000 Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis

Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: Feedback: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margin s, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in -text citations, and reference list. Show Descriptions Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 %7B%220.03500 Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting Points: Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback: Points: Points: Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) %7B%220.05000 %7B%220.04000 Uses correct APA format with no errors. Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Feedback: Feedback: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback: Feedback: Show Feedback Quality of Work Submitted: The extent of which work meets the assigned criteria and work reflects graduate level critical and analytic thinking.– Levels of Achievement: Excellent 27 (27%) – 30 (30%) %7B%220.27000 Assignment exceeds expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 75% containing exceptional breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics. Good 24 (24%) – 26 (26%) %7B%220.24000 Assignment meets expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 50% containing good breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics. %7B%220.21000 Fair 21 (21%) – 23 (23%) Assignment meets most of the expectations. One required topic is either not addressed or inadequately addressed. %7B%220.00000 Poor 0 (0%) – 20 (20%) Assignment superficially meets some of the expectations. Two or more required topics are either not addressed or inadequately addressed. Feedback: Quality of Work Submitted: The purpose of the paper is clear.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 A clear and comprehensive purpose statement is provided which delineates all required criteria. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Purpose of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Purpose of the assignment is vague or off topic. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 No purpose statement was provided. Feedback: Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis

The extend to w hich the work reflects the student’s ability to: Understand and interpret the assignment’s key concepts.-Levels of Achievement: %7B%220.09000 Excellent 9 (9%) – 10 (10%) Demonstrates the ability to critically appraise and intellectually explore key concepts. %7B%220.08000 Good 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Demonstrates a clear understanding of key concepts. Fair 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) %7B%220.07000 Shows some degree of understanding of key concepts. Poor 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) %7B%220.00000 Shows a lack of understanding of key concepts, deviates from topics. Feedback: Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to: Apply and integrate material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, and textbook) and credible outside resources.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) %7B%220.18000 Demonstrates and applies exceptional support of major points and integrates 2 or more credible outside sources, in addition to 2-3 course resources to suppport point of view. Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) %7B%220.16000 Integrates specific information from 1 credible outside resource and 2-3 course resources to support major points and point of view. Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) %7B%220.14000 Minimally includes and integrates specific information from 2-3 resources to support major points and point of view. Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) %7B%220.00000 Includes and integrates specific information from 0 to 1 resoruce to support major points and point of view. Feedback: Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to: Synthesize (combines various components or different ideas into a new whole) material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, textbook) and outside, credible resources by comparing different points of view and highlighting similarities, differences, and connections.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) %7B%220.18000 Synthesizes and justifies (defends, explains, validates, confirms) information gleaned from sources to support major points presented. Applies meaning to the field of advanced nursing practice. Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) %7B%220.16000 Summarizes information gleaned from sources to support major points, but does not synthesize. Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) %7B%220.14000 Identifies but does not interpret or apply concepts, and/or strategies correctly; ideas unclear and/or underdeveloped. %7B%220.00000 Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) Rarely or does not interpret, apply, and synthesize concepts, and/or strategies. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting Paragraph and Sentence Structure: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.-Levels of Achievement: Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 80% of the time. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity < 60% of the time. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 Uses correct APA format with no errors. Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback: Total Points: 100 Name: NURS_6241_Week_7_Assignment_1_Rubric … Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis