NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
ORDER CUSTOM, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS ON NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
Hello I need help with a paper that has already been write. I have attached the preparation and information word documents to help understand what the paper was about. Also the grading tool any where you see basic it where the comment are needs to fix so I can be graded at proficient or distinguished. NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
NHS-FP6004_MillsSamantha_Assessment- this the paper with comments of things that need to be change. Please use this one to make the changes and attach this when completed. Please highlight your changes.
Please let me know if you need help.
Overview: Review the performance dashboard for a health care organization, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Then, write a report for senior leaders in the organization that communicates your analysis and evaluation of the current state of organizational performance, including a recommended metric to target for improvement. Note: Each assessment in this course builds on the work you completed in the previous assessment. Therefore, you must complete the assessments in this course in the order in which they are presented. In the era of health care reform, many of the laws and policies set 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. This assessment offers an opportunity for you to demonstrate and sharpen your ability to analyze, interpret, and evaluate performance dashboard metrics.
By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and assessment criteria: • • • • NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
Competency 1: Analyze the effects of health care policies, laws, and regulations on organizations, interprofessional teams, and personal practice. • Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team.
Competency 3: Lead the development and implementation of ethical and culturally sensitive policies that improve health outcomes for individuals, organizations, and populations. • Advocate for ethical action in addressing a benchmark underperformance, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders.
Competency 4: Evaluate relevant indicators of performance, such as benchmarks, research, and best practices, for health care policies and law for patients, organizations, and populations. • Evaluate dashboard metrics with regard to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws. • Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
Competency 6: Apply various methods of communicating with policy makers, stakeholders, colleagues, and patients to ensure that communication in a given situation is professional, clear, efficient, and effective. • Communicate evaluation and analysis in a professional and effective manner, writing content clearly and logically, with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. • Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style.
Questions to Consider
As you prepare to complete this assessment, you may want to think about other related issues to deepen your understanding or broaden your viewpoint. You are encouraged to consider the questions below and discuss them with a fellow learner, a work associate, an interested friend or family member, or a member of your professional community. Note that these questions are for your own development and exploration and do not need to be completed or submitted as part of your assessment. • •
What local, state, or federal health care policies or laws set benchmarks and standards reflected in performance dashboards common in your professional area of practice? What are the potential challenges or opportunities for health care organizations or interprofessional teams in meeting prescribed performance benchmarks and standards? Factors you might consider include the organization’s mission, its size and resources, operational policies and procedures, and the population the organization serves. NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
Capella University Scoring Guide Tool NHS-FP6004 u01a1 – Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation Learner: Samantha , Mills OVERALL COMMENTS Samantha: Thank you for your submission of Assessment 1, attempt 2. I appreciate that you made improvements, especially in correcting the grammatical errors and awkward wording. However, you still do not clearly address low performing benchmarks with accurate data. You need to discuss challenges of improving documentation errors. You address diversity but how is diversity related to improving documentation errors? Ethical actions need to address the documentation errors and not diversity. You still need to review APA formatting. See my comments in the paper and on the scoring guide. Please highlight your changes in a different color. This first assessment is the basis for the future assessments. This first assessment can be challenging and I am not sure if you fully understand what is being asked.
Each assessment in this course builds on previous assessments so it is imperative that learners have a good understanding of the expectations. Please contact me or the tutor for assistance. We are here to support you and want you to succeed in this course. Dr. Ryan
RUBRICS
https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails 1/7 4/29/2019 Capella University Scoring Guide Tool CRITERIA 1 (20%) Evaluate dashboard metrics with regard to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws. COMPETENCY Evaluate relevant indicators of performance, such as benchmarks, research, and best practices, for health care policies and law for patients, organizations, and populations. NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not analyze dashboard metrics with regard to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws. BASIC: Analyzes dashboard metrics, but relationship to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws is missing or flawed.
PROFICIENT: Evaluates dashboard metrics with regard to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws. DISTINGUISHED: Evaluates dashboard metrics with regard to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws, and identifies knowledge gaps, unknowns, missing information, unanswered questions, or areas of uncertainty (where further information could improve the evaluation). Comments: You still need to evaluate actual dashboard metrics by comparing Mercy Medical Center’s data with other local, state or national benchmarks. https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails 2/7 4/29/2019 Capella University Scoring Guide Tool CRITERIA 2 (16%) Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team.
COMPETENCY Analyze the effects of health care policies, laws, and regulations on organizations, interprofessional teams, and personal practice. NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not list challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team. BASIC: Lists but does not analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team, or provides a flawed analysis that misses key challenges. PROFICIENT: Analyzes challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team. NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
DISTINGUISHED: Analyzes challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team, and identifies assumptions on which the analysis is based. Comments: Previous: You discuss demographics for the county in Minnesota but you don’t discuss how these demographics can pose challenges in meeting the benchmarks. You briefly mention staffing. How do age, and cultural diversity affect the documentation errors? https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails 3/7 4/29/2019 Capella University Scoring Guide Tool CRITERIA 3 (16%) Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance. COMPETENCY Evaluate relevant indicators of performance, such as benchmarks, research, and best practices, for health care policies and law for patients, organizations, and populations.
NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance. BASIC: Provides a partial or flawed evaluation of a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team; misses factors that are key to understanding the potential for improving overall quality or performance. PROFICIENT: Evaluates a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance. DISTINGUISHED: Evaluates a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance, and defends reasoning for selecting this benchmark over another with similar potential for improvement. Comments: You provide data for documentation errors for the Bariatric and Orthopedic services for 2016 and 2017 which do not correlate with the source. How can documentation be improved and what are the repercussions if documentation is not improved? https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails 4/7 4/29/2019 Capella University Scoring Guide Tool CRITERIA 4 (16%) Advocate for ethical action in addressing a benchmark underperformance, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders.
COMPETENCY Lead the development and implementation of ethical and culturally sensitive policies that improve health outcomes for individuals, organizations, and populations. NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not advocate for ethical action in addressing a benchmark underperformance, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders. BASIC: Attempts to advocate for ethical action but attempt is flawed, superficial, or does not address an appropriate group of stakeholders. PROFICIENT: Advocates for ethical action in addressing a benchmark underperformance, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders. DISTINGUISHED: Advocates for ethical action in addressing a benchmark underperformance, directed at an appropriate group of stakeholders, and recommends criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of recommended action. Comments: Previous: You discuss diversity but what this criteria is asking is for ethical actions in addressing the low performing benchmark of documentation, not diversity. https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails 5/7 4/29/2019 Capella University Scoring Guide Tool. NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
CRITERIA 5 (16%) Communicate evaluation and analysis in a professional and effective manner, writing content clearly and logically, with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. COMPETENCY Apply various methods of communicating with policy makers, stakeholders, colleagues, and patients to ensure that communication in a given situation is professional, clear, efficient, and effective. NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not communicate evaluation and analysis findings and recommendations in a professional and effective manner; does not write content clearly and logically, and does not use correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
BASIC: Communicates evaluation and analysis findings and recommendations that are not consistently professional, effective, clear, and logical, or that contain errors in use of grammar, punctuation, or spelling that distract from the message. PROFICIENT: Communicates evaluation and analysis in a professional and effective manner, writing content clearly and logically, with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. DISTINGUISHED: Communicates evaluation and analysis findings and recommendations that are professional, effective, and insightful; the content is clear, logical, and persuasive; and grammar, punctuation, and spelling are without errors. Comments: Good job in correcting the grammatical errors and awkward wording. https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails 6/7 4/29/2019 Capella University Scoring Guide Tool CRITERIA 6 (16%) Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style.
COMPETENCY Apply various methods of communicating with policy makers, stakeholders, colleagues, and patients to ensure that communication in a given situation is professional, clear, efficient, and effective. NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not integrate relevant sources to support arguments; does not correctly format citations and references using current APA style. BASIC: Cites sources that lack relevance or integrates them poorly, or formats citations or references incorrectly. PROFICIENT: Integrates relevant sources to support arguments, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style. DISTINGUISHED: Integrates relevant sources to support arguments, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style. Citations are free from all errors. Comments: You provide relevant sources to support most of your discussions but there are still some facts and assertions that are not supported with evidence. You also need to review APA for running heads, citations and references. APA central link http://apastylecentral.apa.org.library.capella.edu/ APA citing a website Revised completed paperhttp://media.capella.edu/CourseMedia/APACitation/website.asp Academic Writer link: https://academicwriter-apa-org.library.capella.edu/ https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails 7/7 Running head: Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation Samantha Mills Capella University NHS-FP6004 04/26/2019 Evaluation of the Dashboard and the Healthcare 1 Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation 8 There is every kind of essence for healthcare organizations to come up with benchmarking means as this would effectively improve their services (Blouin, 2017).
The primary role of the benchmarks is that they provide visual interpretations and plans on how the organizations would improve their services and facilities. It means that through the data provided by the benchmarks, it would be possible for the firms to carry out analyses and seek ways of improving their firms. Through benchmarking, the organizations are provided with a platform for analyzing their internal data, local, international, while at the same time comparing them with other facilities (Exchange, 2018). NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
At the end of the process, the facility would have gained much in terms of what they are supposed to improve. According to Blouin (2017), benchmarking is a process that involves measuring the internal process of an organization, then identifying, analyzing, understanding, and adapting to the outstanding practices as carried out by the other organizations. A performance dashboard is described as a layered system of data delivery system, which is presented in a single screen, while at the same time providing the most critical information (Blouin, 2017). Through the performance dashboard, the organizations can formulate strategic objectives about their facilities (Blouin, 2017). With this, the managers can quickly identify, measure, monitor, and then manage their performance more effectively. The end product of this is that there would be an effective system of management that has accumulated knowledge from different aspects, hence incorporating them into their system. There are professional healthcare professions who have been explicitly used benchmarking metrics to improve their facilities. An excellent example of this is Mercy Medical Center. The organization has critically made use of the benchmarks, whose purpose is to evaluate Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation 8 the errors, the demographics, readmission, and patient safety (Exchange, 2018). By getting this knowledge as instructed at Mercy Medical Center, it would be able to come up with an even more enhanced organization than before. The benchmarks are equally to be compared at both the national levels and the local levels. It should be noted that for healthcare organizations to enhance efficiency in service delivery, they should strive to ensure that they compete both locally and nationally. It is impossible for an organization to enhance efficiency if they keep their levels down at the local levels alone (Blouin, 2017). NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
This paper analyses the benchmarks metrics of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) dashboards at the Mercy Medical Center. The evaluation also includes the challenges involved in the same and the underperformance that has been witnessed over a long period. Above all, the report tries to highlight strategies on how such issues could be addressed adequately. Benchmarks as Structured by the Local, State, or the Federal Healthcare Policies The Joint Commission stipulates that the primary roles of the dashboards are to focus more on the quality and safety, while at the same time documenting the risk management trends, and the severe safety events within the facility (Exchange, 2018). The risk management trends and patterns should be given among the priorities given that most of the work within the facility touches on the safety of the patients. The safety of the patients should always come as a first priority. Other factors that the dashboard should address include the staffing issue and critically, the quality of services offered by the organization (Health, 2018). At Mercy Medical Center, the organization has come up with meaningful metrics that ensure the organization has met all the highlighted factors, from patient’s safety to the quality of healthcare that is provided. According to Mercy Medical Center, quality is the most critical thing when it comes to patient care.
If a facility were not able to take care of the quality that they offer, Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation 8 at the end of it, they would have failed the patients as far as matters of healthcare are concerned. In this regard, Mercy Medical Center saw the need to develop a benchmark that critically illustrated to show both the local and national readmission rates for COPD, heart failure, and pneumonia (Ghazisaeidi & Safdari et al., 2015). The organization was keen in establishing and analyzing the failures within its setting, medication errors, documentation errors, and the patient injuries that had not been addressed before. It is arguably correct that with this in place, it becomes elementary to deal with the mistakes and rectify them. Minnesota’s Local Public Health Act stipulates that the local government and the state are responsible in dealing with health care issues (Blouin, 2017). Both the state and local government should come up with better ways that would enhance service delivery at the healthcare centers. With that in place, they would have developed better means of providing even better services to their patients. The local government and the state are both responsible for coming up with accountability schemes for the funding of initiatives, developing, and initiating guidelines that would aid in assessing and planning of appropriate healthcare within the state (Dreachslin & Maldonado et al., 2017). NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation
They should also come up with means that would develop documented progress towards the achievement of statewide objectives and goals. After all, these are done, the two should come up with an assigned oversight body to commission the healthcare system within the state or the entire country. Benchmarking Challenges In any given organization metrics, it is expected that several challenges may occur. The three primary problems that are expected within the setting of an organization include age diversity, cultural diversity, and proper documentation (Exchange, 2018). Although … NHS-FP6004 Benchmark Evaluation