NURS 8114 Week 6 assignment: EBP, IS, AND QI
For Week 6, you will continue to develop your EBP, IS, and QI Assignment, which you began in Week 4.
Note: This Assignment is hypothetical in nature and is unrelated to your Practicum and DNP Project. However, the work you put in on this Assignment can help inform your future Practicum and DNP Project.
Note: This is a two-part Assignment consisting of a written paper and a PowerPoint presentation, both of which are due by Day 7 of Week 6.
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
TO PREPARE
- Review the Learning Resources in Weeks 4, 5, and 6 that address evidence-based practice (EBP), implementation science (IS), and quality improvement (QI).
- Review the Learning Resources that address how to use PowerPoint and create narrated PowerPoint presentations.
- Identify three sites within your community that would benefit from an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) project.
- Based on your professional experience, consider practice or organization issues that would make sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) project initiative. Select one on which to focus for this Assignment. Note: You should consider practice or organization issues that you are particularly interested in or passionate about.
- Search the Walden Library and/or the internet to identify at least five recent, peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years) to support the development of a QI project that applies EBP to address the specific practice or organization issue you selected.
- Based on the practice or organization issue you selected, consider the key stakeholders who would be involved in a QI initiative at each of the three sites you selected. For each site, research the website and any other available information to identify:
- A department that leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the organization who would be in charge of approving such initiatives
- Titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (including the highest level of required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement changes in daily patient care)
- Select one of the three potential sites you identified that you think is the best option. Consider the factors on which you based your decision, as well as the mechanics of your decision-making process.
- Based on the practice or organization issue and the site you selected, consider various translation frameworks/models that may be a good fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative.
- Select one translation framework/model that you think is the best fit. Then, consider the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows this framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. Note: Utilize the Week 5 Learning Resources and Discussion to help you with this.
- Begin outlining how you would present the elements of your proposed evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative to key stakeholders of the site you selected in order to gain their approval. Note: You will use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template document, provided in the Learning Resources, to develop this presentation to stakeholders.
Note: This is a two-part Assignment consisting of a written paper and a PowerPoint presentation. Both are due by Day 7 of Week 6.
THE ASSIGNMENT (3–5 PAGES)
Part 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper)
For Part 1, you will present the specifics of your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. You will also explain your decision-making processes.
In a 4- to 6-page paper (not including cover page and references page), do the following:
Site Selection (1–2 pages)
- Describe each of the three healthcare settings you identified as the proposed site for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be sure to address the following questions about the site:
- Who is the patient population(s)?
- What is their mission?
- Is it a public or private entity?
- Is it a stand-alone organization or a member of a larger corporation?
- What other information about the site do you think is relevant and significant?
- Compare the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites in terms of their viability as the location for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be specific and provide examples.
- Identify the one site of the three you selected. Describe the factors on which you based your decision. Explain your decision-making process.
Stakeholders (1 page)
- Identify the department that leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the organization who would be in charge of approving such an initiative.
- Identify the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (from the highest level of required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement changes in daily patient care).
Practice or Organization Issue (1 page)
- Describe the practice or organization issue you selected.
- Explain why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be specific, provide examples, and cite at least five recent, peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years).
Translation Framework/Model (1–2 page)
- Identify and briefly describe the one translation framework/model that you decided is the best fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative.
- Explain why you selected it amongst all the alternatives.
- Describe the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model you selected to translate research and evidence to improve practice.
Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 1 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. Use the College of Nursing Writing Template for your Assignment submission.
Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 1 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. The College of Nursing requires that all papers include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. Use the College of Nursing Writing TemplateLinks to an external site. for your Assignment submission.
Part 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation)
For Part 2, you will present your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) Initiative proposal to (hypothetical) stakeholders at the healthcare organization site. Your goal is to persuade and obtain approval for the EBP QI initiative you are proposing.
In a 6- to 10-slide PowerPoint presentation (not including cover and references slides), address the following:
- Title
- Include the title of your presentation and your name.
- Introduction (1–2 slides)
- Identify the healthcare organization site.
- Introduce and describe the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative you are proposing.
- The Issue (2–3 slides)
- Introduce and describe the practice or organization issue you aim to address.
- Explain the goal of the project. Why is it important?
- Translation Framework/Model (2–3 slides)
- Introduce and describe the translation framework/model you will use to implement the project.
- Explain how it will work. Why will it be effective to achieve your goal?
- Conclusion (1–2 slides)
- Summarize your presentation. Ask for stakeholder support.
- References
- Cite the sources you used to support your presentation.
Note: You must Include detailed speaker notes for each slide. Your speaker notes should explain all of the points you would make to the stakeholders to convince them to approve your proposal.
Also Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 2 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. Use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template document Download College of Nursing PowerPoint Template documentfor your Assignment submission.
BY DAY 7 OF WEEK 6
Submit Part 1 (Word) and Part 2 (PPT) of your Assignment.
RELATED: Business Model Canvas Part 2: Pattern, Design, and Strategy
NURS_8114_Week6_Assignment_Rubric
| NURS_8114_Week6_Assignment_Rubric | ||
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Site Selection Describe each of the three healthcare settings you identified as the proposed site for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Compare the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites in terms of their viability as the location for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Identify the one site of the three you selected. Describe the factors on which you based your decision. Explain your decision-making process. | 18 to >16.0 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and clearly describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
16 to >14.0 ptsGoodThe response accurately describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 14 to >12.5 ptsFairThe response inaccurately or vaguely describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 12.5 to >0 ptsPoorThe response inaccurately and vaguely describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Stakeholders Identify the department that leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the organization who would be in charge of approving such a QI initiative. Identify the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (from the highest level of required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement changes in daily patient care). | 18 to >16.0 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and clearly identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
16 to >14.0 ptsGoodThe response accurately identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 14 to >12.5 ptsFairThe response inaccurately or vaguely identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 12.5 to >0 ptsPoorThe response inaccurately and vaguely explains identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Practice or Organization Issue Describe the practice or organization issue you selected. Explain why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be specific, provide examples, and cite at least five recent, peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years). | 18 to >16.0 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and
Note: Full answer to this question is available after purchase.
|
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Translation Framework/Model Identify and briefly describe the one translation framework/model that you decided is the best fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Explain why you selected your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative amongst all the alternatives. Describe the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model you selected to translate research and evidence to improve practice. | 18 to >16.0 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and clearly identifies and describe the one translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
16 to >14.0 ptsGoodThe response accurately identifies and describe the one translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 14 to >12.5 ptsFairThe response inaccurately or vaguely explains identifies and describe the one translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 12.5 to >0 ptsPoorThe response inaccurately and vaguely identifies and describe the one translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
18 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Title and Introduction Include the title of your presentation and your name. Identify the healthcare organization site. Introduce and describe the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative you are proposing. | 15 to >13.5 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and clearly identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
13.5 to >12.0 ptsGoodThe response accurately identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 12 to >10.5 ptsFairThe response inaccurately or vaguely identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 10.5 to >0 ptsPoorThe response inaccurately and vaguely identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) The Issue Introduce and describe the practice or organization issue you aim to address. Explain the goal of the project. Why is it important? | 15 to >13.5 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and clearly introduces and describes the practice or organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
13.5 to >12.0 ptsGoodThe response accurately introduces and describes the practice or organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 12 to >10.5 ptsFairThe response inaccurately or vaguely introduces and describes the practice or organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 10.5 to >0 ptsPoorThe response inaccurately and vaguely introduces and describes the practice or organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Translation Framework/Model Introduce and describe the translation framework/model you will use to implement the project. Explain how it will work. Why will it be effective to achieve your goal? | 15 to >13.5 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and clearly introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be effective to achieve the goal. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
13.5 to >12.0 ptsGoodThe response accurately introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be effective to achieve the goal. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 12 to >10.5 ptsFairThe response inaccurately or vaguely introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be effective to achieve the goal. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 10.5 to >0 ptsPoorThe response inaccurately and vaguely introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be effective to achieve the goal or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Conclusion and References Summarize your presentation. Ask for stakeholder support. Cite the sources you used to support your presentation. | 15 to >13.5 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and clearly summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
13.5 to >12.0 ptsGoodThe response accurately summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 12 to >10.5 ptsFairThe response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described. 10.5 to >0 ptsPoorThe response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing. |
15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. | 6 to >5.0 ptsExcellentParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. 90% of the time. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.
5 to >4.2 ptsGoodParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. 4.2 to >3.0 ptsFairParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 70% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. 3 to >0 ptsPoorParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 70% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation | 6 to >5.0 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
5 to >4.0 ptsGoodContains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 4 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. | 6 to >5.0 ptsExcellentUses correct APA format with no errors.
5 to >4.0 ptsGoodContains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 4 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
6 pts |
Total Points: 150
RELATED: Business Model Canvas Part 2: Pattern, Design, and Strategy
Order This Paper
Reviews
There are no reviews yet.