In a 1,000-1,250-word paper, consider the outcome and process measures that can be used for CQI. Include the following in your essay:
At least two process measures that can be used for CQI.
At least one outcome measure that can be used for CQI.
A description of why each measure was chosen.
An explanation of how data would be collected for each (how each will be measured).
An explanation of how success would be determined.
One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge.
Use a minimum of three peer-reviewed scholarly references as evidence.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Beat the deadline
Order today and get your high-quality custom paper within hours.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Benchmark Information
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency:
MSN Leadership in Health Care Systems
6.5: Generate data-driven, cost-effective solutions to organizational challenges.
Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630 Topic 5 DQ 1
Measurement is required to determine the success of your CQI project. What is the difference between outcome and process measures? Which are more important? Why? Support your reasoning with an example.
Topic 5 DQ 2
Identify which one of the following approaches you would choose to assist in determining and measuring outcomes: FMEA, Pareto principle, and control charts. Describe the best approach and explain why you chose it.
Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630 Resources
Read “Key Questions When Choosing Health Care Quality Measures,” located on the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
Data-Driven Quality Improvement, Culture Change, and the High Reliability Journey at a Special Hospital for People With Medically Complex Developmental Disabilities
Read “Data-Driven Quality Improvement, Culture Change, and the High Reliability Journey at a Special Hospital for People With Medical
Using the Quality Improvement (QI) Tool Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to Examine Implementation Barriers to Common Workflows in Integrated Pediatric Care
Read “Using the Quality Improvement (QI) Tool Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to Examine Implementation Barriers to Common
Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630 – Rubric
Rubric Criteria
Process Measures
Criteria Description
Process Measures
5. Target
13.2 points
Two process measures are present. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
4. Acceptable
12.14 points
NA
3. Approaching
11.62 points
NA
2. Insufficient
10.56 points
Two process measures are incomplete or not applicable. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Two process measures are not present.
Outcome Measures
Criteria Description
Outcome Measures
5. Target
13.2 points
One outcome measure is present.
4. Acceptable
12.14 points
NA
3. Approaching
11.62 points
NA
2. Insufficient
10.56 points
One outcome measure is incomplete or not applicable.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
One outcome measure is not present. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
Description of Why Each Measure Was Chosen
Criteria Description
Description of Why Each Measure Was Chosen
5. Target
14.4 points
A description of why each measure was chosen is present and thorough.
4. Acceptable
13.25 points
A description of why each measure was chosen is present and detailed.
3. Approaching
12.67 points
A description of why each measure was chosen is present. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
2. Insufficient
11.52 points
A description of why each measure was chosen is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A description of why each measure was chosen is not present. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
Explanation of How Data Would Be Collected for Each Measure
Criteria Description
Explanation of How Data Would Be Collected for Each Measure
5. Target
14.4 points
An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is present and thorough.
4. Acceptable
13.25 points
An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is present and detailed.
3. Approaching
12.67 points
An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is present.
2. Insufficient
11.52 points
An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An explanation of how data would be collected for each measure is not present. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
Explanation of How Success Would Be Determined
Criteria Description
Explanation of How Success Would Be Determined
5. Target
14.4 points
An explanation of how success would be determined is present and thorough.
4. Acceptable
13.25 points
An explanation of how success would be determined is present and detailed.
3. Approaching
12.67 points
An explanation of how success would be determined is present.
2. Insufficient
11.52 points
An explanation of how success would be determined is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An explanation of how success would be determined is not present.
Data Driven, Cost-Effective Solutions (C6.5.)
Criteria Description
Data Driven, Cost-Effective Solutions (C6.5.)
5. Target
14.4 points
One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are present and thorough. Solutions provided are appropriate for the task.
4. Acceptable
13.25 points
One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are detailed.
3. Approaching
12.67 points
One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are present.
2. Insufficient
11.52 points
One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are incomplete or not applicable. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
One or two data-driven, cost-effective solutions to this challenge are not present.
Scholarly Sources
Criteria Description
5. Target
6 points
A minimum of three peer-reviewed, scholarly sources are present. Sources are distinctive and address all of the requirements stated in the assignment criteria.
4. Acceptable
5.52 points
A minimum of three peer-reviewed, scholarly sources are present. Sources address all of the requirements stated in the assignment criteria.
3. Approaching
5.28 points
A minimum of three peer-reviewed, scholarly sources are present.
2. Insufficient
4.8 points
Two or three peer-reviewed, sources are present, but are not scholarly. Limited research is present.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Peer-reviewed, scholarly sources are not present.
Thesis Development and Purpose
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Target
8.4 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Acceptable
7.73 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Approaching
7.39 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Insufficient
6.72 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Target
9.6 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Acceptable
8.83 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Approaching
8.45 points
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Insufficient
7.68 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Benchmark Outcome and Process Measures NUR 630
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Mechanics of Writing
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.
5. Target
6 points
No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable
5.52 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.
3. Approaching
5.28 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient
4.8 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
Format/Documentation
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
5. Target
6 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.
4. Acceptable
5.52 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching
5.28 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.
2. Insufficient
4.8 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
