Below is the rubric the topic is diabetes in Indian culture. All the details are in file below 

NR222 RUA: Health Promotion Project (New MAY20)
NR222 RUA: Health Promotion Project (New MAY20)CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction and ConclusionRequired criteria
1. Introduction establishes the purpose of the paper and describes why topic is important to health promotion in the target population in your area.
2. Introduction stimulates the reader’s interest.
3. Conclusion includes the main ideas from the body of the paper.
4. Conclusion includes the major support points from the body of the paper.

15.0 ptsHighest Performance
Includes no fewer than 4 requirements for section.
13.0 ptsHigh Performance
Includes no fewer than 3 requirements for section.
12.0 ptsSatisfactory
Includes no fewer than 2 requirements for section.
8.0 ptsUnsatisfactory
Includes 1 or fewer requirements for section.
0.0 ptsSection not Present
No requirements for this section presented.15.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRelate Topic to Target PopulationRequired criteria
1. Describes the topic and target cultural population.
2. Includes statistics to support significance of the topic.
3. Explains how the project relates to the selected Healthy People 2020 topic area.
4. Applies health promotion concepts.

25.0 ptsHighest Performance
Includes no fewer than 4 requirements for section.
20.0 ptsHigh Performance
Includes no fewer than 3 requirements for section.
15.0 ptsSatisfactory
Includes no fewer than 2 requirements for section.
10.0 ptsUnsatisfactory
Includes 1 or fewer requirements for section.
0.0 ptsSection not Present
No requirements for this section presented.25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSummary of ArticlesRequired criteria
1. A minimum of three (3) scholarly articles, from the last 5 years, are used as sources.
2. Articles meet criteria of being from scholarly journals and include health promotion and wellness content.
3. At least one article is related to the chosen cultural group.
4. Summaries all key points and findings from the articles.
5. Includes statistics to support significance of the topic.
6. Discusses how information from the articles is used in the Health Promotion Project, including specific examples.

25.0 ptsHighest Performance
Includes no fewer than 4 requirements for section.
23.0 ptsHigh Performance
Includes no fewer than 3 requirements for section.
21.0 ptsSatisfactory
Includes no fewer than 2 requirements for section.
10.0 ptsUnsatisfactory
Includes 1 or fewer requirements for section.
0.0 ptsSection not Present
No requirements for this section presented.25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeHealth Promotion DiscussionRequired criteria
1. Describes approaches to educate the target population about the topic.
2. The approaches are appropriate for the cultural target population.
3. Identifies specific ways to promote lifestyle changes within the target population.
4. Applies health promotion strategies.

25.0 ptsHighest Performance
Includes no fewer than 4 requirements for section.
23.0 ptsHigh Performance
Includes no fewer than 3 requirements for section.
21.0 ptsSatisfactory
Includes no fewer than 2 requirements for section.
10.0 ptsUnsatisfactory
Includes 1 or fewer requirements for section.
0.0 ptsSection not Present
No requirements for this section presented.25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Style and OrganizationRequired criteria
1. TurnItIn is used prior to submitting paper for grading.
2. Revisions are made based on TurnItIn originality report.
3. References are submitted with assignment.
4. Uses current APA format and is free of errors.
5. Grammar and mechanics are free of errors.
6. Paper is 3-4 pages, excluding title and reference pages.
7. Information is organized around required components and flows in a logical sequence.

10.0 ptsHighest Performance
Includes no fewer than 7 requirements for section.
9.0 ptsHigh Performance
Includes no fewer than 6 requirements for section.
8.0 ptsSatisfactory
Includes no fewer than 5 requirements for section.
4.0 ptsUnsatisfactory
Includes 1 -4 requirements for section.
0.0 ptsSection not Present
No requirements for this section presented.10.0 pts
Total Points: 100.0

PreviousNext

Pick a real healthcare organization or create your own. Think about the reimbursement types that organization is basing the financial sustainability on. List the organization type (e.g., for profit, not-for-profit etc., a hospital, a minute clinic etc.). List the income streams appropriate (e.g., out of pocket, capitation, fee-for-service etc.). Discuss how we can use epidemiology to assess served population healthcare risks that will affect cost of care and financial sustainability of your organization.

 

Draft a written proposal and implementation guidelines for an organizational policy that you believe would help lead to an improvement in quality and performance associated with the benchmark metric for which you advocated action in Assessment 1.

Introduction

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 advocating for institutional policy changes related to local, state, or federal health care laws or policies, health leaders must be able to develop and present clear and well-written policy and practice guidelines change proposals that will enable a team, unit, or the organization as a whole to resolve relevant performance issues and bring about improvements in the quality and safety of health care.

As a master’s-level health care practitioner you have a valuable viewpoint and voice to bring to discussions about policy development, both inside and outside your care setting. Developing policy for internal purposes can be a valuable process toward quality and safety improvement, as well as ensuring compliance with various health care regulatory pressures. This assessment offers you an opportunity to take the lead in proposing such changes.

Demonstration of Proficiency

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and assessment criteria:

• Competency 2: Analyze relevant health care laws and regulations and their applications and effects on processes within a health care team or organization.
  • Propose a succinct policy and guidelines to enable a team, unit, or the organization as a whole to implement recommended strategies to resolve the performance issue related to the relevant local, state, or federal health care policy or law.
• Competency 3: Lead the development and implementation of ethical and culturally sensitive policies that improve health outcomes for individuals, organizations, and populations.
  • Recommend ethical, evidence-based strategies to resolve a performance issue related to health care policy or law.
• 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.
  • Explain the need for creating an organizational policy or practice to address a shortfall in meeting a prescribed metric benchmark. 
• Competency 5: Develop strategies to work collaboratively with policy makers, stakeholders, and colleagues to address environmental (governmental and regulatory) forces.
  • Analyze the potential effects of environmental factors on recommended strategies.
  • Propose stakeholders and groups that would need to be involved in further development and implementation of the recommended strategies, policy, and guidelines.
• 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 a proposed policy and guidelines and recommended strategies in a professional and persuasive manner, writing content clearly and logically, with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
  • Effectively support arguments with relevant sources, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style.

Preparation

After reviewing your benchmark evaluation, senior leaders in the organization have asked you to draft a policy change proposal and practice guidelines addressing the benchmark metric for which you advocated action.

In their request, senior leaders have asked for a proposal of not more than 2–4 pages that includes a concise policy description (about one paragraph), practice guidelines, and 3–5 credible references to relevant research, case studies, or best practices that support your analysis and recommendations. You are also expected to be precise, professional, and persuasive in justifying the merit of your proposed actions.

When creating your policy and guidelines it may be helpful to utilize the template that your current care setting or organization uses. Your setting’s risk management or quality department could be a good resource for finding an appropriate template or format. If you are not currently in practice, or your care setting does not have these resources, there are numerous appropriate templates freely available on the Web.

You may also find it useful to have worked through the Problem Identification and Policy Development | Transcript media piece. This activity could be useful in refining your understanding about aligning policy development to address specific problems.

Instructions

The senior leadership has stressed that they hope you are precise and professional in your proposal, as well as persuasive in demonstrating the merit of your proposed actions. They have stressed that the following must be addressed in your proposal.

Note: The tasks outlined below correspond to grading criteria in the scoring guide.

In your proposal, senior leaders have asked that you:

• Explain why a change in organizational policy or practice guidelines is needed to address a shortfall in meeting a performance benchmark prescribed by applicable local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.
  • What is the current benchmark for the organization? What is the numeric score for the underperformance?
  • How might the benchmark underperformance be affecting the quality of care being provided or the operations of the organization?
  • What are the potential repercussions of not making any changes?
• Recommend ethical, evidence-based strategies to resolve the performance issue.
  • What does the evidence-based literature suggest are potential strategies to improve performance for your targeted benchmark?
  • How would these strategies ensure improved performance or compliance with applicable local, state, or federal health care laws or policies?
  • How would you propose to apply these strategies in the context of your chosen professional practice setting?
  • How would you ensure that the application of these strategies is ethical and culturally inclusive?
  • Does your policy encompass the key components of your recommendations?
• Analyze the potential effects of environmental factors on your recommended strategies.
  • What regulatory considerations could affect your recommended strategies?
  • What organizational resources could affect your recommended strategies (for example, staffing, finances, logistics, and support services)?
  • Are your policy and guidelines realistic in light of existing environmental factors?
• Propose a succinct policy and guidelines to enable a team, unit, or the organization as a whole to implement recommended strategies to resolve the performance issue related to the relevant local, state, or federal health care policy or law.
• Identify colleagues, individual stakeholders, or stakeholder groups who should be involved in further development and implementation of your proposed policy, guidelines, and recommended strategies.
  • Why is it important to engage these colleagues, individual stakeholders, or stakeholder groups?
  • Do your proposed guidelines help colleagues, individual stakeholders, or stakeholder groups understand how to implement your proposed policy?
  • How might engaging these colleagues, individual stakeholders, or stakeholder groups result in a better organizational policy and smoother implementation?
  • Are your proposal and recommended strategies realistic, given the care team, unit, or organization you are considering?
• Communicate your proposed policy, guidelines, and recommended strategies in a professional and persuasive manner.
  • Write clearly and logically, using correct grammar, punctuation, and mechanics.
• Integrate relevant sources to support your arguments, correctly formatting source citations and references using current APA style.
  • Did you cite an additional 3–5 credible sources to support your analysis and recommendations?

Additional Requirements

• Structure: Include a title page and reference page.
• Length: 2–4 pages should be sufficient for presenting a thorough and concise evaluation, not including your  titles and reference pages.
• References: Cite 3–5 current scholarly or professional resources.
• Format: Use APA style for references and citations.
  • You may wish to refer to the following APA resources to help with your structure, formatting, and style:
    • APA Style and Format.
    • APA Paper Tutorial.
    • APA Paper Template.
• Font: Times New Roman font, 12 point, double-spaced for narrative portions only.

Grading Rubric:

1.  Explain the need for creating an organizational policy or practice to address a shortfall in meeting a prescribed metric benchmark. 

Passing Grade:  Explains the need for creating an organizational policy or practice to address a shortfall in meeting a prescribed metric benchmark, acknowledging costs and benefits both of changing and of not changing the policy or practice. 

2.  Recommend ethical, evidence-based strategies to resolve a performance issue related to health care policy or law. 

Passing Grade:  Recommends ethical, evidence-based strategies to resolve a performance issue related to health care policy or law, and identifies areas of uncertainty or knowledge gaps. 

3.  Analyze the potential effects of environmental factors on recommended strategies. 

Passing Grade:  Analyzes the potential effects of environmental factors on recommended strategies, and proposes mitigation or potential responses to those factors. 

4.  Propose a succinct policy and guidelines to enable a team, unit, or the organization as a whole to implement recommended strategies to resolve the performance issue related to the relevant local, state, or federal health care policy or law. 

Passing Grade:  Proposes a succinct policy and guidelines to enable a team, unit, or the organization as a whole to implement recommended strategies to resolve the performance issue related to the relevant local, state, or federal health care policy or law; makes explicit links to evidence that supports the soundness of the proposal. 

5.  Propose stakeholders and groups that would need to be involved in further development and implementation of the recommended strategies, policy, and guidelines. 

Passing Grade:  Proposes stakeholders and groups that would need to be involved in further development and implementation of the recommended strategies, policy, and guidelines, and suggests collaboration strategies. 

6.  Communicate proposal in a professional and persuasive manner, writing content clearly and logically, with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. 

Passing Grade:   Proposal is professional, effective, and insightful; content is clear, logical, and persuasive; grammar, punctuation, and spelling are without errors. 

7.   Effectively support arguments with relevant sources, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style. 

Passing Grade:  Effectively supports arguments with relevant sources, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style. Citations are free from errors. 

 

1) **********minimum 2 full pages (1 page each document) ( not words)**************************** (cover or reference page not included) 

2)¨**********APA norms, please use headers  (All paragraphs must be narrative and cited in the text- each paragraphs- bulleted responses are not accepted- do not write in the first person.)

3)********** It will be verified by Turnitin and SafeAssign 

4) Minimum 4 references not older than 5 years

5) Each answer must be identified according to the question number. Check the list of questions. Your answer should start objectively answering the question

Question:

1)…………

2)…………

3)…………

Answer:

1)…………

2)…………

3)…………

_______________________________________________________

You must answer (4) question 2 times. 

You must submit 2 documents (each 1 page).

Copy and paste will not be admitted. 

You should address the questions with different wording, different references, but always, objectively answering the questions.

___________________________________________________________

Case: 

 

Mr. J, age 42, is a construction worker in Las Vegas. He recently noticed that a mole on his face seemed to be getting larger and darker. At first he did not worry because he was in the sun a lot and assumed the change may have been caused by sunburn. After a month, not only was the mole larger and darker, but it appeared to be “bumpy.” His doctor diagnosed a malignant melanoma skin cancer following biopsy of the nevus. Mr. J reports pain in his right shin that does not go away when he puts his feet up or sleeps.

Discussion Questions

• 1) Relate Mr. J’s skin changes to the warning signs for malignant melanoma.
• 2) Discuss the normal progression of this malignancy. 
• 3) What is the significance of the bone pain that Mr. J is experiencing?
• 4)Discuss the treatment available for this patient and the prognosis for recovery.

 

Overview

For this assignment, you write your own qualitative study critique (similar to what you did in Week 12 for the quantitative study critique, only this time critiquing a qualitative research study) on one of the studies provided to you.

Choose one qualitative journal article from this list:

• Biezen, R., Grando, D., Mazza, D., & Brijnath, B. (2019). Visibility and transmission: complexities around promoting hand hygiene in young children: A qualitative study. BMC Public Health, 19(1), no pages.
• da Silva Lins, H. N., Macêdo Paiva, L. K., Gonçalves de Souza, M., Cassimiro Lima, R. M., & Albuquerque, N. L. A. (2019). Experiences in women’s care: Doulas’ perception. Journal of Nursing UFPE / Revista de Enfermagem UFPE, 13(5), 1264–1269.
• Mele, B., Goodarzi, Z., Hanson, H. M., & Holroyd-Leduc, J. (2019). Barriers and facilitators to diagnosing and managing apathy in Parkinson’s disease: A qualitative study. BMC Neurology, 19(1), no pages.

Assignment Instructions

Read your selected journal article entirely.

Analyze the journal article and use the specific questions that are outlined in Gray, Grove, and Sutherland (2017) found on pages 445 through 449 to construct your analysis of your chosen qualitative research study.

These are the main headers of your paper:

• Identifying the Steps of the Qualitative Research Process
• Determination of Strengths and Weaknesses of Qualitative Studies
• Evaluating a Qualitative Study

You have many questions to address in your assignment this week. They should be in complete sentences (i.e., bullet point responses are not acceptable).

APA format is required in your assignment Word document. Page length, excluding the title and references list, is between five and seven pages.

Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded.

 

Writing Assignment Rubric

Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.

Writing Assignment Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary
Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced
Meets ExpectationsIntermediate
Needs ImprovementNovice
InadequateTotal PointsContent of PaperThe writer demonstrates a well-articulated understanding of the subject matter in a clear, complex, and informative manner. The paper content and theories are well developed and linked to the paper requirements and practical experience. The paper includes relevant material that fulfills all objectives of the paper.

Cites five or more references, using at least two new scholarly resources that were not provided in the course materials.

All instruction requirements noted.

30 pointsThe writer demonstrates an understanding of the subject matter, and components of the paper are accurately represented with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Course materials and scholarly resources support required concepts. The paper includes relevant material that fulfills all objectives of the paper.

Cites four references.

All instruction requirements noted.

26 pointsThe writer demonstrates a moderate understanding of the subject matter as evidenced by components of the paper being summarized with minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role-development. Course content is present but missing depth and or development.

Cites three references.

Most instruction requirements are noted.

23 pointsAbsent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Use of course content is superficial.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

Content of paper is inaccurately portrayed or missing.

Cites two or fewer references.

Missing some instruction requirements.

20 points30Analysis and Synthesis of Paper Content and MeaningThrough critical analysis, the submitted paper provides an accurate, clear, concise, and complete presentation of the required content.

Information from scholarly resources is synthesized, providing new information or insight related to the context of the assignment by providing both supportive and alternative information or viewpoints.

All instruction requirements noted.

30 pointsPaper is complete, providing evidence of further synthesis of course content via scholarly resources.

Information is synthesized to help fulfill paper requirements. The content supports at least one viewpoint.

All instruction requirements noted.

26 pointsPaper lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly reference supports the content without adding any new information or insight. The paper’s content may be confusing or unclear, and the summary may be incomplete.

Most instruction requirements are noted.

23 pointsSubmission is primarily a summation of the assignment without further synthesis of course content or analysis of the scenario.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

Missing some instruction requirements.

Submits assignment late.

20 points30Application of KnowledgeThe summary of the paper provides information validated via scholarly resources that offer a multidisciplinary approach.

The student’s application in practice is accurate and plausible, and additional scholarly resource(s) supporting the application is provided.

All questions posed within the assignment are answered in a well-developed manner with citations for validation.

All instruction requirements noted.

30 pointsA summary of the paper’s content, findings, and knowledge gained from the assignment is presented.

Student indicates how the information will be used within their professional practice.

All instruction requirements noted.

26 pointsObjective criteria are not clearly used, allowing for a more superficial application of content between the assignment and the broader course content.

Student’s indication of how they will apply this new knowledge to their clinical practice is vague.

Most instruction requirements are noted.

23 pointsThe application of knowledge is significantly lacking.

Student’s indication of how they will apply this new knowledge to their clinical practice is not practical or feasible.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

Application of knowledge is incorrect and/or student fails to explain how the information will be used within their personal practice.

Missing several instruction requirements.

Submits assignment late.

20 points30OrganizationWell-organized content with a clear and complex purpose statement and content argument. Writing is concise with a logical flow of ideas.

5 pointsOrganized content with an informative purpose statement and supportive content and summary statement. Argument content is developed with minimal issues in content flow.

4 pointsPoor organization, and flow of ideas distract from content. Narrative is difficult to follow and frequently causes reader to reread work.

Purpose statement is noted.

3 pointsIllogical flow of ideas. Missing significant content. Prose rambles. Purpose statement is unclear or missing.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

No purpose statement.

Submits assignment late.

2 points5APA, Grammar, and SpellingCorrect APA formatting with no errors.

The writer correctly identifies reading audience, as demonstrated by appropriate language (avoids jargon and simplifies complex concepts appropriately).

Writing is concise, in active voice, and avoids awkward transitions and overuse of conjunctions.

There are no spelling, punctuation, or word-usage errors

5 pointsCorrect and consistent APA formatting of references and cites all references used. No more than two unique APA errors.

The writer demonstrates correct usage of formal English language in sentence construction. Variation in sentence structure and word usage promotes readability.

There are minimal to no grammar, punctuation, or word-usage errors.

4 pointsThree to four unique APA formatting errors.

The writer occasionally uses awkward sentence construction or overuses/inappropriately uses complex sentence structure. Problems with word usage (evidence of incorrect use of thesaurus) and punctuation persist, often causing some difficulties with grammar. Some words, transitional phrases, and conjunctions are overused.

Multiple grammar, punctuation, or word usage errors.

3 pointsFive or more unique formatting errors or no attempt to format in APA.

The writer demonstrates limited understanding of formal written language use; writing is colloquial (conforms to spoken language).

The writer struggles with limited vocabulary and has difficulty conveying meaning such that only the broadest, most general messages are presented.

Grammar and punctuation are consistently incorrect. Spelling errors are numerous.

Submits assignment late.

2 points5Total Points100