NHS-FPX6004 Assessment 1: Dashboard Metrics Evaluation

Assessment 1 : Dashboard Metrics Evaluation

Write a 3-5 page report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance, with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels.

Introduction

In the era of health care reform, many of the laws and policies set forth 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.

Maintaining standards and promoting quality in modern health care are crucial, not only for the care of patients, but also for the continuing success and financial viability of health care  organizations. In the era of health care reform, health care leaders must understand what quality care entails and how quality in health care connects to the standards set forth by relevant federal, state, and local laws and policies. Understanding relevant benchmarks that result from these laws and policies and how they relate to quality care and regulatory standards is also vitally important.

Health care is a dynamic, complex, and heavily regulated industry. For this reason, you will be expected to constantly scan the external environment for emerging laws, new regulations, and changing industry standards. You may discover that as new policies are enacted into law, ambiguity in interpretation of various facets of the law may occur. Sometimes, new laws conflict with preexisting laws and regulations, or unexpected implementation issues arise, which may warrant further clarification from lawmakers. Adding partisan politics and social media to the mix can
further complicate understanding of the process and buy-in from stakeholders.

Health care is a dynamic, complex, and heavily regulated industry. For this reason, you will be expected to constantly scan the external environment for emerging laws, new regulations, and changing industry standards. You may discover that as new policies are enacted into law, ambiguity in interpretation of various facets of the law may occur. Sometimes, new laws conflict with preexisting laws and regulations, or unexpected implementation issues arise, which may warrant further clarification from lawmakers. Adding partisan politics and social media to the mix can
further complicate understanding of the process and buy-in from stakeholders.

 

ORDER AN ORIGINAL ASSIGNMENT FROM US TODAY !

 

Instructions

Choose one of the following two options for a performance dashboard to use as the basis for your evaluation:

Option 1: Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Simulation

Use the data presented in your Assessment 1 Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation activity as the basis for your evaluation.

Note: The writing you do as part of the simulation could serve as a starting point to build upon for this assessment.

Option 2: Actual Dashboard

Use an actual dashboard from a professional practice setting for your evaluation. If you decide to use actual dashboard metrics, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

• The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
• The specific type of care delivery.
• The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
• The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.

Note: Ensure your data are Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

To complete this assessment:

1. Review the performance dashboard metrics in your Assessment 1 Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation activity, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Note: The writing you do as part of the simulation could serve as a starting point to build upon for this assessment.
2. Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance, with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical and sustainable action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on the performance dashboard.
3. Make sure your report meets the Report Requirements listed below. Structure it so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.

 

Report Requirements

The report requirements outlined below correspond to the scoring guide criteria, so be sure to address each main point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each criterion to see how your work will be assessed. In addition, be sure to note the requirements for document format and length and for supporting evidence.

• Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.
  • Which metrics are not meeting the benchmark for the organization?
  • What are the local, state, or federal health care policies or laws that establish these benchmarks?
  • What conclusions can you draw from your evaluation?
  • Are there any unknowns, missing information, unanswered questions, or areas of uncertainty where additional information could improve your evaluation?
• Analyze the consequence(s) of not meeting prescribed benchmarks and the impact this has on health care organizations or teams.
  • Consider the following examples:
    • Organizational mission and vision.
    • • Financial: Operational and capital funding.
      • Logistical considerations: Physical space.
      • Support services (any ancillary department that gives support to a specific care unit in the
        organization, such as pharmacy, cleaning services, dietary, et cetera).
    • Cultural diversity in the community.
    • Staff skills.
    • Procedures and processes.
  • Address the following:
    • What are the challenges that may potentially contribute to benchmark underperformance?
    • What assumptions underlie your conclusions?
  • Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
    • Focus on the benchmark you chose to target for improvement. Which metric is underperforming its benchmark by the greatest degree?
    • State the benchmark underperformance that is the most widespread throughout the organization or interprofessional team.
    • State the benchmark that affects the greatest number of patients.
    • Include how this underperformance will affect the community that the organization serves.
    • Include the greatest opportunity to improve the overall quality of care or performance of the organization or interpersonal team and, ultimately, to improve patient outcomes, as you think about the issue and the current poor benchmark outcomes.
  • Advocate for ethical and sustainable action(s), directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, needed to address a benchmark underperformance.
    • Who would be an appropriate group of stakeholders to act on improving your identified benchmark metric?
    • Why should the stakeholder group take action?
    • What are some ethical actions the stakeholder group could take that support improved benchmark performance?
  • Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.
    • Proofread your report, before you submit it, to minimize errors that could distract readers and make it more difficult for them to focus on the substance of your evaluation and analysis.
  • Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.
    • Be sure to apply correct APA formatting to source citations and references.

Report Format and Length

Format your report using APA style.

• Use the APA Style Paper Tutorial [DOCX] to help you in writing and formatting your report. Be sure to include:
  • A title and references page. An abstract is not required.
  • Appropriate section headings.
• Your report should be 3–5 pages in length, not including the title page and references page.

Supporting Evidence

Cite 4–6 credible sources from peer-reviewed journals or professional industry publications to support your analysis of challenges, evaluation of potential for improvement, and your advocacy for ethical action.

Portfolio Prompt: You may choose to save your report to your ePortfolio.

 

Competencies Measured

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

• Competency 1: Analyze relevant health care laws, policies, and regulations; their application; and their effects on organizations, interprofessional teams, and professional practice.
  • Analyze the consequence(s) of not meeting prescribed benchmarks and the impact this has on health care organizations or teams.
• Competency 2: Lead the development and implementation of ethical and culturally sensitive policies that improve health outcomes for individuals, organizations, and populations.
  • Advocate for ethical and sustainable action(s), directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, needed to address a benchmark underperformance.
• Competency 3: Evaluate relevant indicators of performance, such as benchmarks, research, and best practices, to inform health care laws and policies for patients, organizations, and populations.
  • Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.
  • Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a health care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving quality or performance
• Competency 5: Produce clear, coherent, and professional written work, in accordance with Capella’s writing standards.
  • Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.
  • Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.

SCORING GUIDE

Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Scoring Guide

CRITERIA	NON-PERFORMANCE	BASIC	PROFICIENT	DISTINGUISHED
Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.	Does not evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.	Evaluates dashboard metrics not clearly associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies, leading to unsubstantiated conclusions about organizational performance.	Evaluates dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.	Provides an objective, accurate evaluation of dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies. Clearly articulates organizational performance shortfalls and any gaps in information affecting the evaluation.
Analyze the consequence(s) of not meeting prescribed benchmarks and the impact this has on health care organizations or teams.	Does not identify the consequence(s) of not meeting prescribed benchmarks and the impact this has on health care organizations or teams.	Identifies the consequence(s) of not meeting prescribed benchmarks and the impact this has on health care organizations or teams.	Analyzes the consequence(s) of not meeting prescribed benchmarks and the impact this has on health care organizations or teams.	Analyzes the consequence(s) of not meeting prescribed benchmarks and the impact this has on health care organizations or teams. Identifies clear implications of such consequences for the organization or team and acknowledges assumptions underlying the analysis.
Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a health care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving quality or performance.	Does not evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.	Conducts an evaluation of a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that misinterprets or overlooks factors that are key to a clear understanding of the potential for improving overall quality or performance.	Evaluates a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.	Evaluates a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance. Provides a compelling and fully substantiated argument for the chosen benchmark’s potential impact on quality of performance.
Advocate for ethical and sustainable action(s), directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, needed to address a benchmark underperformance.	Does not advocate for ethical and sustainable action(s) needed to address a benchmark underperformance.	Advocates for ethical and sustainable action(s) needed to address a benchmark underperformance.	Advocates for ethical and sustainable action(s), directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, needed to address a benchmark underperformance.	Advocates for ethical and sustainable action(s), directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, needed to address a benchmark underperformance. Argues effectively for recommended actions underscored by a clear and perceptive explanation of the

 

CRITERIA	NON-PERFORMANCE	BASIC	PROFICIENT	DISTINGUISHED
				ethical principles and sustainability goals to guide such actions.
Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.	Does not organize content for ideas to flow logically with smooth transitions.	Organizes content with some logical flow and smooth transitions.	Organizes content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.	Organizes content so clarity is enhanced and all ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.
Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.	Does not support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.	Does not support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.	Supports main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.	Supports main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant, credible, and convincing evidence. Skillfully combines virtually error-free source citations with a perceptive and coherent synthesis of the evidence.