Emergency Department HCAPHS Data Analysis

December 31, 2022

Emergency Department HCAPHS Data Analysis

Order ID:89JHGSJE83839

Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago

Pages:5-10

Instructions:

Emergency Department HCAPHS Data Analysis

Improvement in quality and safety should be considered a core organizational strategy. Leading that change is not always easy. A road map for change is helpful in managing organizational change. Kotter’s (1995, 1996; as cited in Nash et al., 2019) model for change is a realistic framework to manage quality improvements. The eight steps of Kotter’s theory include 1) unfreezing the old culture; 2) forming a powerful guiding coalition; 3) developing a vision and strategy; 4) communicating a vision and strategy; 5) empowering employees to act on the vision and strategy; 6) generating short-term wins; 7) consolidating gains and producing more change; and 8) refreezing new approaches in the culture (Nash, et.al, 2019, page numbers).

In this Assignment, you will analyze Emergency Department data and other resources to identify areas where the care and services provided are not up to state or national comparisons. You will also address how you would improve the substandard performance indicators.

The Assignment:

The HCAHPS data for the Emergency Department would indicate there are areas where the care and services are not up to par, as compared to state or national standards.

Using Kotter’s work as described in Chapter 16 of your text, and other change models from the reading, write an analysis of the performance data for the Emergency Department, comparing the medical care and services to state and/or national standards. Provide recommendations for strategies to improve the Emergency Department substandard performance indicators.

Emergency Department HCAPHS Data Analysis

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Methodology

58-53 points

Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.

83-76 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.

52-49 points

Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.

75-1 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.

48-1 points

There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met