10 pg paper | Original Essay Writers

You will analyze data related to benchmarks and national standards and suggest two goals for initiatives that address any deficiencies/opportunities in quality. Anticipated outcomes will also be identified, and appropriate time frames to re-evaluate data and provide a new analysis will be addressed.

We Write Essays for Students

Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper

Get Help Now!

To prepare:

Read the case study Patient Safety at Grand River Hospital & St. Mary’s General Hospital in your Learning Resources.

Conduct an analysis of the case and write a 10- to 12-page (excluding title page and references) report including:

Data analysis against benchmarks and national standards
Observations about where quality improvements are needed
Goals for initiatives that address those deficiencies/opportunities in quality
Outcomes that are anticipated in order to accomplish the initiatives
Appropriate time frames to re-evaluate data and provide a new analysis. Justify your response

Added Instruction (2020-01-27)

EXCELLENT – above expectations	GOOD – met expectations	FAIR – below expectations	POOR – significantly below expectations or missing
Data analysis against benchmarks and national standards.	36 (18%) – 40 (20%) The data analysis show depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.	32 (16%) – 35 (17.5%) The data analysis fully compares to benchmarks and national standards. Triangulation was attempted but not shown.	28 (14%) – 31 (15.5%) The vision statement and core values lack depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.	0 (0%) – 27 (13.5%) The data analysis does not compare (zero points) or poorly compares to benchmarks and national standards
Observation and goals for initiatives to address deficiencies/opportunities in quality.	56 (28%) – 60 (30%) The observation and goals for initiatives show depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.	48 (24%) – 53 (26.5%) The observation and goals for initiatives fully address the deficiencies/opportunities in quality. Triangulation was attempted but not shown.	42 (21%) – 47 (23.5%) The observation and goals for initiatives lacks depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.	0 (0%) – 41 (20.5%) The observation and goals for initiatives do not address (zero points) or poorly address the deficiencies/opportunities in quality.
Outcomes for initiatives and timeframes for reevaluating data.	56 (28%) – 60 (30%) The outcomes and timeframes for initiatives show depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.	48 (24%) – 53 (26.5%) The outcomes and timeframes for initiatives fully address addresses how to accomplish the initiative. Triangulation was attempted but not shown.	42 (21%) – 47 (23.5%) The outcomes and timeframes for initiatives lack depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.	0 (0%) – 41 (20.5%) The outcomes and timeframes for initiatives do not address (zero points) or poorly addresses how to accomplish the initiative.
Writing	36 (18%) – 40 (20%) The report is well organized, uses professional tone, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate level writing style. The work is supported by at least eight current scholarly sources. At least four resources should be from peer reviewed journals. All references should be less than five years old.	32 (16%) – 35 (17.5%) The report is mostly consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors. The work is supported by eight current scholarly sources. At least four resources should be from peer reviewed journals. All references should be less than five years old.	28 (14%) – 31 (15.5%) The report is somewhat consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors. The work is supported is supported by eight current scholarly sources but at least four resources are not from peer reviewed journals. One or more references are not less than five years old.	0 (0%) – 27 (13.5%) The report is well below graduate level writing style expectations for organization, professional tone, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting. The work is supported by at least eight current scholarly sources or at least four resources are not from peer reviewed journals. References are not less than five years old.

EXCELLENT – above expectations

GOOD – met expectations

FAIR – below expectations

POOR – significantly below expectations or missing

Data analysis against benchmarks and national standards.

36 (18%) – 40 (20%)

The data analysis show depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.

32 (16%) – 35 (17.5%)

The data analysis fully compares to benchmarks and national standards.
Triangulation was attempted but not shown.

28 (14%) – 31 (15.5%)

The vision statement and core values lack depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.

0 (0%) – 27 (13.5%)

The data analysis does not compare (zero points) or poorly compares to benchmarks and national standards

Observation and goals for initiatives to address deficiencies/opportunities in quality.

56 (28%) – 60 (30%)

The observation and goals for initiatives show depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.

48 (24%) – 53 (26.5%)

The observation and goals for initiatives fully address the deficiencies/opportunities in quality.
Triangulation was attempted but not shown.

42 (21%) – 47 (23.5%)

The observation and goals for initiatives lacks depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.

0 (0%) – 41 (20.5%)

The observation and goals for initiatives do not address (zero points) or poorly address the deficiencies/opportunities in quality.

Outcomes for initiatives and timeframes for reevaluating data.

56 (28%) – 60 (30%)

The outcomes and timeframes for initiatives show depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.

48 (24%) – 53 (26.5%)

The outcomes and timeframes for initiatives fully address addresses how to accomplish the initiative.
Triangulation was attempted but not shown.

42 (21%) – 47 (23.5%)

The outcomes and timeframes for initiatives lack depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking.

0 (0%) – 41 (20.5%)

The outcomes and timeframes for initiatives do not address (zero points) or poorly addresses how to accomplish the initiative.

Writing

36 (18%) – 40 (20%)

The report is well organized, uses professional tone, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate level writing style.
The work is supported by at least eight current scholarly sources. At least four resources should be from peer reviewed journals. All references should be less than five years old.

32 (16%) – 35 (17.5%)

The report is mostly consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors.
The work is supported by eight current scholarly sources. At least four resources should be from peer reviewed journals. All references should be less than five years old.

28 (14%) – 31 (15.5%)

The report is somewhat consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors.
The work is supported is supported by eight current scholarly sources but at least four resources are not from peer reviewed journals. One or more references are not less than five years old.

0 (0%) – 27 (13.5%)

The report is well below graduate level writing style expectations for organization, professional tone, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting.
The work is supported by at least eight current scholarly sources or at least four resources are not from peer reviewed journals. References are not less than five years old.

5 hours ago

Welcome to originalessaywriters.com, our friendly and experienced essay writers are available 24/7 to complete all your assignments. We offer high-quality academic essays written from scratch to guarantee top grades to all students. All our papers are 100% plagiarism-free and come with a plagiarism report, upon request

Tell Us “Write My Essay for Me” and Relax! You will get an original essay well before your submission deadline.

We Write Essays for Students

Added Instruction (2020-01-27)

Tell Us “Write My Essay for Me” and Relax! You will get an original essay well before your submission deadline.

RECENT ASSIGNMENTS

Higher purchase agreement

Career opportunities research and report

W72