Instructions
One way an organization communicates with its constituents is by its accreditation. Your department head knows that you are in a graduate program and has asked you to assist the department head that works with accreditation and licensure in your facility. She has asked you to develop an initial plan to gain accreditation for a new facility that your organization is opening. Choose one accreditation that is appropriate for the facility. Write an introductory paragraph then follow it with the initial plan in table format and should include:
- One type of accreditation needed for the facility and in 1-2 sentences, why it is needed for the facility
- Estimate the amount of time it will take for the new facility to attain accreditation
- What resources are needed
- Estimate direct costs for accreditation
- Estimate the financial impact on revenue if not earning accreditation
For example:
| Type of Accreditation | Time Needed | Resources Required | Direct Costs for Accreditation | Financial impact if Accreditation not Earned |
Provide a paragraph under the table with conclusions and any potential limitation of this accreditation.
Please provide 3-4 references from scholarly journals and websites provided in the course.
Estimated time to complete: 4 hours
| Submitting… |
Bottom of Form
Rubric
true
299482
Can’t change a rubric once you’ve started using it.
Unit 6 Assignment Accreditation Plan
You’ve already rated students with this rubric. Any major changes could affect their assessment results.
| Unit 6 Assignment Accreditation Plan | ||||
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTopic _1961 NU530-CO5 view longer description Range threshold: pts | 10.0 to >9.0 pts Level 5 Identifies a creative, focused, and manageable topic that addresses potentially significant aspects of the topic. blank 9.0 to >8.0 pts Level 4 Identifies a creative, focused, and manageable topic that addresses important and notable aspects of the topic. _4605 8.0 to >7.0 pts Level 3 Identifies a focused and manageable/doable topic that appropriately addresses relevant aspects of the topic. _1138 7.0 to >6.0 pts Level 2 Identifies a topic that while manageable/doable, is too narrowly focused and leaves out relevant aspects of the topic. _3612 6.0 to >0.0 pts Level 1 Identifies a topic that is far too general and wide-ranging as to be manageable and doable. _2229 0.0 to >0 pts Level 0 Does not clearly identify a topic that is relative to the assignment. blank_2 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 10.0 pts — | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExisting Knowledge, Research, and/or Views _7454 view longer description Range threshold: pts | 20.0 to >18.0 pts Level 5 Synthesizes in-depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches. _6069 18.0 to >16.0 pts Level 4 Examines in-depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches. _1815 16.0 to >14.0 pts Level 3 Explains in-depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches. _2122 14.0 to >12.0 pts Level 2 Relates information from relevant sources representing limited points of view/approaches. _9771 12.0 to >0.0 pts Level 1 Relates information from irrelevant sources representing limited points of view/ approaches. _238 0.0 to >0 pts Level 0 Information is irrelevant to the topic. No clear point of view/approaches. _1236 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 20.0 pts — | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDesign Process _9604 view longer description Range threshold: pts | 20.0 to >18.0 pts Level 5 All elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are skillfully developed. Appropriate methodology or theoretical frameworks may be synthesized from across disciplines or from relevant sub-disciplines. _4274 18.0 to >16.0 pts Level 4 Most critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are appropriately developed. Appropriate methodology or theoretical frameworks may be analyzed from across disciplines or from relevant sub-disciplines. _5062 16.0 to >14.0 pts Level 3 Some critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are appropriately developed, however, more subtle elements are ignored or unaccounted for. _6823 14.0 to >12.0 pts Level 2 Critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are missing, incorrectly developed, or unfocused. _5608 12.0 to >0.0 pts Level 1 Inquiry design demonstrates a misunderstanding of the methodology or theoretical framework. _9564 0.0 to >0 pts Level 0 The design of the paper is not based upon a clear methodology or framework. _3078 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 20.0 pts — | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis 14047_3559 view longer description Range threshold: pts | 35.0 to >32.0 pts Level 5 Organizes and synthesizes evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. 14047_1512 32.0 to >28.0 pts Level 4 Organizes and analyzes evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. 14047_1897 28.0 to >25.0 pts Level 3 Organizes evidence to reveal important patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. 14047_6839 25.0 to >21.0 pts Level 2 Organizes evidence, but the organization is not effective in revealing important patterns, differences, or similarities. 14047_6533 21.0 to >0.0 pts Level 1 Describes evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus. 14047_8631 0.0 to >0 pts Level 0 Lists evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus. 14047_2706 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 35.0 pts — | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion 14047_3558view longer description Range threshold: pts | 10.0 to >9.0 pts Level 5 States a conclusion that is a logical extrapolation from the inquiry findings. 14047_9546 9.0 to >8.0 pts Level 4 States a conclusion that is a logical interpretation of the inquiry findings. 14047_6512 8.0 to >7.0 pts Level 3 States a conclusion focused solely on the inquiry findings. The conclusion arises specifically from and responds specifically to the inquiry findings. 14047_364 7.0 to >6.0 pts Level 2 States a general conclusion that, because it is so general, also applies beyond the scope of the inquiry findings. 14047_6936 6.0 to >0.0 pts Level 1 States an ambiguous or unsupportable conclusion from inquiry findings. 14047_9825 0.0 to >0 pts Level 0 States an illogical conclusion from inquiry findings. 14047_4553 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 10.0 pts — | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLimitations and Implications 14047_3160 PRICE-I view longer description Range threshold: pts | 10.0 to >9.0 pts Level 5 Insightfully discusses in detail relevant and supported limitations and implications. 14047_2912 9.0 to >8.0 pts Level 4 Examines relevant and supported limitations and implications. 14047_3423 8.0 to >7.0 pts Level 3 Discusses relevant and supported limitations and implications. 14047_9051 7.0 to >6.0 pts Level 2 Presents relevant and supported limitations and implications. 14047_8884 6.0 to >0.0 pts Level 1 Presents limitations and implications, but they are unsupported. 14047_8248 0.0 to >0 pts Level 0 Presents limitations and implications, but they are irrelevant. 14047_1113 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 10.0 pts — | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting 14047_8167 PRICE-I view longer description Range threshold: pts | 10.0 to >9.0 pts Level 5 The paper exhibits a superior command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling. 14047_6209 9.0 to >8.0 pts Level 4 The paper exhibits a strong command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impair the flow of communication. 14047_3762 8.0 to >7.0 pts Level 3 The paper exhibits a command of written English language conventions. The paper has minor errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impact the flow of communication. 14047_4161 7.0 to >6.0 pts Level 2 The paper exhibits a limited command of written English language conventions. The paper has frequent errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impede the flow of communication. 14047_3143 6.0 to >0.0 pts Level 1 The paper exhibits little command of written English language conventions. The paper has errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader to stop and reread parts of the writing to discern meaning. 14047_1220 0.0 to >0 pts Level 0 The paper does not demonstrate command of written English language conventions. The paper has multiple errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader difficulty discerning the meaning. 14047_5234 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 10.0 pts — | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA 14047_5217 view longer description Range threshold: pts | 10.0 to >9.0 pts Level 5 The required APA elements are all included with correct formatting, including in-text citations and references. 14047_9736 9.0 to >8.0 pts Level 4 The required APA elements are all included with minor formatting errors, including in-text citations and references. 14047_362 8.0 to >7.0 pts Level 3 The required APA elements are all included with multiple formatting errors, including in-text citations and references. 14047_218 7.0 to >6.0 pts Level 2 The required APA elements are not all included and/or there are major formatting errors, including in-text citations and references. 14047_6470 6.0 to >0.0 pts Level 1 Several APA elements are missing. The errors in formatting demonstrate a limited understanding of APA guidelines, in-text-citations, and references. 14047_1262 0.0 to >0 pts Level 0 There is little to no evidence of APA formatting and/or there are no in-text citations and/or references. 14047_5530 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 10.0 pts — | ||
| Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion view longer description Range threshold: 5 pts | 5to >0 pts Full Marks blank 0to >0 pts No Marks blank_2 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 5 pts — | ||
| Total Points: 125.0 out of 125.0 | ||||
| Top of Form I’ll write free-form comments when assessing students Remove points from rubric Don’t post Outcomes results to Learning Mastery Gradebook Use this rubric for assignment grading Hide score total for assessment results CancelCreate Rubric Bottom of Form | ||||
Top of Form
Description
Long Description
CancelUpdate Criterion
Bottom of Form
Additional Comments:
CancelUpdate Comments
Additional Comments:
Top of Form
Rating Score
Rating max scoreto > pts
Rating Title
Rating Description
CancelUpdate Rating
Bottom of Form
Rubric
Can’t change a rubric once you’ve started using it.
Title: Find Rubric
Title
You’ve already rated students with this rubric. Any major changes could affect their assessment results.
| Title | ||||
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts | ||
| Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion view longer description Range threshold: 5 pts | 5to >0 pts Full Marks blank 0to >0 pts No Marks blank_2 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 5 pts — | ||
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion view longer description Range threshold: 5 pts | 5to >0 pts Full Marks blank 0to >0 pts No Marks blank_2 This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion. | pts / 5 pts — | ||
| Total Points: 5 out of 5 | ||||
| Top of Form I’ll write free-form comments when assessing students Remove points from rubric Don’t post Outcomes results to Learning Mastery Gradebook Use this rubric for assignment grading Hide score total for assessment results CancelCreate Rubric Bottom of Form | ||||
Reference:
Utilization Review Accreditation Commission (Links to an external site.)
Healthcare Facilities Accreditation Program
Church, C., Cosme, S., & O’Brien, M. (2019). Accreditation of transition to practice programs ). Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 35(4), 180-184.
Kagan, I., Farkash-Fink, N., & Fish, M. (2016). Effect of joint commission international accreditation on the nursing work environment in a tertiary medical center (Links to an external site.). Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 31(4), E1-E8
Hitt, M.A., Colella, A., Miller, C. (2018). Organizational behavior. (5th ed.). Wiley Publishing
AACN (Links to an external site.)
Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care, Inc. (Links to an external site.)
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Hitt, M.A., Colella, A., Miller, C. (2018). Organizational behavior. (5th ed.). Wiley Publishing.
