Purpose
Organizational leaders are often involved in a process that requires involves demonstrating compliance with regulatory guidelines or demonstrating evidence that the organization meets a particular set of standards. Some examples of this might include Magnet Journey, specialty area certification (i.e., upgrading of ER Trauma Level; Stroke Center Designation), Joint Commission Survey, State Department of Health. The organization is often provided with a form that specifies the information required and which must be completed and returned to the requesting agency for review. The information you provide to the requesting agency is then distributed to the team of evaluators responsible for determining if your organization has met the requirements of the agency. The quality of information you provide and the consistency of the format requested play a critical role in the minds of the evaluators. If there are gaps in the information, it will lead to questions from the evaluators during the visit. If you produce a thorough, high-quality, and professional document, consistent with the format requested, it significantly increases the likelihood of a favorable review process.
The portfolio assignment provides the student with practice in finding and assembling information into a requested format for review. In a very small and simple way, this simulates a process such as what is described in the previous paragraph.
The portfolio assignment also serves to chronicle and archive the project process. While you may start the project as the project manager, sometimes projects are handed off to another person or another team. Having a current set of documents and information allows a current PM to seamlessly hand off the project to another PM. Think of yourself as the PM taking over your project. What information would you want to help ensure a seamless transition? Assemble the portfolio so that it would be such that you would want to receive it in taking the handoff.
This assignment allows you to assemble your CGE portfolio with the project management components and activities completed to this point. You will build on this assignment at the conclusion of the CGE II course to create an updated portfolio.
Course Learning Outcomes
Through this assignment, you will address the following course learning outcomes:
CO 1: Apply evidence-based leadership skills and concepts in the planning of an executive-level practice change project. (PO 4, 5)
CO 2: Develop an evidence-based foundation to lead organizational change using current knowledge, standards of practice, and research from current literature. (PO 4, 5)
CO 4: Apply evidence-based fiscal principles that contribute to the creation of a caring environment characterized by high quality, safe, patient-centered care. (PO 1, 2, 4, 5)
CO 5: Apply an evidence-based change theory to a project that results in practice change and positive organizational outcomes. (PO 1, 2, 5)
Total Points Possible: 200 Points
Assignment Overview
1. Assemble the initial portfolio.
Elements of Portfolio
The student is responsible for the development of a CGE portfolio that includes the following elements in the following order.
- Project PICOT question
- Five individual PICOT elements as approved in the Week 2 discussion
- Narrative PICOT statement or question consistent with the PICOT element statements
- Summary of CGE Executive Organizational Change Project Proposal
- Literature review (may be copied and pasted from the Week 4 assignment with any revisions requested by the instructor; summary table not required)
- Reflection on Course Outcome (CO) achievement
- List each CO as a heading in proper APA format.
- For each CO, provide a reflective summary of how you feel you have progressed in meeting this outcome through the resources and activities of NR631.
- The following documents each included as a separate appendix in the following order
- PICOT Worksheet (Week 2)
- Project Charter (Week 3)
- Project Scope (Week 3)
- Communication Plan (Week 5)
- Deliverables and CSF (Week 6)
2. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, references, and citations are consistent with formal academic writing and APA format as expressed in the current edition of the manual.
Assignment Instructions
- All aspects of the portfolio must be completed.
- Ideas and information from professional sources must be cited correctly using the current edition of the APA manual.
- Grammar, spelling, punctuation, references, and citations are consistent with formal academic writing.
Revision Process
If you do not receive at least a proficient rating in any content category, you can re-submit your assignment with revision to that content category to improve the points earned within that specific section. Please note the following guidelines:
- After receiving your assignment grade, you have one opportunity to resubmit.
- In order to resubmit, your initial submission must have been a complete assignment. Rough drafts will not be graded or allowed for resubmission.
- Only content sections that did not receive at least a proficient rating with the first submission may be revised to earn a better score in that content category. APA format and writing style will not be re-graded.
- Points possible for revised and resubmitted work will not exceed the “proficient” rubric category (84%).
- Any revision must be submitted for re-evaluation within 7 days after the assignment grade is posted. For example, if your assignment grade is posted on Friday at 12 noon MT, you have until the following Friday at 12 noon MT to resubmit any content area that did not earn a proficient rating.
- Within 7 days from your resubmission, the class instructor will post your score for the resubmitted work.
Steps to follow for resubmission of a content section within an assignment that did not earn a proficient rating on the rubric:
- Contact your class instructor privately via email, phone, or Canvas private message to inform him/her that you plan to resubmit a content section of the assignment that did not receive a proficient rating on the rubric.
- Submit the assignment in its entirety (including the rewritten content section) within 7 days of the original assignment grade being posted.
Assignment Criteria
| Assessment Criteria | Points | % | Description |
| PICOT question | 30 | 15 | A PICOT question is present and listed in the proper PICOT format. All five elements of the PICOT are included followed by the narrative question or statement. |
| Executive CGE Project Proposal | 30 | 15 | A short abstract describing the CGE project is present. |
| Literature Review | 50 | 25 | A comprehensive literature review is present with any requested visions. |
| Course Outcome Reflections | 20 | 10 | Sincere reflections on the student’s achievement of each NR631 CO is present. |
| Project management appendices | 50 | 25 | An appendix for each project management tool listed in the assignment guidelines is present. |
| Grammar, spelling, punctuation, and APA formatting | 20 | 10 | Grammar, spelling, punctuation, references, and citations are consistent with formal academic writing and APA format as expressed in the current edition of the manual. |
| Total | 200 | 100% | A quality assignment will meet or exceed the above requirements. |
Grading Rubric
| Assessment Criteria | Distinguished (100%) | Exceeds (92%) | Proficient (84%) | Needs Improvement (0%) |
| PICOT Question | 30 Points | 28 Points | 26 Points | 0 Points |
| All five approved and properly constructed PICOT elements are present A corresponding narrative PICOT question or statement, consistent with the PICOT elements is present. | One or more PICOT element statements are not from the approved elements, OR The narrative PICOT question/statement is not consistent with the PICOT elements. | One or more PICOT element statements are not from the approved elements, AND The narrative PICOT question/statement is not consistent with the PICOT elements. | No PICOT elements or question/statement is present. | |
| Executive CGE Project Proposal | 30 Points | 28 Points | 26 Points | 0 Points |
| A well-written proposal that clearly explains the project in a way that can be understood clearly by an executive leader The proposal includes information contained in project management tools (i.e., Project Charter, Scope of Work, etc.) Project Management tools and concepts are directly referred to in the proposal | A well-written proposal that clearly explains the project in a way that can be understood clearly by an executive leader. The proposal does not include information contained in project management tools (i.e., Project Charter, Scope of Work, etc.) OR Project Management tools and concepts are not directly referred to in the proposal | The proposal is not well written and does not clearly convey the goals and scope of the project in a way that would be understood by an executive leader AND EITHER: The proposal does not include information contained in project management tools (i.e., Project Charter, Scope of Work, etc.) OR Project Management tools and concepts are not directly referred to in the proposal | No proposal is present. | |
| Literature Review | 50 points | 45 Points | 40 Points | 0 Points |
| Well-written and comprehensive literature review with at least 10 scholarly sources and with revisions as recommended by instructor (if any) are present | Literature review included but either lacks the 10 required scholarly sources OR instructor-suggested revisions (if any) not made | Literature review present but falls short of the 10 required scholarly sources AND does not make revisions recommended by instructor | Does not include a literature review | |
| Course Outcome Reflections | 20 points | 18 Points | 16 Points | 0 Points |
| Includes sincere reflective summary of progress toward achievement of each CO | Includes sincere reflective summary of progress toward achievement of 4-5 COs | Includes sincere reflective summary of progress toward achievement of 2-3 COs | Does not make any attempt to reflect on achievement of COs | |
| Project Management Appendices | 50 Points | 45 Points | 40 Points | 0 Points |
| All 5 project management appendices completed and present with any requested revisions | 4 project management appendices complete and present with any requested revisions | 3 or fewer project management appendices complete and present with any requested revisions | No project management appendices present | |
| Grammar, Spelling, Punctuation, References, Citations, and APA Formatting | 20 Points | 18 Points | 16 Points | 0 Points |
| No grammar, spelling, punctuation, reference, or citation errors and are consistent with formal academic writing and APA format, as expressed in the current edition | 1-2 grammar, spelling, punctuation, reference, or citation error that is consistent with formal academic writing and APA format, as expressed in the current edition. | 3-5 grammar, spelling, punctuation, reference, or citation errors that are consistent with formal academic writing and APA format, as expressed in the current edition. | More than 5 grammar, spelling, punctuation, reference, or citation errors; is not consistent with formal academic writing and APA format, as expressed in the current edition. |
