HQS 620 Benchmark Monitoring Progress and Project Outcomes

HQS 620 Benchmark Monitoring Progress and Project Outcomes

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to discuss the value of to develop quality and safety initiatives. In a 750-900-word paper, address the following:

1. Discuss the value of
2. Explain the benefits of evaluating overall project outcomes.
3. Discuss the importance of final project analysis and debriefing following project closure.
4. Discuss who should be involved in the project debriefing.
5. Explain why it’s important to celebrate successful completion of a project.
6. How would you celebrate successful completion?
7. If all desired outcomes are not met in a project, describe the appropriate next steps.
8. Based on the case study in which you have applied the principles of project management to in Topics 3-8, develop at least two potential resulting quality and safety initiatives.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency:

MSN with an Emphasis in Health Care Quality and Patient Safety

6.2: Use process improvement principles to design quality and safety initiatives.

Resources

Collapse All

How Digital Information Transforms Project Delivery Models

Read “How Digital Information Transforms Project Delivery Models,” by Whyte, from Project Management Journal (2019).

https://journals-sagepub-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/doi/full/10.1177/8756972818823304

Project Management for the Advanced Practice Nurse

Read Chapter 7 in Project Management for the Advanced Practice Nurse.

View Resource

Reconciling the Views of Project Success: A Multiple Stakeholder Model

Read “Reconciling the Views of Project Success: A Multiple Stakeholder Model,” by Davis, from Project Management Journal 

… Read More

https://journals-sagepub-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/doi/10.1177/8756972818786663

The Importance of a Great Finish

Read “The Importance of a Great Finish,” by Matsudaira, from Communications of the ACM (2019).

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=134383083&site=eds-live&scope=site

Project Management Closure: Best Practice for Project Learning

Read “Project Management Closure: Best Practice for Project Learning,” from Virtual Project Consulting (2010).

An Empirical Investigation into Different Stakeholder Groups Perception of Project Success

Read “An Empirical Investigation into Different Stakeholder Groups Perception of Project Success,” by Davis, fro

… Read More

https://www-sciencedirec

Benchmark – Monitoring Progress and Project Outcomes – Rubric

Collapse All

Monitoring Progress

9 points

Criteria Description

Monitoring Progress

5. 5: Excellent

9 points

A discussion on the value of monitoring the progress of the project and the impact it has on project outcomes is present and thorough.

4. 4: Good

8.28 points

A discussion on the value of monitoring the progress of the project and the impact it has on project outcomes is present and detailed.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.92 points

A discussion on the value of monitoring the progress of the project and the impact it has on project outcomes is present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.2 points

A discussion on the value of monitoring the progress of the project and the impact it has on project outcomes is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion on the value of monitoring the progress of the project and the impact it has on project outcomes is not present.

Evaluation Project Outcomes

9 points

Criteria Description

Evaluation Project Outcomes

5. 5: Excellent

9 points

An explanation of the benefits of evaluating overall project outcomes is present and thorough.

4. 4: Good

8.28 points

An explanation of the benefits of evaluating overall project outcomes is present and detailed.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.92 points

An explanation of the benefits of evaluating overall project outcomes is present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.2 points

An explanation of the benefits of evaluating overall project outcomes is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of the benefits of evaluating overall project outcomes is not present.

Final Analysis

9 points

Criteria Description

Final Analysis

5. 5: Excellent

9 points

A discussion of the importance of final project analysis and debriefing following project closure is present and thorough.

4. 4: Good

8.28 points

A discussion of the importance of final project analysis and debriefing following project closure is present and detailed.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.92 points

A discussion of the importance of final project analysis and debriefing following project closure is present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.2 points

A discussion of the importance of final project analysis and debriefing following project closure is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the importance of final project analysis and debriefing following project closure is not present.

Project debriefing

9 points

Criteria Description

Project debriefing

5. 5: Excellent

9 points

A discussion on who should be involved in the project debriefing is present and thorough.

4. 4: Good

8.28 points

A discussion on who should be involved in the project debriefing is present and detailed.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.92 points

A discussion on who should be involved in the project debriefing is present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.2 points

A discussion on who should be involved in the project debriefing is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion on who should be involved in the project debriefing is not present.

Successful Completion

8 points

Criteria Description

Successful Completion

5. 5: Excellent

8 points

An explanation of why it is important and how they would celebrate successful completion of a project is present and thorough.

4. 4: Good

7.36 points

An explanation of why it is important and how they would celebrate successful completion of a project is present and detailed.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.04 points

An explanation of why it is important and how they would celebrate successful completion of a project is present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

6.4 points

An explanation of why it is important and how they would celebrate successful completion of a project is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of why it is important and how they would celebrate successful completion of a project is present.

Next Steps

12 points

Criteria Description

Next Steps

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

A description of the next steps if not all desired outcomes are met is present and thorough.

4. 4: Good

11.04 points

A description of the next steps if not all desired outcomes are met is present and detailed.

3. 3: Satisfactory

10.56 points

A description of the next steps if not all desired outcomes are met is present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.6 points

A description of the next steps if not all desired outcomes are met is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the next steps if not all desired outcomes are met is not present.

Quality and Safety Initiatives (B)

14 points

Criteria Description

Quality and Safety Initiatives (C6.2)

5. 5: Excellent

14 points

Two quality and safety initiatives are developed and thorough.

4. 4: Good

12.88 points

Two quality and safety initiatives are developed and detailed.

3. 3: Satisfactory

12.32 points

Two quality and safety initiatives are developed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

11.2 points

Two quality and safety initiatives are developed, but lack details or are incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Two quality and safety initiatives are not developed.

Thesis Development and Purpose

7 points

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. 5: Excellent

7 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

4. 4: Good

6.44 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. 3: Satisfactory

6.16 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

5.6 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction

8 points

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. 5: Excellent

8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

4. 4: Good

7.36 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.04 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

6.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. 5: Excellent

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. 4: Good

4.6 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.4 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5 points

Criteria Description

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5. 5: Excellent

5 points

All format elements are correct.

4. 4: Good

4.6 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.4 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Documentation of Sources

5 points

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5. 5: Excellent

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. 4: Good

4.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.4 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.