LE001: Legal Requirements and Ethics
Mbide
LE001_Rubric.pdf
© 2020 Walden University 1
LE001: Legal Requirements and Ethics: Summarize legal mandates and ethical principles to address complex
challenges, manage risk, and advance organizational integrity.
Assessment Rubric
Rubric Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations
Part 1: Principles of Autonomy and Nonmaleficence
Learning Objective 1.1:
Define the principles of respect for autonomy and nonmaleficence.
Response does not provide or provides partial or inaccurate definitions of the principles of respect for autonomy and nonmaleficence.
Response provides two thorough and accurate definitions of the principles of respect for autonomy and nonmaleficence that apply to the situation. Response includes examples that demonstrate an understanding of how the principles of respect for autonomy and nonmaleficence can conflict. Response includes references to relevant academic/professional resources.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response includes three definitions and examples that demonstrate an understanding of how the principles of respect for autonomy and nonmaleficence can conflict.
Learning Objective 1.2 Explain the prioritization of respect for
Response does not provide an explanation or provides a partial or unclear explanation of which principle to prioritize or fails to provide support for reasoning
Response clearly explains which principle to prioritize when patients refuse care. Response provides at least two relevant examples of
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following:
© 2020 Walden University 2
Rubric Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations
autonomy and nonmaleficence.
about which principle to prioritize. Response provides an irrelevant example of information the hospital would use to determine whether to prioritize respect for autonomy or nonmaleficence.
information the hospital would use to determine whether to prioritize respect for autonomy or nonmaleficence. Response includes references to relevant academic/professional resources.
Response provides at least three relevant examples of information the hospital would use to determine whether to prioritize respect for autonomy or nonmaleficence.
Rubric Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations
Part 2: Clinical Ethics
Learning Objective 2.1: Identify conflicting ethical principles.
Response does not identify, or one or more responses inaccurately identify s a conflicting ethical principle, or the response does not address each scenario individually.
Response accurately identifies one conflicting ethical principle in each scenario. Response justifies the importance of each of the principles in conflict. Response includes references to relevant academic/professional resources.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response accurately identifies at least two conflicting ethical principles in each scenario and justifies the importance of each of the principles in conflict.
Learning Objective 2.2:
Response does not select or selects inappropriate actions for one or more scenarios.
Response selects appropriate actions to resolve the conflicting ethical principles in each scenario.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following:
© 2020 Walden University 3
Select actions to resolve conflicting ethical principles.
Response provides compelling justification and reasoning to support the selected action in each scenario. Response includes references to relevant academic/professional resources.
Response is written substantively and thoroughly related to these topics.
Rubric Criteria Needs Improvement Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations
Part 3: Risk Assessment Framework
Learning Objective 3.1:
Use the seven-step risk assessment framework described by the Joint Commission.
Response does not complete or completed some of the seven steps incorrectly or fails to complete all seven steps.
Response accurately completes each of the seven steps to illustrate how the hospital in the scenario might use a risk assessment framework. Response includes a thorough reflection on the value of the Joint Commission standards and their impact on providers and patients. Response includes references to relevant academic/professional resources.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response is written substantively and thoroughly related to these topics.
© 2020 Walden University 4
Rubric Criteria Needs Improvement Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations
Part 4: Impact of Regulatory Guidelines on the Delivery of Care
Learning Objective 4.1 Explain how shortages of healthcare workers impact the ability to deliver quality care and manage risks.
Response does not provide or provides an unclear or partial explanation of how shortages of healthcare workers impact the ability to deliver quality care and manage risks for each scenario provided. Response includes an inappropriate explanation of how to mitigate the impact of shortages of healthcare workers on the delivery of quality care and the management of risk for each scenario presented.
Response clearly explains how shortages of healthcare workers impact the ability to deliver quality care and manage risks for each scenario presented. Response includes at least one appropriate explanation of how to mitigate the impact of shortages of healthcare workers on the delivery of quality care and the management of risk for each scenario presented. Response includes references to relevant academic/professional resources.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response provides more than one appropriate explanation of how to mitigate the impact of shortages of healthcare workers on the delivery of quality care and the management of risk for each scenario presented.
Learning Objective 4.2 Explain how revenue and resource constraints may limit the ability to
Response does not provide or provides an unclear or partial explanation of how changing reimbursement rules for Medicare impacts the ability to deliver quality care and manage
Response clearly explains how changing reimbursement rules for Medicare impacts the ability to deliver quality care and manage risks for each scenario presented.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following:
© 2020 Walden University 5
deliver quality care and manage risks.
risks for each scenario presented. Response makes an inappropriate explanation regarding how to mitigate the impact of changing reimbursement rules for Medicare on the delivery of quality care and the management of risk for each scenario presented.
Response makes at least one appropriate explanation regarding how to mitigate the impact of changing reimbursement rules for Medicare on the delivery of quality care and the management of risk for each scenario presented. Response includes references to relevant academic/professional resources.
Response provides more than one appropriate explanation regarding how to mitigate the potential impact of changing reimbursement rules for Medicare on the delivery of quality care and the management of risk for each scenario presented.
Rubric Criteria Needs Improvement Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations
Part 5: Is healthcare a right or a privilege?
Learning Objective 5.1:
Analyze whether healthcare is a right or a privilege.
Response does not provide or provides an unclear explanation of whether healthcare is a right or a privilege. Response chooses incorrect or irrelevant citations or does not provide citations.
Response provides a logical justification for whether healthcare is a right or a privilege. Response appropriately cites from relevant academic/professional resources to support the justification.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response is written substantively and thoroughly related to these topics.
