| Unit 4: Community Needs and Health Screening Initiative |
| | Introductory | Emergent | Practiced | Proficient/Mastered | Score | Weight | Final |
| | 0 -1.9 | 2 - 2.9 | 3 - 3.9 | 4 | | | Score |
| Coceptual Model | Conceptual model not clear in paper or included | Conceptual model is not established model, or application relevant | A theory or conceptual model is included but may be vague or not apply to the initiative | A Theory or conceptual model chosen and applied to initiative | 4 | 15% | 0.60 |
| Screening Purpose | Reason for screening topic is not identified or is poorly presented. | Reason for screening topic is unclear or inadequately described. Little data demonstrated | Reason for screening topic is identified. Description is lacking detail on community statistics. | Reason for screening topic is explained in detail via community statistics/ assessment data | 4 | 15% | 0.60 |
| Screening population | Screening population is not identified. | Screening population is unclear or inadequately described | Screening population is identified but details needed | Screening population is identified based on age, sex as appropriate and geographic location | 4 | 15% | 0.60 |
| Setting | No setting is identified. | Screening setting is noted as vague or may not be appropriate for selected population or screening | Screening setting is provided but lacks details/ specifics | Setting for screening is provided with details, and is appropriate for community or workplace preventive intervention | 4 | 15% | 0.60 |
| Explanation of outcomes | Explanation of outcomes and rationale for screening activity is not provided, may be poorly presented, or is irrealvant; may be contraindicated as a screening. | Explanation is only provided for some of the outcomes. Detail and rationale for screening activity is unclear, inadequately described or may not be correctly supported in literature | Explanation is provided on screening activity and how most outcomes are affected by the screening activity. Detail is lacking in areas, or outcomes may be unclear. Exact screening test may be vague Rationale is given but lacks substance. | Detailed explanation is provided on screening activity and how each outcome is affected by the activity. Screening test is clear and matches guidelines. Rationale for their explanation is provided. | 4 | 25% | 1.00 |
| Cost | No cost is identified. | Cost is noted as a total without details, or stated as all donations, very little analysis | Cost for initiative is somewhat limited, lacked depth of thought of needed cost analysis | Detailed cost analysis to perform screening is provided | 4 | 10% | 0.40 |
| Format/Style | APA format is not utilized. No obvious attempt made to cite ideas and information from other sources. There are consistent and repeated errors in rules of grammar, word usage, and punctuation. There are consistent and repeated spelling and/or proofreading errors. Overall style is not at all consistent with formal, professional work. | There are frequent repeated errors in consistency of the text, title page, and references page with APA format. There are numerous errors in which ideas and information from other sources are not cited correctly. There are numerous errors in rules of grammar, word usage, and punctuation. There are numerous spelling and/or proofreading errors. Overall style is inadequate for formal, professional work; many areas needs need style improvement. | There are some errors, but much of the text, title page, and references page is consistent with the APA format. Ideas and information from other sources are cited correctly with few exceptions. Rules of grammar, word usage, and punctuation are followed with few exceptions. Assignment has few spelling and/or proofreading errors. Overall style is adequate for formal, professional work; some areas need style improvement. | Text, title page, and references page are consistent with APA format. Ideas and information from other sources are cited correctly. Rules of grammar, word usage, and punctuation are followed. Assignment is spellchecked and proofread. Overall style is demonstrates excellent consistency with that expected of formal, professional work. | 4 | 20% | 0.80 |
| | | | | | | 100% | 4.00 |
| | | | | Final Score | | | 100 |
| | | | | Percentage | | | 100.00% |
| Total available points = | | 100 | 4 |
aq24
MN505_Unit_4_Rubric1.xlsx
