Benchmark- Capstone Project Change Proposal Presentation for Faculty Review and Feedback

Benchmark- Capstone Project Change Proposal Presentation for Faculty Review and Feedback - Rubric

Clinical Problem Statement and Purpose 1.5 points

Criteria Description

Identify the clinical problem statement and explain the purpose of the evidence-based change proposal.

5. Target 1.5 points

An identification of the clinical problem statement and explanation of the purpose of the evidence-based

change proposal are thorough and accurate.

4. Acceptable 1.34 points

An identification of the clinical problem statement and explanation of the purpose of the evidence-based

change proposal are mostly detailed.

3. Approaching 1.19 points

An identification of the clinical problem statement and explanation of the purpose of the evidence-based

change proposal are present but lack detail.

2. Insufficient 1.13 points

An identification of the clinical problem statement and explanation of the purpose of the evidence-based

change proposal are inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

An identification of the clinical problem statement and explanation of the purpose of the evidence-based

change proposal are missing.

Collapse All

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Summary of Literature 2.25 points

Criteria Description

Summarize the evidence/literature, including connection to proposed plan.

5. Target 2.25 points

Summarize the evidence/literature, including connection to proposed plan, is thorough and accurate.

4. Acceptable 2 points

Summarize the evidence/literature, including connection to proposed plan, is mostly detailed.

3. Approaching 1.78 points

Summarize the evidence/literature, including connection to proposed plan, is present, but lacks detail.

2. Insufficient 1.69 points

Summarize the evidence/literature, including connection to proposed plan, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Summarize the evidence/literature, including connection to proposed plan, is missing.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Implementation Plan and Outcome Measures 1.5 points

Criteria Description

Describe the proposed implementation plan with outcome measures.

5. Target 1.5 points

A description of the proposed implementation plan with outcome measures is thorough and accurate.

4. Acceptable 1.34 points

A description of the proposed implementation plan with outcome measures is mostly detailed.

3. Approaching 1.19 points

A description of the proposed implementation plan with outcome measures is present but lacks detail.

2. Insufficient 1.13 points

A description of the proposed implementation plan with outcome measures is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A description of the proposed implementation plan with outcome measures is missing.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Roles and Responsibilities (B) 2.25 points

Criteria Description

Outline the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders needed to implement plan, including an

explanation of their connection to the implementation plan. (C6.3)

5. Target 2.25 points

An outline of the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders needed to implement plan, including an

explanation of their connection to the implementation plan, is thorough and accurate.

4. Acceptable 2 points

An outline of the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders needed to implement plan, including an

explanation of their connection to the implementation plan, is mostly detailed.

3. Approaching 1.78 points

An outline of the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders needed to implement plan, including an

explanation of their connection to the implementation plan, is present, but lacks detail.

2. Insufficient 1.69 points

An outline of the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders needed to implement plan, including an

explanation of their connection to the implementation plan, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

An outline of the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders needed to implement plan, including an

explanation of their connection to the implementation plan, is missing.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Resources 1.5 points

Criteria Description

Describe the resources needed for project implementation.

5. Target 1.5 points

A description of the resources needed for project implementation is thorough and accurate.

4. Acceptable 1.34 points

A description of the resources needed for project implementation is mostly detailed.

3. Approaching 1.19 points

A description of the resources needed for project implementation is present but lacks detail.

2. Insufficient 1.13 points

A description of the resources needed for project implementation is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A description of the resources needed for project implementation is missing.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Evaluation 1.5 points

Criteria Description

Discuss the evaluation plan for proposed nursing intervention.

5. Target 1.5 points

A discussion of the evaluation plan for proposed nursing intervention is thorough and accurate.

4. Acceptable 1.34 points

A discussion of the evaluation plan for proposed nursing intervention is mostly detailed.

3. Approaching 1.19 points

A discussion of the evaluation plan for proposed nursing intervention is present but lacks detail.

2. Insufficient 1.13 points

A discussion of the evaluation plan for proposed nursing intervention is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A discussion of the evaluation plan for proposed nursing intervention is missing.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Presentation of Content 1.5 points

Criteria Description

Presentation of Content

5. Target 1.5 points

The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project

includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the

main idea.

4. Acceptable 1.34 points

The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information, exhibiting a unity,

coherence, and cohesiveness. Presentation includes persuasive information from reliable sources.

3. Approaching 1.19 points

The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization

and/or in their relationships to each other.

2. Insufficient 1.13 points

The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Presentation

includes some persuasive information.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Presentation includes little

persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Layout 0.75 points

Criteria Description

Layout of presentation.

5. Target 0.75 points

The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings,

subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The

background and colors enhance the readability of the text.

4. Acceptable 0.67 points

The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts

are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.

3. Approaching 0.59 points

The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in

a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not

enhance readability.

2. Insufficient 0.56 points

The layout shows some structure but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space

or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts,

dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the

readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and

inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is

evident.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Language Use and Audience Awareness 0.75 points

Criteria Description

Includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.

5. Target 0.75 points

The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and

creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

4. Acceptable 0.67 points

The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and

uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.

3. Approaching 0.59 points

Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.

2. Insufficient 0.56 points

Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits

some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of

audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them

inappropriately.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Mechanics of Writing 0.75 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

5. Target 0.75 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 0.67 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

3. Approaching 0.59 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure

is attempted.

2. Insufficient 0.56 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence

structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence

structure errors are found throughout.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Format/Documentation 0.75 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations,

footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target 0.75 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 0.67 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 0.59 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

2. Insufficient 0.56 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of

sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 15 points

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.