OM005 Operational resources and Productivity
Mbide
OM005_Rubric.pdf
© 2021 Walden University 1
OM005: Operational Resources and Productivity: Evaluate productivity against established benchmarks and recommend changes to improve patient safety metrics.
Assessment Rubric
Rubric Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations Part 1: Productivity Metrics Learning Objective 1.1:
Identify activities and processes in emergency departments that impact the patient experience.
Response does not identify, identifies fewer than six activities and processes carried out in the scenario, or it identifies activities and processes not relevant to the patient experience. The six activities and processes, with durations, are inaccurately entered into the productivity metrics dashboard, or fewer than six activities and processes are entered.
Response identifies at least six activities and processes carried out in the scenario that impact the patient experience. Each of the six activities and processes, with its duration, national average and difference OT vs NA is accurately entered in the productivity metrics dashboard. Source Tab is completed.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response identifies more than six activities and processes and the activities/processes identified are those that have the greatest potential impact on patient experience.
Learning Objective 1.2
Analyze activities and processes for how activities/processes create inefficiency.
Analysis does not identify or identifies fewer than five activities or processes that created inefficiency in the case presented, or the activities identified are not related to issues of efficiency. Rationale for selection of the five activities creates inefficiency is weak or all five activities are not addressed.
Analysis identifies five activities or processes that created inefficiency in the case presented. Analysis includes a logical rationale for selection of each of the five activities. Includes cited material to support assertions.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response describes the impact that the inefficiencies have on patient experience.
© 2021 Walden University 2
Rubric Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations Discrepancies and reasons why they exist are unclear or missing.
Analysis identifies discrepancies and outlines reasons why they exist.
Learning Objective 1.3
Analyze activities and processes that create inefficiencies against national benchmarks.
Analysis does not identify or identifies national benchmarks for fewer than five of the identified activities/processes that create inefficiency, or Identification of benchmarks is inaccurate. National benchmarks are entered incorrectly in the productivity metrics dashboard, or they are missing from the dashboard. National benchmarks are not supported by a citation, or the citation is irrelevant, or the national averages are not documented.
Analysis accurately identifies the national benchmarks for the ten activities/processes identified as creating inefficiency. National benchmarks are entered correctly in the productivity metrics dashboard. National benchmarks are supported by a citation for the data, and citations are included in the sources tab of the productivity metrics dashboard.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response includes national benchmarks for eleven or more activities/processes carried out in this scenario, OR Analysis includes an explanation for any measure that deviates from the national benchmarks.
Learning Objective 1.4
Analyze activities and processes to determine acceptable differentials for a
Response does not explain or partially explains the methodology used to determine acceptable differentials for each of the five activities/processes, or not all five activities/processes are addressed.
Response thoroughly explains the methodology used to determine acceptable differentials for each of the five activities/processes.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response details the acceptable differentials for six or more
© 2021 Walden University 3
Rubric Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations productivity metrics dashboard.
activities/processes with relevant rationale.
Rubric Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations
Part 2: Balanced Scorecard Methodology Learning Objective 2.1: Explain the balanced scorecard methodology
Response does not explain or vaguely explains the balanced scorecard methodology or explains fewer than two strengths and fewer than two limitations, or the strengths/limitations are unclear. Strengths and weaknesses are not supported by references to academic resources relevant to the best practices in using balanced scorecards, or the references are not relevant.
Response clearly explains the balanced scorecard methodology, including two strengths and two limitations. Strengths and limitations are supported by references to academic resources relevant to best practices in using balanced scorecards.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response clearly explains more than two strengths and more than two weaknesses of the balanced scorecard methodology.
Learning Objective 2.2: Explain the benefits of using the balanced scorecard methodology in a specific healthcare context.
Response does not provide or provides an unclear explanation of the benefits of using the balanced scorecard methodology, or the explanation does not address each of the five activities/processes identified in the case presented. Benefits of using balanced scorecards are not supported by
Response clearly explains the benefits of using the balanced scorecard for each of the five activities/processes identified in the case presented. Benefits of using balanced scorecards are supported by references to relevant academic resources.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response clearly explains the benefits of using the balanced scorecard for six or more activities/processes
© 2021 Walden University 4
references to academic resources, or the resources are not relevant.
identified in the case presented.
Learning Objective 2. 3: Critique productivity metric results and limitations of the data collection process.
Response does not provide or provides a vague or inaccurate critique of the productivity metric results. Response does not provide or provides a critique of any limitations of the current data collection process and/or metrics being used for the scorecard.
Response clearly and accurately provides a critique of the productivity metrics results, any limitations of the current data collection process and the metrics being used for the scorecard.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response explains the effect of current data collection process being used and the contributing factors to any limitations identified.
Rubric Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations Part 3: Balanced Scorecard Creation Learning Objective 3.1: Create a balanced scorecard for a healthcare organization.
Response does not include or includes an illogical or incomplete balanced scorecard or does not relate to the case presented. Balanced scorecard does not include both quantitative and qualitative metrics for each of the five activities/processes identified in the case presented, or the metrics provided are not accurate.
Response includes a logical and cohesive balanced scorecard for the case presented. Balanced scorecard includes both quantitative and qualitative metrics for each of the five activities/processes identified in the case presented. Metrics provided are accurate.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Balanced scorecard includes both quantitative and qualitative metrics for six or more activities/processes identified in the case presented.
Learning Objective 3.2:
Response does not explain or incompletely or unclearly explains
Response clearly explains why specific qualitative and
Response demonstrates the same level of
© 2021 Walden University 5
Explain why specific metrics are identified and used for a balanced scorecard.
why specific qualitative and quantitative metrics were chosen for the balanced scorecard. Response is vague about how the targets were identified.
quantitative metrics were chosen for the balanced scorecard. Response clearly explains how the targets were identified.
achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response includes an explanation of how the metrics relate to patient care.
Learning Objective 3.3: Defend use of best practices for productivity metric data collection, analysis/interpretation, and action planning.
Response does not defend or vaguely or inaccurately defends use of best practices for productivity metric data collection, analysis/interpretation, and action planning.
Response clearly and accurately defends use of best practices for productivity metric data collection, analysis/interpretation, and action planning.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response provides specific examples of the positive impact that best practices have on productivity metric data collection, analysis/interpretation, and action planning.
Learning Objective 3.4: Recommend a high- level process to collect, track, and measure data for productivity metrics.
Response does not recommend or vaguely or inaccurately recommends a high-level process to collect, track, and measure data for productivity metrics. Or recommendation is illogical or ineffective.
Response clearly and accurately recommends a logical and effective high-level process to collect, track, and measure data for productivity metrics.
Response demonstrates the same level of achievement as “Meets,” plus the following: Response includes both benefits and limitations for the recommendations of the performance metrics dashboard and an explanation of how the metrics relate to patient care.
© 2021 Walden University 6
