Research Draft
Minicaa
Rubric-ResearchPaperDraft.pdf
Health Care Research Paper: Draft - Rubric Total 80 points
Criterion 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 2. 2: Less Than
Satisfactory 3. 3: Satisfactory 4. 4: Good 5. 5: Excellent
Health Care Issue or
Barrier
Health Care Issue or Barrier
0 points
A description of the
approved health care issue
or barrier is not presented.
2.6 points
An incomplete description of
the approved health care
administration issue or
barrier is presented.
Significant detail or evidence
is needed to explain the
nature of the problem.
3 points
A summary of the approved
health care administration
problem is presented. Some
information or detail is
needed to fully describe the
nature of the problem.
3.4 points
A description of the
approved health care
administration problem is
presented.
4 points
The health care
administration problem is
thoroughly described.
Detailed information and
strong evidence support the
description.
Characteristics and Role of
an Effective Leader
Characteristics and Role of
an Effective Leader
0 points
Paper does not address
leader characteristics or role.
5.2 points
Paper only vaguely identifies
the characteristics of an
effective leader and their role
in the plan.
6 points
Paper identifies the
characteristics of an effective
leader and their role in the
plan.
6.8 points
Paper effectively identifies
the characteristics of an
effective leader and their role
in the plan.
8 points
Paper thoroughly identifies
the characteristics of an
effective leader and provides
detailed insight into their
role in the plan.
Resources Needed for Plan
Resources Needed for Plan
0 points
Resources are not presented.
5.2 points
Few resources have been
identified. The relevance of
the resources and the role
they play in the addressing
the problem are not
discussed.
6 points
Some relevant resources
have been identified. A
general discussion of the
resources is presented. The
role the resources play in
addressing the health care
issue or barrier is somewhat
unclear.
6.8 points
Most key resources have
been identified. A discussion
of the resources and the role
they pay in the addressing
the problem is presented.
The discussion demonstrates
why the resources are
relevant to addressing the
health care issue or barrier.
8 points
All key resources have been
identified. A detailed
discussion of the resources
and the role they pay in the
addressing the problem is
clearly presented. The
discussion explains why the
resources are relevant to
addressing the health care
issue or barrier. Detailed
information and evidence are
provided to support the
discussion.
Identification of
Compliance Requirements
Identification of Compliance
Requirements
0 points
No compliance
considerations or
requirements are identified.
5.2 points
At least two compliance
considerations or
requirements are identified.
The relevancy of these to the
plan is not established. More
information or evidence is
needed for support.
Significant legislative,
institutional, or agency policy
is omitted.
6 points
Some key compliance
considerations or
requirements are identified.
A general summary discusses
the relevance of these to the
plan. Some information or
evidence is needed for
support. At least one
significant legislative,
institutional, or agency policy
is omitted.
6.8 points
Most key compliance
considerations or
requirements are identified.
The relevancy of these to the
plan is discussed. Some
information or evidence is
needed for support.
8 points
All significant compliance
considerations or
requirements are clearly
identified. The relevancy of
these to the plan is
discussed, and substantial
evidence is provided for
support. Additional external
or internal regulatory
considerations are identified,
and strong rationale has
been provided to describe
significance.
Organizational or
Strategical Development
Plan
Organizational or Strategical
Development Plan
0 points
No organizational or
strategical development plan
is identified.
7.8 points
Clear identification of
organizational development
is missing. Supporting
evidence is provided but not
valid.
9 points
Some components of
organizational and strategical
development plan are
identified. Valid supporting
evidence is missing. Some
resources are out-of-date.
10.2 points
Organizational and
strategical development plan
is identified. Additional
information is needed
regarding implementation.
Some additional evidence is
needed for support.
12 points
Substantial organizational
and strategical development
plan is identified. How the
plan is to be implemented is
clearly identified with strong
rationale. Valid evidence is
used for support.
Communication Strategies
for Plan
Communication Strategies
for Plan
0 points
No strategies are presented
to communicate the
proposed plan.
5.2 points
A partial strategy for
communication is presented.
Significant information or
detail is needed.
6 points
A general strategy for
communication is presented.
Some aspects of the
communication strategy are
unclear.
6.8 points
A strategy for communication
is presented. The plan
suggests a good approach to
communicate the proposed
plan overall.
8 points
A clear strategy for
communication is presented.
The plan is detailed and
proposes effective
approaches to communicate
the proposed plan to all
stakeholders.© 2026. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Criterion 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 2. 2: Less Than
Satisfactory 3. 3: Satisfactory 4. 4: Good 5. 5: Excellent
Evidence Provided to
Support Plan
Evidence Provided to Support
Plan
0 points
No evidence from the
literature review is used to
provide support for the plan.
5.2 points
Some evidence from the
literature review is used to
provide support for the plan.
The evidence provided is
used inaccurately or does not
provide support for the plan.
6 points
Evidence from the literature
review is effort to provide
support for the plan. More
detail or information is
needed in order to fully
demonstrate support for the
plan.
6.8 points
Evidence from the literature
review demonstrates support
for the overall plan.
8 points
Evidence from the literature
review is clearly described
and organized around ideas
in a manner that offers
strong support for the
various stages of the plan
and the plan overall.
Thesis Development and
Purpose
Thesis Development and
Purpose
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible
overall purpose or organizing
claim.
3.64 points
Thesis is insufficiently
developed or vague. Purpose
is not clear.
4.2 points
Thesis is apparent and
appropriate to purpose.
4.76 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts
the development of the
paper. Thesis is descriptive
and reflective of the
arguments and appropriate
to the purpose.
5.6 points
Thesis is comprehensive and
contains the essence of the
paper. Thesis statement
makes the purpose of the
paper clear.
Argument Logic and
Construction
Argument Logic and
Construction
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.
4.16 points
Sufficient justification of
claims is lacking. Argument
lacks consistent unity. There
are obvious flaws in the logic.
Some sources have
questionable credibility.
4.8 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.
5.44 points
Argument shows logical
progression. Techniques of
argumentation are evident.
There is a smooth
progression of claims from
introduction to conclusion.
Most sources are
authoritative.
6.4 points
Clear and convincing
argument presents a
persuasive claim in a
distinctive and compelling
manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing
(includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar,
language use)
Mechanics of Writing
(includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar,
language use)
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive
enough that they impede
communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is
used.
2.6 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.
3 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.
3.4 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.
4 points
Writer is clearly in command
of standard, written,
academic English.
Paper Format (use of
appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
Paper Format (use of
appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
0 points
Template is not used
appropriately, or
documentation format is
rarely followed correctly.
2.6 points
Appropriate template is
used, but some elements are
missing or mistaken. A lack
of control with formatting is
apparent.
3 points
Appropriate template is
used. Formatting is correct,
although some minor errors
may be present.
3.4 points
Appropriate template is fully
used. There are virtually no
errors in formatting style.
4 points
All format elements are
correct.
Documentation of Sources
Documentation of Sources
(citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc.,
as appropriate to assignment
and style)
0 points
Sources are not documented.
2.6 points
Documentation of sources is
inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
3 points
Sources are documented, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, although some
formatting errors may be
present.
3.4 points
Sources are documented, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is
mostly correct.
4 points
Sources are completely and
correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is free
of error.
© 2026. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
