Human Resource Management Week 10 Assignment: Capstone Integrative Proposal Project

Week 10 Assignment: Capstone Integrative Proposal Project

Overview This is the final assignment of the Capstone Integrative Proposal Project in which you

will consolidate elements from your assignments in Weeks 3 and 8 into a final Research

Proposal or Program Evaluation Proposal. Review the feedback and scores received for

those previous components before beginning the final assignment. You should make

improvements and revisions to previously submitted sections of the Proposal based on

feedback you received from your instructor, peers, and your continued research

throughout the course.

The final Research Proposal or Program Evaluation Proposal will be expanded to

include consideration of ethical issues and reflections on the process of writing a

proposal.

Instructions Include the following components in your assignment.

Introduction ● Provide a short introduction to the paper.

Overview of the Problem/Program Objective ● Provide a concise problem statement or program objective statement which

describes the population of focus and analyzes the social problem of interest.

● Evaluate diversity, equity, or inclusion issues which impact the social problem and anticipate how you would ethically coordinate with diverse stakeholders to address diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Literature Review ● Synthesize current literature that provides a background on the chosen

problem and population, summarizes the constructs from the selected human service theory, and explains how the constructs align with the problem.

Research Proposal/Program Evaluation Proposal ● Create an original research question or program evaluation question. ● Evaluate the selected survey instrument(s) and how well the instrument

aligns with the research question or program evaluation question. ● Apply ethical principles and laws/legal standards and address how the

Belmont Report relates to the proposal. ○ Summarize concerns for participant protection (confidentiality,

vulnerable groups) and concerns regarding publishing the results of the program evaluation (available for public dissemination versus only available to program administrator).

Reflection ● Analyze your experience developing a Research Proposal or Program

Evaluation Proposal. ○ Has your initial interest in the social problem or program objective

changed? ○ What area of the Proposal were most challenging to develop? ○ What area would you continue to revise if you were to pursue the

Proposal further?

Conclusion ● Provide a short conclusion to the paper.

Additional Requirements ● References: Include a minimum of 12 peer-reviewed journal articles

published within the last five years. ● Length of paper: 5–8 pages.

● Communication: Communicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and respectful of the diversity, dignity, and integrity of others, consistent with expectations for members of the human services profession. Written communication should be free of errors that detract from the overall message.

● APA Style and Format : Use appropriate APA style and formatting for citations and references.

Competencies Measured By successfully completing this assignment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the

following course competencies and grading criteria:

● Competency 1: Apply laws, legal issues, professional ethics and cultural competence to the human services profession.

○ Evaluate diversity, equity or inclusion issues which impact the social problem and anticipate how you would ethically coordinate with diverse stakeholders to address diversity, equity, and inclusion.

○ Apply ethical principles and laws/legal standards and address how the Belmont Report relates to the proposal.

● Competency 2: Apply historical and current human systems (individual, interpersonal, group, family, organizational, community, and societal systems) and research findings about client, organizational, and community needs and the social, economic, and cultural impacts to solve issues in for-profit, nonprofit, and government settings.

○ Provide a concise problem statement or program objective statement which describes the population of focus and analyzes the social problem of interest.

● Competency 4: Apply interdisciplinary knowledge and research skills to better understand human functioning and conduct a systematic analysis of service needs, interventions, and evaluate outcomes.

○ Synthesize current literature that provides a background on the chosen problem and population, summarizes the constructs from the selected human service theory, and explains how the constructs align with the problem.

○ Evaluate the selected survey instrument(s) and how well the instrument aligns with the research question or program evaluation question.

● Competency 5: Employ human services management skills to address the scope of conditions that can promote or inhibit human functioning: conceptualize problems, contribute in collaborative settings, and communicate recommendations regarding direct care, resource management, and service delivery.

○ Create an original research question or program evaluation question.

○ Analyze your experience developing a Research Proposal or Program Evaluation Proposal.

● Competency 6: Communicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and respectful of the diversity, dignity, and integrity of others, consistent with expectations for members of the human services profession.

○ Communicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and respectful of the diversity, dignity, and integrity of others, consistent with expectations for members of the human services profession

Week 10 Assignment - Capstone Integrative Proposal Project

Criteria Ratings Pts

Provide a concise problem

statement or program objective statement

which describes the population of

focus and analyzes the

social problem of

interest. view longer description

39 to >33.15 pts DISTINGUISHED Provides a concise and contemporary problem statement or program objective statement which describes the population of focus and analyzes the social problem of interest, strongly supporting all claims with examples and references to scholarly literature as appropriate. 33.15 to >27.3 pts PROFICIENT Provides a concise problem statement or program objective statement which describes the population of focus and analyzes the social problem of interest. 27.3 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an unclear problem statement or program objective statement which does not adequately describe the population of focus and analyze the social problem of interest. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not provide a problem statement or program objective statement which describes the population of focus and analyzes the social problem of interest.

/ 39 pts

Evaluate diversity, equity or inclusion

issues which impact the

social problem and

anticipate how you would ethically

coordinate with diverse stakeholders to address diversity,

equity, and inclusion.

view longer description

39 to >33.15 pts DISTINGUISHED Evaluates diversity, equity or inclusion issues which impact the social problem and anticipate how you would ethically coordinate with diverse stakeholders to address diversity, equity, and inclusion, strongly supporting all claims with examples and references to scholarly literature as appropriate. 33.15 to >27.3 pts PROFICIENT Evaluates diversity, equity or inclusion issues which impact the social problem and anticipate how you would ethically coordinate with diverse stakeholders to address diversity, equity, and inclusion. 27.3 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an incomplete or vague discussion of diversity, equity or inclusion issues which impact the social problem and how you would ethically coordinate with diverse stakeholders to address diversity, equity, and inclusion. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not provide a discussion of diversity, equity or inclusion issues which impact the social problem and how you would ethically coordinate with diverse stakeholders to address diversity, equity, and inclusion.

/ 39 pts

Synthesize current

literature which

provides a background

on the chosen problem and population, summarizes

the constructs from the selected human

service theory, and explains

how the constructs

align with the problem.

view longer description

39 to >33.15 pts DISTINGUISHED Synthesizes current literature which provides a background on the chosen problem and population, summarizes the constructs from the selected human service theory, and explains how the constructs align with the problem, strongly supporting all claims with examples and references to scholarly literature as appropriate. 33.15 to >27.3 pts PROFICIENT Synthesizes current literature which provides a background on the chosen problem and population, summarizes the constructs from the selected human service theory, and explains how the constructs align with the problem. 27.3 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an inadequate synthesis of literature to address the background on the chosen problem and population, the constructs from the selected human service theory, and how the constructs align with the problem. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not provide a synthesis of literature to address the background on the chosen problem and population, the constructs from the selected human service theory, and how the constructs align with the problem.

/ 39 pts

Create an original

research question or

program evaluation question.

view longer description

39 to >33.15 pts DISTINGUISHED Creates an original and timely research question or program evaluation question, strongly supporting all claims with examples and references to scholarly literature as appropriate. 33.15 to >27.3 pts PROFICIENT Creates an original research question or program evaluation question. 27.3 to >0 pts BASIC Creates an inappropriate or unoriginal research question or program evaluation question. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not create a research question or program evaluation question.

/ 39 pts

Evaluate the selected survey

instrument(s) and how well the instrument aligns with the

research question or

program evaluation question.

view longer description

36 to >30.6 pts DISTINGUISHED Evaluates the selected survey instrument(s) and how well the instrument aligns with the research question or program evaluation question, strongly supporting all claims with examples and references to scholarly literature as appropriate. 30.6 to >25.2 pts PROFICIENT Evaluates the selected survey instrument(s) and how well the instrument aligns with the research question or program evaluation question. 25.2 to >0 pts BASIC Provides a survey instrument but does not sufficiently evaluate how well the instrument

/ 36 pts

aligns with the research question or program evaluation question. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not provide a survey instrument(s) aligned with the research question or program evaluation question.

Apply ethical principles and

laws/legal standards and address how the Belmont

Report relates to the

proposal. view longer description

36 to >30.6 pts DISTINGUISHED Applies ethical principles and laws/legal standards and addresses how the Belmont Report relates to the proposal, strongly supporting all claims with examples and references to scholarly literature as appropriate. 30.6 to >25.2 pts PROFICIENT Applies ethical principles and laws/legal standards and addresses how the Belmont Report relates to the proposal. 25.2 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an incomplete application of ethical principles, laws/legal standards and the the relation of the Belmont Report to the proposal. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not apply ethical principles and laws/legal standards and address how the Belmont Report relates to the proposal.

/ 36 pts

Analyze your experience

developing a Research

Proposal or Program

Evaluation Proposal.

view longer description

36 to >30.6 pts DISTINGUISHED Analyzes the experience of developing a Research Proposal or Program Evaluation Proposal, strongly supporting all claims with examples and references to scholarly literature as appropriate. 30.6 to >25.2 pts PROFICIENT Analyzes the experience of developing a Research Proposal or Program Evaluation Proposal. 25.2 to >0 pts BASIC Explains but does not analyze the experience of developing a Research Proposal or Program Evaluation Proposal. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not address the experience of developing a Research Proposal or Program Evaluation Proposal.

/ 36 pts

Communicate in a manner

that is scholarly,

professional, and respectful

of the diversity,

dignity, and integrity of

others, consistent

with expectations for members of the human

services profession. view longer description

36 to >30.6 pts DISTINGUISHED Communicates in a manner that is highly scholarly and professional, consistently respectful of the diversity, dignity, and integrity of others, and strongly aligned with expectations for members of the human services profession. 30.6 to >25.2 pts PROFICIENT Communicates in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and respectful of the diversity, dignity, and integrity of others, consistent with expectations for members of the human services profession. 25.2 to >0 pts BASIC Communicates inconsistently in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and respectful of the diversity, dignity, and integrity of others, aligned expectations for members of the human services profession. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not communicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and respectful of the diversity, dignity, and integrity of others, consistent with expectations for members of the human services profession.

/ 36 pts