2 to 3 page due 10/20/2018
barfud_feitye
Week4twotothreepgsassign.docx1
Running head: Title
TITLE 4
Week 4 - Assignment
Stark Law
Case Study: Review this scenario:
Two physicians, Dr. S. and Dr. V., leased a nuclear camera so they would no longer have to refer their patients to the local hospital for nuclear imaging. Faced with the prospect of losing over a third of its $2,274,094 in annual gross nuclear medicine revenues, the hospital responded by threatening to revoke the doctors’ admitting privileges. Lengthy negotiations ensued, at the end of which the hospital agreed to sublease the camera from the two physicians; the camera remained at the physicians’ offices but other physicians with privileges at the hospital could use it. Four other local physicians who provided the same or similar services to patients as Dr. S. and Dr. V. brought a qui tam action alleging that the sublease violated the Anti-Kickback and Stark Acts and that the defendants falsely certified compliance with those laws in connection with claims submitted to Medicare in violation of the False Claims Act.
(Please note: This is an actual court case and an Internet search may uncover the actual case details. You are prohibited from utilizing any source materials associated with this case. Use of any related materials will result in a reduction of points on this assignment. This assignment is being graded on your ability to critically think—on your own recognizance—based on your comprehension of the knowledge provided in this week’s learning materials.)
Instructions: Carefully review Chapter 7 of your textbook and research Stark Law. Given this scenario, analyze whether the actions of Dr. S. and Dr. V. violated Stark Law. Provide solid evidence supporting your decision by utilizing information from the
University Library as well as the law itself.
Your paper must be two to three pages in length, excluding the title and reference pages; include at least two scholarly sources, in addition to the textbook; and be written in APA format.
Description:
Analyzes Whether the Actions of Drs. S. and V. Violated Stark Law
Distinguished - Comprehensively analyzes whether the actions of Drs. S. and V. violated Stark Law.
Proficient -Analyzes whether the actions of Drs. S. and V. violated Stark Law. Minor details are missing or unclear.
Basic - Partially analyzes whether the actions of Drs. S. and V. violated Stark Law. Relevant details are missing or unclear.
Below Expectations - Attempts to analyze whether the actions of Drs. S. and V. violated Stark Law; however, significant details are missing or unclear.
Non-Performance - The analysis of whether the actions of Drs. S. and V. violated Stark Law is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Provides Solid Evidence Supporting the Decision
Distinguished - Thoroughly provides solid evidence supporting the decision, fully utilizing information from the University Library and the law itself.
Proficient - Provides evidence supporting the decision, utilizing information from th University Library and the law itself. Minor details are missing or unclear.
Basic - Provides limited evidence supporting the decision, minimally utilizing information from the
Non-Performance - The solid evidence supporting the decision is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Critical Thinking – Explanation of Issues
Distinguished - Clearly and comprehensively explains in detail the issue to be considered, delivering all relevant information necessary for a full understanding.
Proficient - Clearly explains in detail the issue to be considered, delivering enough relevant information for an adequate understanding.
Basic - Briefly recognizes the issue to be considered, delivering minimal information for a basic understanding.
Below Expectations - Briefly recognizes the issue to be considered, but may not deliver additional information necessary for a basic understanding.
Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Critical Thinking – Evidence
Distinguished - Employs persuasive information from credible sources to develop an ample analysis or synthesis of the topic. Viewpoints of experts are scrutinized thoroughly.
Proficient - Employs applicable information from credible sources to develop an analysis of the topic.
Basic - Identifies applicable information from credible sources, but may neglect the application of such information toward the analysis of the topic.
Below Expectations - Displays information from external sources, but such information may lack credibility and/or relevance. Neglects the application of such information toward the analysis of the topic.
Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics
Distinguished - Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors, and is very easy to understand.
Proficient - Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors, and is mostly easy to understand.
Basic - Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors, which may slightly distract the reader.
Below Expectations - Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors, which distract the reader.
Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
APA Formatting
Distinguished - Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.
Proficient - Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.
Basic - Exhibits basic knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements.
Below Expectations - Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.
Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Page Requirement
Distinguished - The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Proficient - The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Basic - The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Below Expectations - The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Resource Requirement
Distinguished - Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Proficient -Uses required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Basic - Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.
Below Expectations - Uses inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.
Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Powered by
