Operational Implications of Process Improvement

Final Project Rubric

© 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 1 of 2

CATEGORY EXCELLENT

(above expectations) GOOD

(met expectations) FAIR

(below expectations)

POOR (significantly below

expectations or missing)

Operations Requirements

(32 points possible)

The assessment of the requirements and resources shows depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking when describing what is working and what is not working at the hospital. (29–32 points)

The assessment of the requirements and resources fully addresses what is working and what is not working at the hospital. Triangulation was attempted but not shown. (26–28 points)

The assessment of the requirements and resources lacks depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking when describing what is working and what is not working at the hospital. (22–25 points)

The assessment of the requirements and resources does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses what is working and what is not working at the hospital. (0–21 points)

Literature Review and Scan of Operations Best Practices

(32 points possible)

The Literature Review and Scan of Operations Best Practices show depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing how the hospital can implement initiatives from a high-reliability health care organization. (29–32 points)

The Literature Review and Scan of Operations Best Practices fully address how the hospital can implement initiatives from a high- reliability health care organization. Triangulation was attempted but not shown. (26–28 points)

The Literature Review and Scan of Operations Best Practices lack depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing how the hospital can implement initiatives from a high- reliability health care organization. (22–25 points)

The Literature Review and Scan of Operations Best Practices does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses how the hospital can implement initiatives from a high-reliability health care organization. (0–21 points)

Recommendations for Improving Readiness for Transition from Volume-Based to Value- Based Delivery of Health Care

(32 points possible)

The Recommendations show depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing the readiness for transition from volume-based to value-based delivery of healthcare. (29–32 points)

The Recommendations fully address the readiness for transition from volume-based to value-based delivery of healthcare. Triangulation was attempted but not shown. (26–28 points)

The Recommendations lack depth, breadth, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing the readiness for transition from volume-based to value-based delivery of healthcare. (22–25 points)

The Recommendation do not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the readiness for transition from volume-based to value-based delivery of healthcare. (0–21 points)

Operational Implications of Health Care Reforms and Mandates

(32 points possible)

The Analysis shows depth, breath, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing the operational implications of 2–3 current health care reforms and mandates that might affect the implementation of an initiative. (29–32 points)

The Analysis fully addresses the operational implications of 2–3 current health care reforms and mandates that might affect the implementation of an initiative. Triangulation was attempted but not shown. (26–28 points)

The Analysis lacks depth, breath, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing the operational implications of 2–3 current health care reforms and mandates that might affect the implementation of an initiative. (22–25 points)

The Analysis does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses operational implications of 2–3 current health care reforms and mandates that might affect the implementation of an initiative. (0–21 points)

Final Project Rubric

© 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 2 of 2

CATEGORY EXCELLENT

(above expectations) GOOD

(met expectations) FAIR

(below expectations)

POOR (significantly below

expectations or missing)

Assessment of Current and Future Trends

(32 points possible)

The Assessment shows depth, breath, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing how trends can help hospitals become a sustainable model for high-reliability organizations. (29–32 points)

The Assessment fully addresses how trends can help hospitals become a sustainable model for high-reliability organizations. Triangulation was attempted but not shown. (26–28 points)

The Assessment lacks depth, breath, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing how trends can help hospitals become a sustainable model for high-reliability organizations. (22–25 points)

The Assessment does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses how trends can help hospitals become a sustainable model for high-reliability organizations. (0–21 points)

Writing

(40 points possible)

The Report is well organized, uses professional tone, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate level writing style. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and more than three additional scholarly sources. The Report is 5–7 pages excluding the title page and references. (36–40 points)

The Report is mostly consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and at least three additional scholarly sources. The Report is 5–7 pages excluding the title page and references. (32–35 points)

The Report is somewhat consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and less than three additional scholarly sources. The Report is not 5–7 pages excluding the title page and references. (28–31 points)

The Report is well below graduate level writing style expectations for organization, professional tone, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting. The work is not supported by the Learning Resources or additional scholarly sources. The Report is not 5–7 pages excluding the title page and references. (0–27 points)