Assignment: Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AS INDICATED BELOW:
1). ZERO (0) PLAGIARISM
2). ATLEAST 5 REFERENCES, NO MORE THAN 5 YEARS
3). PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING ATTACHED RUBRIC DETAILS.
Thank you.
Program/policy evaluation is a valuable tool that can help strengthen the quality of programs/policies and improve outcomes for the populations they serve. Program/policy evaluation answers basic questions about program/policy effectiveness. It involves collecting and analyzing information about program/policy activities, characteristics, and outcomes. This information can be used to ultimately improve program services or policy initiatives.
Nurses can play a very important role assessing program/policy evaluation for the same reasons that they can be so important to program/policy design. Nurses bring expertise and patient advocacy that can add significant insight and impact. In this Assignment, you will practice applying this expertise and insight by selecting an existing healthcare program or policy evaluation and reflecting on the criteria used to measure the effectiveness of the program/policy.
To Prepare:
- Review the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template provided in the Resources.
- Select an existing healthcare program or policy evaluation or choose one of interest to you.
- Review community, state, or federal policy evaluation and reflect on the criteria used to measure the effectiveness of the program or policy described.
The Assignment: (2–3 pages)
Based on the program or policy evaluation you selected, complete the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template. Be sure to address the following:
- Describe the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
- How was the success of the program or policy measured?
- How many people were reached by the program or policy selected?
- How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
- At what point in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?
- What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
- What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?
- What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
- Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
- Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
- Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after 1 year of implementation.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name:
NURS_6050_Module05_Week10_Assignment_Rubric
- Grid View
- List View
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Points: Points Range: Response clearly and accurately describes in detail the healthcare program or policy outcomes. Response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the success of the program or policy was measured. Response clearly and accurately describes in detail how many people were reached by the program or policy and fully describes the impact of the program or policy. Response clearly and accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Response accurately describes the healthcare program or policy outcomes. Response accurately explains how the success of the program or policy was measured. Response accurately describes how many people were reached by the program or policy and accurately describes the impact of the program or policy. Response accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate or incomplete. Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate or incomplete. Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the impact is vague or inaccurate. Response vaguely describes the point at which the program or policy evaluation was conducted. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing. Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing. Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the associated impacts is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Response of the point at which time the program or policy was conducted is missing. Feedback: |
|
Points: Points Range: Response clearly and accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation. Response clearly and thoroughly explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation. Response clearly and accurately explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation. Response clearly and accurately explains in detail who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation. Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Response accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation. Response explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation. Response explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation. Response explains who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation. Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation. Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague or incomplete. Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate. Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate. Explanation of whether the program/policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete or inaccurate. Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete or inaccurate. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Identification of the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unitended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague and incomplete, or is missing. Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanation of whether the program or policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing. Feedback: |
|
Points: Points Range: Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. Feedback: |
|
Points: Points Range: Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback: |
|
Points: Points Range: Uses correct APA format with no errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback: |
Show Descriptions
Show Feedback
Program/Policy Evaluation
Based on the program or policy evaluation you seelcted, complete the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template. Be sure to address the following:
· Describe the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
· How was the success of the program or policy measured?
· How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
· At what point in time in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
32 (32%) – 35 (35%)
Response clearly and accurately describes in detail the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
Response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the success of the program or policy was measured.
Response clearly and accurately describes in detail how many people were reached by the program or policy and fully describes the impact of the program or policy.
Response clearly and accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted.
Good
28 (28%) – 31 (31%)
Response accurately describes the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
Response accurately explains how the success of the program or policy was measured.
Response accurately describes how many people were reached by the program or policy and accurately describes the impact of the program or policy.
Response accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted.
Fair
25 (25%) – 27 (27%)
Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate or incomplete.
Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate or incomplete.
Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the impact is vague or inaccurate.
Response vaguely describes the point at which the program or policy evaluation was conducted.
Poor
0 (0%) – 24 (24%)
Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing.
Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing.
Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the associated impacts is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
Response of the point at which time the program or policy was conducted is missing.
Feedback:
Reporting of Program/Policy Evaluations
· What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
· What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?
· What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit the most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
· Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
· Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
· Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after 1 year of implementation.–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Response clearly and accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.
Response clearly and thoroughly explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation.
Response clearly and accurately explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation.
Response clearly and accurately explains in detail who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation.
Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.
Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.
Good
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Response accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.
Response explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation.
Response explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation.
Response explains who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation.
Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.
Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.
Fair
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.
Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague or incomplete.
Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate.
Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate.
Explanation of whether the program/policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete or inaccurate.
Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete or inaccurate.
Poor
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Identification of the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unitended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague and incomplete, or is missing.
Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
Explanation of whether the program or policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing.
Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing.
Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.
Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.
Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.
Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors.
Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3-4) APA format errors.
Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Feedback:
Name: NURS_6050_Module05_Week10_Assignment_Rubric
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name:
NURS_6050_Module05_Week10_Assignment_Rubric
- Grid View
- List View
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Points: Points Range: Response clearly and accurately describes in detail the healthcare program or policy outcomes. Response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the success of the program or policy was measured. Response clearly and accurately describes in detail how many people were reached by the program or policy and fully describes the impact of the program or policy. Response clearly and accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Response accurately describes the healthcare program or policy outcomes. Response accurately explains how the success of the program or policy was measured. Response accurately describes how many people were reached by the program or policy and accurately describes the impact of the program or policy. Response accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate or incomplete. Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate or incomplete. Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the impact is vague or inaccurate. Response vaguely describes the point at which the program or policy evaluation was conducted. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing. Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing. Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the associated impacts is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Response of the point at which time the program or policy was conducted is missing. Feedback: |
|
Points: Points Range: Response clearly and accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation. Response clearly and thoroughly explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation. Response clearly and accurately explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation. Response clearly and accurately explains in detail who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation. Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Response accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation. Response explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation. Response explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation. Response explains who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation. Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation. Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague or incomplete. Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate. Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate. Explanation of whether the program/policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete or inaccurate. Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete or inaccurate. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Identification of the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unitended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague and incomplete, or is missing. Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanation of whether the program or policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing. Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing. Feedback: |
|
Points: Points Range: Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. Feedback: |
|
Points: Points Range: Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback: |
|
Points: Points Range: Uses correct APA format with no errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback: |
Show Descriptions
Show Feedback
Program/Policy Evaluation
Based on the program or policy evaluation you seelcted, complete the Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis Template. Be sure to address the following:
· Describe the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
· How was the success of the program or policy measured?
· How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected?
· At what point in time in program implementation was the program or policy evaluation conducted?–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
32 (32%) – 35 (35%)
Response clearly and accurately describes in detail the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
Response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the success of the program or policy was measured.
Response clearly and accurately describes in detail how many people were reached by the program or policy and fully describes the impact of the program or policy.
Response clearly and accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted.
Good
28 (28%) – 31 (31%)
Response accurately describes the healthcare program or policy outcomes.
Response accurately explains how the success of the program or policy was measured.
Response accurately describes how many people were reached by the program or policy and accurately describes the impact of the program or policy.
Response accurately indicates the point at which time the program or policy evaluation was conducted.
Fair
25 (25%) – 27 (27%)
Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate or incomplete.
Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate or incomplete.
Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the impact is vague or inaccurate.
Response vaguely describes the point at which the program or policy evaluation was conducted.
Poor
0 (0%) – 24 (24%)
Description of the healthcare program or policy outcomes is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing.
Explanation of how the success of the program or policy was measured is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing.
Description of how many people were reached by the program or policy and the associated impacts is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
Response of the point at which time the program or policy was conducted is missing.
Feedback:
Reporting of Program/Policy Evaluations
· What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation?
· What specific information on unintended consequences was identified?
· What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit the most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples.
· Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not?
· Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not?
· Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after 1 year of implementation.–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Response clearly and accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.
Response clearly and thoroughly explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation.
Response clearly and accurately explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation.
Response clearly and accurately explains in detail who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation.
Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.
Response includes a thorough and accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate and detailed explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.
Good
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Response accurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.
Response explains in detail specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation.
Response explains in detail the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation.
Response explains who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation.
Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program met the original intent and outcomes, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.
Response includes an accurate explanation of whether the program should be implemented, including an accurate explanation of the reasons supporting why or why not.
Fair
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation.
Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unintended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague or incomplete.
Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate.
Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague or inaccurate.
Explanation of whether the program/policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete or inaccurate.
Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete or inaccurate.
Poor
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Identification of the data used to conduct the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
Explanation of specific information on outcomes and unitended consequences identified through the program or policy evaluation is vague and incomplete, or is missing.
Explanation of the stakeholders involved in the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
Explanation of who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
Explanation of whether the program or policy met the original intent and outcomes and the reasons why or why not is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing.
Explanation of whether the program or policy should be implemented, and the reasons why or why not, is incomplete and inaccurate, or is missing.
Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.
Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.
Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.
Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors.
Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3-4) APA format errors.
Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Feedback:
Name: NURS_6050_Module05_Week10_Assignment_Rubric
Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis
Template
Use this document to complete the Module 5 Assessment
Assessing a Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation
|
Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation |
|
Description |
|
How was the success of the program or policy measured? |
|
How many people were reached by the program or policy selected? How much of an impact was realized with the program or policy selected? |
|
What data was used to conduct the program or policy evaluation? |
|
What specific information on unintended consequences were identified? |
|
What stakeholders were identified in the evaluation of the program or policy? Who would benefit most from the results and reporting of the program or policy evaluation? Be specific and provide examples. |
|
Did the program or policy meet the original intent and objectives? Why or why not? |
|
Would you recommend implementing this program or policy in your place of work? Why or why not? |
|
Identify at least two ways that you, as a nurse advocate, could become involved in evaluating a program or policy after one year of implementation. |
|
General Notes/Comments |
Healthcare Program/Policy Evaluation Analysis
Template
© 2020 Walden University
2