EBP, IS, AND QI
For Week 6, you will continue to develop your EBP, IS, and QI Assignment, which you began in Week 4.
Note: This Assignment is hypothetical in nature and is unrelated to your Practicum and DNP Project. However, the work you put in on this Assignment can help inform your future Practicum and DNP Project.
Note: This is a two-part Assignment consisting of a written paper and a PowerPoint presentation, both of which are due by Day 7 of Week 6.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To Prepare
· Review the Learning Resources in Weeks 4, 5, and 6 that address evidence-based practice (EBP), implementation science (IS), and quality improvement (QI).
· Review the Learning Resources that address how to use PowerPoint and create narrated PowerPoint presentations.
· Identify three sites within your community that would benefit from an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) project.
· Based on your professional experience, consider practice or organization issues that would make sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) project initiative. Select one on which to focus for this Assignment. Note: You should consider practice or organization issues that you are particularly interested in or passionate about.
· Search the Walden Library and/or the internet to identify at least five recent, peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years) to support the development of a QI project that applies EBP to address the specific practice or organization issue you selected.
· Based on the practice or organization issue you selected, consider the key stakeholders who would be involved in a QI initiative at each of the three sites you selected. For each site, research the website and any other available information to identify:
o A department that leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the organization who would be in charge of approving such initiatives
o Titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (including the highest level of required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement changes in daily patient care)
· Select one of the three potential sites you identified that you think is the best option. Consider the factors on which you based your decision, as well as the mechanics of your decision-making process.
· Based on the practice or organization issue and the site you selected, consider various translation frameworks/models that may be a good fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative.
· Select one translation framework/model that you think is the best fit. Then, consider the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows this framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve practice. Note: Utilize the Week 5 Learning Resources and Discussion to help you with this.
· Begin outlining how you would present the elements of your proposed evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative to key stakeholders of the site you selected in order to gain their approval. Note: You will use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template document, provided in the Learning Resources, to develop this presentation to stakeholders.
Note: This is a two-part Assignment consisting of a written paper and a PowerPoint presentation. Both are due by Day 7 of Week 6.
The Assignment (3–5 pages)
Part 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper)
For Part 1, you will present the specifics of your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. You will also explain your decision-making processes.
In a 4- to 6-page paper (not including cover page and references page), do the following:
Site Selection (1–2 pages)
· Describe each of the three healthcare settings you identified as the proposed site for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be sure to address the following questions about the site:
o Who is the patient population(s)?
o What is their mission?
o Is it a public or private entity?
o Is it a stand-alone organization or a member of a larger corporation?
· What other information about the site do you think is relevant and significant?
· Compare the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites in terms of their viability as the location for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be specific and provide examples.
· Identify the one site of the three you selected. Describe the factors on which you based your decision. Explain your decision-making process.
Stakeholders (1 page)
· Identify the department that leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the organization who would be in charge of approving such an initiative.
· Identify the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (from the highest level of required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement changes in daily patient care).
Practice or Organization Issue (1 page)
· Describe the practice or organization issue you selected.
· Explain why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. Be specific, provide examples, and cite at least five recent, peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years).
Translation Framework/Model (1–2 page)
· Identify and briefly describe the one translation framework/model that you decided is the best fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative.
· Explain why you selected it amongst all the alternatives.
· Describe the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model you selected to translate research and evidence to improve practice.
Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 1 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. Use the College of Nursing Writing Template for your Assignment submission.
Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 1 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. The College of Nursing requires that all papers include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. Use the College of Nursing Writing TemplateLinks to an external site. for your Assignment submission.
Part 2: Proposal to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation)
For Part 2, you will present your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) Initiative proposal to (hypothetical) stakeholders at the healthcare organization site. Your goal is to persuade and obtain approval for the EBP QI initiative you are proposing.
In a 6- to 10-slide PowerPoint presentation (not including cover and references slides), address the following:
· Title
o Include the title of your presentation and your name.
· Introduction (1–2 slides)
o Identify the healthcare organization site.
o Introduce and describe the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative you are proposing.
· The Issue (2–3 slides)
o Introduce and describe the practice or organization issue you aim to address.
o Explain the goal of the project. Why is it important?
· Translation Framework/Model (2–3 slides)
o Introduce and describe the translation framework/model you will use to implement the project.
o Explain how it will work. Why will it be effective to achieve your goal?
· Conclusion (1–2 slides)
o Summarize your presentation. Ask for stakeholder support.
· References
o Cite the sources you used to support your presentation.
Note: You must Include detailed speaker notes for each slide. Your speaker notes should explain all of the points you would make to the stakeholders to convince them to approve your proposal.
Also Note: Use the Week 4, 5, and 6 Learning Resources to support Part 2 of your Assignment. Use proper APA format and style for all references and citations. Use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template document Download College of Nursing PowerPoint Template documentfor your Assignment submission.
Part 1: Key Project Elements (Written Paper) Site Selection Describe
each of the three healthcare settings you identified as the proposed site for
your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative.
Compare the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites in terms of their
viability as the location for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality
improvement (QI) initiative. Identify the one site of the three you selected.
Describe the factors on which you based your decision. Explain your
decision-making process.
18 to
>16.0 pts
Excellent
The response
accurately and clearly describes each of the three healthcare settings;
compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the
one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the
decision-making process. The response includes relevant, specific, and
appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each
of the alignments described.
16 to
>14.0 pts
Good
The response
accurately describes each of the three healthcare settings; compares the
strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the one site of the
three you selected with an explanation of the decision-making process. The
response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support
the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
14 to
>12.5 pts
Fair
The response
inaccurately or vaguely describes each of the three healthcare settings;
compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the
one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the
decision-making process. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant
examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the
alignments described.
12.5 to
>0 pts
Poor
The response
inaccurately and vaguely describes each of the three healthcare settings;
compares the strengths and weaknesses of the three sites; identifies the
one site of the three you selected with an explanation of the
decision-making process or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate
and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each
of the alignments described or it is missing.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key
Project Elements (Written Paper) Stakeholders Identify the department that
leads QI initiatives or, if one does not exist, an employee within the
organization who would be in charge of approving such a QI initiative.
Identify the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders (from the highest level of
required approval to the healthcare associates who might help implement
changes in daily patient care).
18 to
>16.0 pts
Excellent
The response
accurately and clearly identifies the department or employee that leads QI
initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The
response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully
support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
16 to
>14.0 pts
Good
The response
accurately identifies the department or employee that leads QI initiatives;
identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The response includes
relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations
provided for each of the alignments described.
14 to
>12.5 pts
Fair
The response
inaccurately or vaguely identifies the department or employee that leads QI
initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant stakeholders. The
response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the
explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
12.5 to
>0 pts
Poor
The response
inaccurately and vaguely explains identifies the department or employee
that leads QI initiatives; identifies the titles/roles of relevant
stakeholders or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague
examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the
alignments described or it is missing.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key
Project Elements (Written Paper) Practice or Organization Issue Describe the
practice or organization issue you selected. Explain why it makes sense as
the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI)
initiative. Be specific, provide examples, and cite at least five recent,
peer-reviewed articles (published within the last 5 years).
18 to
>16.0 pts
Excellent
The response
accurately and clearly describes the practice or organization issue
selected; explains why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based
practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. The response includes
relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the
explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
16 to
>14.0 pts
Good
The response
accurately describes the practice or organization issue selected; explains
why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality
improvement (QI) initiative. The response includes relevant, specific, and
accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the
alignments described.
14 to
>12.5 pts
Fair
The response
inaccurately or vaguely describes the practice or organization issue
selected; explains why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based
practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative. The response includes
inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations
provided for each of the alignments described.
12.5 to
>0 pts
Poor
The response
inaccurately and vaguely describes the practice or organization issue
selected; explains why it makes sense as the focus of an evidence-based practice
(EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative or it is missing. The response
includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations
provided for each of the alignments described or it is missing.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Key
Project Elements (Written Paper) Translation Framework/Model Identify and
briefly describe the one translation framework/model that you decided is the
best fit for your evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI)
initiative. Explain why you selected your evidence-based practice (EBP)
quality improvement (QI) initiative amongst all the alternatives. Describe
the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice (EBP) quality
improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model you selected
to translate research and evidence to improve practice.
18 to
>16.0 pts
Excellent
The response
accurately and clearly identifies and describe the one translation
framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the
alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an
evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that
follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve
practice. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate
examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the
alignments described.
16 to
>14.0 pts
Good
The response
accurately identifies and describe the one translation framework/model
utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the alternatives;
describes the steps or processes required for an evidence-based practice
(EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that follows the framework/model
to translate research and evidence to improve practice. The response
includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the
explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
14 to
>12.5 pts
Fair
The response
inaccurately or vaguely explains identifies and describe the one
translation framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst
all the alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an
evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that
follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve
practice. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may
support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
12.5 to
>0 pts
Poor
The response
inaccurately and vaguely identifies and describe the one translation
framework/model utilized; explains why it was selected amongst all the
alternatives; describes the steps or processes required for an
evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative that
follows the framework/model to translate research and evidence to improve
practice or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague
examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the
alignments described or it is missing.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal
to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Title and Introduction Include the
title of your presentation and your name. Identify the healthcare
organization site. Introduce and describe the evidence-based practice (EBP)
quality improvement (QI) initiative you are proposing.
15 to
>13.5 pts
Excellent
The response
accurately and clearly identifies the title of your presentation and your
name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes
the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being
proposed. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate
examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the
alignments described.
13.5 to
>12.0 pts
Good
The response accurately
identifies the title of your presentation and your name; identifies the
healthcare organization site; introduces and describes the evidence-based
practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being proposed. The
response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support
the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
12 to
>10.5 pts
Fair
The response
inaccurately or vaguely identifies the title of your presentation and your
name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes
the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being
proposed. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may
support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
10.5 to
>0 pts
Poor
The response
inaccurately and vaguely identifies the title of your presentation and your
name; identifies the healthcare organization site; introduces and describes
the evidence-based practice (EBP) quality improvement (QI) initiative being
proposed or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague
examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the
alignments described or it is missing.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal
to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) The Issue Introduce and describe
the practice or organization issue you aim to address. Explain the goal of
the project. Why is it important?
15 to
>13.5 pts
Excellent
The response
accurately and clearly introduces and describes the practice or
organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and
why it is important. The response includes relevant, specific, and
appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each
of the alignments described.
13.5 to
>12.0 pts
Good
The response
accurately introduces and describes the practice or organization issue
being addressed; explains the goal of the project and why it is important.
The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that
support the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
12 to
>10.5 pts
Fair
The response
inaccurately or vaguely introduces and describes the practice or
organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and
why it is important. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant
examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the
alignments described.
10.5 to
>0 pts
Poor
The response
inaccurately and vaguely introduces and describes the practice or
organization issue being addressed; explains the goal of the project and
why it is important or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and
vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of
the alignments described or it is missing.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal
to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Translation Framework/Model
Introduce and describe the translation framework/model you will use to implement
the project. Explain how it will work. Why will it be effective to achieve
your goal?
15 to
>13.5 pts
Excellent
The response
accurately and clearly introduces and describes the translation
framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work
and why it will be effective to achieve the goal. The response includes
relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the
explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
13.5 to
>12.0 pts
Good
The response
accurately introduces and describes the translation framework/model used to
implement the project; explains how it will work and why it will be
effective to achieve the goal. The response includes relevant, specific,
and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of
the alignments described.
12 to
>10.5 pts
Fair
The response
inaccurately or vaguely introduces and describes the translation
framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work
and why it will be effective to achieve the goal. The response includes
inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations
provided for each of the alignments described.
10.5 to
>0 pts
Poor
The response
inaccurately and vaguely introduces and describes the translation
framework/model used to implement the project; explains how it will work
and why it will be effective to achieve the goal or it is missing. The
response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the
explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is
missing.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Proposal
to Stakeholders (PowerPoint Presentation) Conclusion and References Summarize
your presentation. Ask for stakeholder support. Cite the sources you used to
support your presentation.
15 to
>13.5 pts
Excellent
The response
accurately and clearly summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder
support; cites the sources used to support the presentation. The response
includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support
the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
13.5 to
>12.0 pts
Good
The response
accurately summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support;
cites the sources used to support the presentation. The response includes
relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations
provided for each of the alignments described.
12 to
>10.5 pts
Fair
The response
inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the presentation and asks for
stakeholder support; cites the sources used to support the presentation.
The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support
the explanations provided for each of the alignments described.
10.5 to
>0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately
and vaguely summarizes the presentation and asks for stakeholder support;
cites the sources used to support the presentation or it is missing. The
response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the
explanations provided for each of the alignments described or it is
missing.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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.
6 to
>5.0 pts
Excellent
Paragraphs and
sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. 90%
of the time. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and
conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.
5 to >4.2 pts
Good
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.
4.2 to
>3.0 pts
Fair
Paragraphs and sentences
follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 70% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off
topic.
3 to
>0 pts
Poor
Paragraphs and
sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity <
70% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was
provided.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression
and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and
proper punctuation
6 to
>5.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct
grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
5 to
>4.0 pts
Good
Contains a few
(1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
4 to
>3.0 pts
Fair
Contains several
(3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3 to
>0 pts
Poor
Contains many (≥
5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the
reader’s understanding.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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.
6 to
>5.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct APA
format with no errors.
5 to
>4.0 pts
Good
Contains a few
(1 or 2) APA format errors.
4 to
>3.0 pts
Fair
Contains several
(3 or 4) APA format errors.
3 to
>0 pts
Poor
Contains many (≥
5) APA format errors.
6 pts
Total
Points: 150
PreviousNext
