Order Now

Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis Strategic Plan

Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis Strategic Plan

Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis Strategic Plan

Course Project: Developing a Strategic Plan

In Week 6, you began to develop a summary of the issue you are addressing through your Course Project. This week, you continue to refine the summary and engage in a SWOT analysis related to the identified unmet need.

Section 1: Summary of the Issue

As introduced in Week 6,continue to develop, write, and refine a 2- to 3-page summary of the issue you are addressing through the creation of a strategic plan. (Refer to Week 6 for the preparatory instructions as necessary).

ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED SOLUTION PAPERS

To complete:

Create a 2- to 3-page summary of the issue, in which you identify and/or describe:

  • The unmet need and how it is evident in the specific group, unit, or organization
  • The mission, vision, and values of the group, unit, or organization
  • Background, including:
    • Data from historical analysis and forecasting
    • Evidence from the literature
    • What has been attempted in the past by various individuals and groups to address this need
    • Which stakeholders should be included in the strategic planning process
  • Initial vision for addressing this need at the institutional or systems level, including at least one strategic goal
  • Broader issues to be considered

Course Project: Developing a Strategic Plan

Section 1: Summary of the Issue Has to be hospital based SWOT anaylsis

To prepare for and set the stage for your Course Project, this week you begin to develop a summary of the issue you will address through the creation of a strategic plan.

You may wish to review the Course Project Overview, which outlines the project components and due dates.

To prepare:

  • Consider the information on strategic planning presented by Dr. Huston in this week’s media program, as well as in the other Learning Resources.
  • Reflect on the unmet need you identified in this week’s Discussion, and consider any feedback you have received to your posting from your Instructor and colleagues. If appropriate, refine your focus to clarify the unmet need.
  • In addition to the steps you took in preparation for the Discussion, proceed as follows:
  • Investigate the background related to this unmet need. What conditions have contributed to this situation? Is there data (beyond what you identified for the Discussion) that should be examined?
  • Conduct research to assess what has been attempted in the past, by various individuals or organizations, to address this unmet need.
  • Think about any broader issues that should be examined to better understand this unmet need. For instance, consider economic, political, and/or social considerations.

Begin to draft your 2- to 3-page summary of the Issue (which will be submitted next week). In your summary, identify and/or describe:

  • The unmet need and how it is evident in the specific group, unit, or organization
  • The mission, vision, and values of the group, unit, or organization
  • Background, including:
    • Data from historical analysis and forecasting
    • Evidence from the literature
    • What has been attempted in the past by various individuals and groups to address this need
    • Which stakeholders should be included in the strategic planning process
  • Initial vision for addressing this need at the organizational or systems level, including at least one strategic goal
  • Broader issues to be considered

 

 

Learning Resources

Required Readings

Balicer, R. D., Shadmi, E., Lieberman, N., Greenberg-Dotan, S., Goldfracht, M., Jana, L., . . . Jacobson, O. (2011). Reducing health disparities: Strategy planning and implementation in Israel’s largest health care organization. Health Services Research, 46(4), 1281–1299.

 

The authors examine the planning, implementation, and evaluation of an organization-wide strategy to address the need to reduce health care inequalities and improve quality in Israel.

Schaffner, J. (2009). Roadmap for success: The 10-step nursing strategic plan. Journal of Nursing Administration, 39(4), 152–155.

 

The author outlines a 10-step strategic planning process for nursing.

Strubhar, A. J. (2011). The application of an environmental scanning and strategic planning framework in an academic department of physical therapy. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 25(3), 53–59.

 

The author examines strategic planning, including environmental scanning, within a physical therapy department in an academic institution.

Authenticity Consulting. (n.d.b). Basic description of strategic planning. Retrieved March 13, 2013, from http://managementhelp.org/strategicplanning/basics.htm

 

This online article provides an overview of the strategic planning.

Authenticity Consulting. (n.d.c). Basic overview of various strategic planning models. Retrieved March 13, 2013, from http://managementhelp.org/strategicplanning/models.htm

 

This online article describes different models of strategic planning, including issues-based planning.

PlanWare. (n.d.). Business planning papers: Developing a strategic plan. Retrieved March 13, 2013, from http://www.planware.org/strategicplan.htm

 

View the strategic planning information on this website.

 

Required Media

Laureate Education (Producer). (2013d). Elements of a strategic plan model [Video file]. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 6 minutes.

Dr. Carol Huston describes elements common to strategic planning models and discusses ways to approach the development of a strategic plan.

Accessible player –Downloads– Download Video w/CC Download Audio Download Transcript

Credit: Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.

Optional Resources

Authenticity Consulting. (n.d.a). All about strategic planning. Retrieved March 13, 20

Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis Strategic Plan

Course Project: Developing a Strategic Plan

In Week 6, you began to develop a summary of the issue you are addressing through your Course Project. This week, you continue to refine the summary and engage in a SWOT analysis related to the identified unmet need.

Section 1: Summary of the Issue

As introduced in Week 6,continue to develop, write, and refine a 2- to 3-page summary of the issue you are addressing through the creation of a strategic plan. (Refer to Week 6 for the preparatory instructions as necessary).

To complete:

Create a 2- to 3-page summary of the issue, in which you identify and/or describe:

  • The unmet need and how it is evident in the specific group, unit, or organization
  • The mission, vision, and values of the group, unit, or organization
  • Background, including:
    • Data from historical analysis and forecasting
    • Evidence from the literature
    • What has been attempted in the past by various individuals and groups to address this need
    • Which stakeholders should be included in the strategic planning process
  • Initial vision for addressing this need at the institutional or systems level, including at least one strategic goal
  • Broader issues to be considered

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis Strategic Plan

 

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name: NURS_6241_Week_7_Assignment_1_Rubric

Grid View

List View

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
Quality of Work Submitted:
The extent of which work meets the assigned criteria and work reflects graduate level critical and analytic thinking.		 Points:

Points Range: 27 (27%) – 30 (30%)

Assignment exceeds expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 75% containing exceptional breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 24 (24%) – 26 (26%)

Assignment meets expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 50% containing good breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 21 (21%) – 23 (23%)

Assignment meets most of the expectations. One required topic is either not addressed or inadequately addressed.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 20 (20%)

Assignment superficially meets some of the expectations. Two or more required topics are either not addressed or inadequately addressed.

Feedback:
Quality of Work Submitted:
The purpose of the paper is clear.		 Points:

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement is provided which delineates all required criteria.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Purpose of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Purpose of the assignment is vague or off topic.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

No purpose statement was provided.

Feedback:
Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas:
The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Understand and interpret the assignment’s key concepts.

 Points:

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Demonstrates the ability to critically appraise and intellectually explore key concepts.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Demonstrates a clear understanding of key concepts.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Shows some degree of understanding of key concepts.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Shows a lack of understanding of key concepts, deviates from topics.

Feedback:
Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas:
The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Apply and integrate material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, and textbook) and credible outside resources.

 Points:

Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

Demonstrates and applies exceptional support of major points and integrates 2 or more credible outside sources, in addition to 2-3 course resources to suppport point of view.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Integrates specific information from 1 credible outside resource and 2-3 course resources to support major points and point of view.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Minimally includes and integrates specific information from 2-3 resources to support major points and point of view.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Includes and integrates specific information from 0 to 1 resoruce to support major points and point of view.

Feedback:
Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas:
The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Synthesize (combines various components or different ideas into a new whole) material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, textbook) and outside, credible resources by comparing different points of view and highlighting similarities, differences, and connections.

 Points:

Points Range: 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

Synthesizes and justifies (defends, explains, validates, confirms) information gleaned from sources to support major points presented. Applies meaning to the field of advanced nursing practice.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Summarizes information gleaned from sources to support major points, but does not synthesize.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Identifies but does not interpret or apply concepts, and/or strategies correctly; ideas unclear and/or underdeveloped.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Rarely or does not interpret, apply, and synthesize concepts, and/or strategies.

Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting

Paragraph and Sentence Structure: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.

 Points:

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 80% of the time.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity < 60% of the time.

Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting

English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

 Points:

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 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, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

 Points:

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Contains several (3-4) APA format errors.

Feedback:

 Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Quality of Work Submitted:
The extent of which work meets the assigned criteria and work reflects graduate level critical and analytic thinking.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 27 (27%) – 30 (30%)

Assignment exceeds expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 75% containing exceptional breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics.

Good 24 (24%) – 26 (26%)

Assignment meets expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 50% containing good breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics.

Fair 21 (21%) – 23 (23%)

Assignment meets most of the expectations. One required topic is either not addressed or inadequately addressed.

Poor 0 (0%) – 20 (20%)

Assignment superficially meets some of the expectations. Two or more required topics are either not addressed or inadequately addressed.

Feedback:

Quality of Work Submitted:
The purpose of the paper is clear.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement is provided which delineates all required criteria.

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Purpose of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.

Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Purpose of the assignment is vague or off topic.

Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

No purpose statement was provided.

Feedback:

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas:
The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Understand and interpret the assignment’s key concepts.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Demonstrates the ability to critically appraise and intellectually explore key concepts.

Good 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Demonstrates a clear understanding of key concepts.

Fair 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Shows some degree of understanding of key concepts.

Poor 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Shows a lack of understanding of key concepts, deviates from topics.

Feedback:

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas:
The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Apply and integrate material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, and textbook) and credible outside resources.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

Demonstrates and applies exceptional support of major points and integrates 2 or more credible outside sources, in addition to 2-3 course resources to suppport point of view.

Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Integrates specific information from 1 credible outside resource and 2-3 course resources to support major points and point of view.

Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Minimally includes and integrates specific information from 2-3 resources to support major points and point of view.

Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Includes and integrates specific information from 0 to 1 resoruce to support major points and point of view.

Feedback:

Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas:
The extend to which the work reflects the student’s ability to:

Synthesize (combines various components or different ideas into a new whole) material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, textbook) and outside, credible resources by comparing different points of view and highlighting similarities, differences, and connections.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

Synthesizes and justifies (defends, explains, validates, confirms) information gleaned from sources to support major points presented. Applies meaning to the field of advanced nursing practice.

Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Summarizes information gleaned from sources to support major points, but does not synthesize.

Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Identifies but does not interpret or apply concepts, and/or strategies correctly; ideas unclear and/or underdeveloped.

Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Rarely or does not interpret, apply, and synthesize concepts, and/or strategies.

Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting

Paragraph and Sentence Structure: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 80% of the time.

Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.

Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity < 60% of the time.

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, running head, 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:

Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_6241_Week_7_Assignment_1_Rubric

Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis Strategic Plan

Cancer Caregivers SWOT Analysis Strategic Plan

× How can I help you?