HC 405 W7 Performance Improvement Plan Paper

Unit 7 Assignment 2 – Performance Improvement Plan

Due Sunday by 11:59pm
Points 35
Submitting a text entry box, a website url, a media recording, or a file upload

ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED SOLUTION PAPERS

Performance Improvement programs and effective project management require an understanding of the four phases of the project life-cycle: initiation, planning, execution/implementation, and closure. It is important to have each phase of the project mapped on a timeline and to be sure the project team has the appropriate members with the right skills to ensure a successful program. Using a case study from the text, students will demonstrate their ability to review and evaluate a performance improvement program by arranging the information provided into a timeline and devising a team with the appropriate skills and knowledge to work the plan.

HC 405 W7 Performance Improvement Plan Paper Instructions

Read Chapter 18 in the text, and focus your assignment on the Case Study on pages 461-462.
Answer the following questions based on the case study:
- Draft a timeline showing the major phases of the project cycle (see Figure 18.1) and the key tasks for each phase.
- Develop a team of up to seven representatives from different departments to serve on a multidisciplinary project team. Construct a list of the types of individuals you would want to serve on this project team.
- What departmental areas of the healthcare organization should be represented on the team?
- What specific skills, knowledge, and expertise should team members possess?
Your submission should include your timeline (use the Gantt chart in Figure 18.3 as a guide), as well as a minimum of 2 additional pages that answers questions 2, 3 and 4.
Please prepare the paper in APA style, including cover and reference pages, with an introduction and conclusion.
Your references should include the textbook and at least two other outside resources.

Rubric – Unit 7 Assignment 2 – Performance Improvement Plan

Unit 7 Assignment 2 – Performance Improvement Plan

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Content

15.0 ptsLevel 5

Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement/ thesis statement/ topic statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors.

13.5 ptsLevel 4

Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement, thesis statement/ topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, and problem statement is adequately detailed.

12.0 ptsLevel 3

Begins to demonstrate the ability to construct a problem statement/ thesis statement/ topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, but problem statement is superficial.

10.5 ptsLevel 2

Demonstrates a limited ability in identifying a problem statement/ thesis statement/ topic statement or related contextual factors.

9.0 ptsLevel 1

Demonstrates the ability to explain contextual factors but does not provide a defined statement.

0.0 ptsLevel 0

There is no evidence of a defined statement.

15.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Analysis PRICE-P

15.0 ptsLevel 5

Organizes and compares evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.

13.5 ptsLevel 4

Organizes and interprets evidence to reveal patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.

12.0 ptsLevel 3

Organizes and describes evidence according to patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.

10.5 ptsLevel 2

Organizes evidence, but the organization is not effective in revealing patterns, differences, or similarities.

9.0 ptsLevel 1

Describes evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus.

0.0 ptsLevel 0

Lists evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus.

15.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Writing

3.0 ptsLevel 5

The paper exhibits an excellent command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling.

2.0 ptsLevel 4

The paper exhibits a good command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics or spelling with minor grammatical errors that impair the flow of communication.

1.0 ptsLevel 3

The paper exhibits a basic command of written English language conventions. The paper has minor errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impact the flow of communication.

0.0 ptsLevel 0

The paper does not demonstrate command of written English language conventions. The paper has multiple errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader difficulty in discerning the meaning.

0.0 ptsLevel 1

The paper exhibits little command of written English language conventions. The paper has errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader to stop and reread parts of the writing to discern meaning.

0.0 ptsLevel 2

The paper exhibits a limited command of written English language conventions. The paper has frequent errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impede the flow of communication.

3.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome APAPRICE-I

2.0 ptsLevel 5

The required APA elements are all included with correct formatting, including in-text citations and references.

1.0 ptsLevel 4

The required APA elements are all included with minor formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.

0.0 ptsLevel 0

There is little to no evidence of APA formatting and/or there are no in-text citations and/or references.

0.0 ptsLevel 1

Several APA elements are missing. The errors in formatting demonstrate a limited understanding of APA guidelines, in-text-citations, and references.

0.0 ptsLevel 2

The required APA elements are not all included and/or there are major formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.

0.0 ptsLevel 3

The required APA elements are all included with multiple formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.

2.0 pts

Total Points: 35.0