NHS-FPX6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Paper

NHS-FPX6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Paper

NHS-FPX6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Paper – Write a 4-6-page report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance, with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.

ORDER NOW FOR ORIGINAL, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

INTRODUCTION

In the era of health care reform, many of the laws and policies set forth by government at the local, state, and federal levels have specific performance benchmarks related to care delivery outcomes that organizations must achieve. It is critical for organizational success that the interprofessional care team is able to understand reports and dashboards that display the metrics related to performance and compliance benchmarks.

NHS-FPX6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Paper

Maintaining standards and promoting quality in modern health care are crucial, not only for the care of patients, but also for the continuing success and financial viability of health care organizations. In the era of health care reform, health care leaders must understand what quality care entails and how quality in health care connects to the standards set forth by relevant federal, state, and local laws and policies. An understanding of relevant benchmarks that result from these laws and policies, and how they relate to quality care and regulatory standards, is also vitally important.

Health care is a dynamic, complex, and heavily regulated industry. For this reason, you will be expected to constantly scan the external environment for emerging laws, new regulations, and changing industry standards. You may discover that as new policies are enacted into law, ambiguity in interpretation of various facets of the law may occur. Sometimes, new laws conflict with preexisting laws and regulations, or unexpected implementation issues arise, which may warrant further clarification from lawmakers. Adding partisan politics and social media to the mix can further complicate understanding of the process and buy-in from stakeholders.

Note: Your evaluation of dashboard metrics for this assessment is the foundation on which all subsequent assessments are based. Therefore, you must complete this assessment first.

Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.

Review the performance dashboard metrics, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.

Note: Remember that you can submit all, or a portion of, your draft report to Smarthinking for feedback, before you submit the final version for this assessment. If you plan on using this free service, be mindful of the turnaround time of 24–48 hours for receiving feedback.

PREPARATION

Choose one of the following three options for a performance dashboard to use as the basis for your evaluation:

Option 1: Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Simulation

Use the data presented in the Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation multimedia activity as the basis for your evaluation.

Note: The writing that you do as part of the simulation could serve as a starting point to build upon for this assessment.

Option 2: Actual Dashboard

Use an actual dashboard from a professional practice setting for your evaluation. If you decide to use actual dashboard metrics, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

  • The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
  • The specific type of care delivery.
  • The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
  • The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.

Note: Ensure your data are Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

Option 3: Hypothetical Dashboard

If you have a sophisticated understanding of dashboards relevant to your own practice, you may also construct a hypothetical dashboard for your evaluation. Your hypothetical dashboard must present at least four different metrics, at least two of which must be underperforming the prescribed benchmark set forth by a federal, state, or local laws or policies. In addition, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

  • The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
  • The specific type of care delivery.
  • The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
  • The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.

Note: Ensure your data are HIPAA compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

INSTRUCTIONS

Note: Your evaluation of dashboard metrics for this assessment is the foundation on which all subsequent assessments are based. Therefore, you must complete this assessment first.

Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.

Review the performance dashboard metrics, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.

REQUIREMENTS

The report requirements outlined below correspond to the scoring guide criteria, so be sure to address each main point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each criterion to see how your work will be assessed. In addition, be sure to note the requirements for document format and length and for supporting evidence.

  • Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.
    • Which metrics are not meeting the benchmark for the organization?
    • What are the local, state, or federal health care policies or laws that establish these benchmarks?
    • What conclusions can you draw from your evaluation?
    • Are there any unknowns, missing information, unanswered questions, or areas of uncertainty where additional information could improve your evaluation?
  • Analyze one challenge that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or interprofessional team.
    • Consider the following examples:
      • Strategic direction.
      • Organizational mission.
      • Resources.
      • Staffing.
      • Financial: Operational and capital funding.
      • Logistical considerations: Physical space.
      • Support services (any ancillary department that gives support to a specific care unit in the organization, such as pharmacy, cleaning services, dietary, et cetera).
      • Cultural diversity in the organization and community.
      • Procedures and processes.
    • Address the following:
      • Why do the challenges you identified contribute, potentially, to benchmark underperformance?
      • What assumptions underlie your conclusions?
  • Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
    • Focus on the benchmark you chose to target for improvement. Which metric is underperforming its benchmark by the greatest degree?
    • State the benchmark underperformance that is the most widespread throughout the organization or interprofessional team.
    • State the benchmark that affects the greatest number of patients. Which benchmark affects the greatest number of staff?
    • Include how this underperformance affect the community that the organization serves.
    • Include the greatest opportunity to improve the overall quality of care or performance of the organization or interpersonal team and, ultimately, to improve patient outcomes, as you think about the issue and the current poor benchmark outcomes.
  • Advocate for ethical action, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, to address a benchmark underperformance.
    • Who would be an appropriate group of stakeholders to act on improving your identified benchmark metric?
    • Why should the stakeholder group take action?
    • What are some ethical actions the stakeholder group could take that support improved benchmark performance?
  • Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.
    • Proofread your report, before you submit it, to minimize errors that could distract readers and make it more difficult for them to focus on the substance of your evaluation and analysis.
  • Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.
    • Be sure to apply correct APA formatting to source citations and references.

Example Assessment: You may use the following to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the scoring guide would look like:

  • Assessment 1 Example [PDF].
Report Format and Length

Format your report using APA style.

  • Use the APA Style Paper Template [DOCX]. An APA Style Paper Tutorial [DOCX] is also provided to help you in writing and formatting your report. Be sure to include:
    • A title page and references page. An abstract is not required.
    • A running head on all pages.
    • Appropriate section headings.
  • Be sure your report is 4–6 pages in length, not including the title page and references page.
Supporting Evidence

Cite 4–6 credible sources from peer-reviewed journals or professional industry publications to support your analysis of challenges, evaluation of potential for improvement, and your advocacy for ethical action.

Note: Faculty may use the Writing Feedback Tool when grading this assessment. The Writing Feedback Tool is designed to provide you with guidance and resources to develop your writing based on five core skills. You will find writing feedback in the Scoring Guide for the assessment, once your work has been evaluated.

Portfolio Prompt: You may choose to save your report to your ePortfolio.

COMPETENCIES MEASURED

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the course competencies through the following assessment scoring guide criteria:

  • Competency 1: Analyze relevant health care laws, policies, and regulations; their application; and their effects on organizations, interprofessional teams, and professional practice.
    • Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or interprofessional team.
  • Competency 2: Lead the development and implementation of ethical and culturally sensitive policies that improve health outcomes for individuals, organizations, and populations.
    • Advocate for ethical action, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, to address a benchmark underperformance.
  • Competency 3: Evaluate relevant indicators of performance, such as benchmarks, research, and best practices, to inform health care laws and policies for patients, organizations, and populations.
    • Evaluate dashboard metrics associated with benchmarks set forth by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.
    • Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
  • Competency 5: Produce clear, coherent, and professional written work, in accordance with Capella’s writing standards.
    • Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.
    • Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.

NHS-FPX6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Example

To the Director of Safety Compliance

Benchmark evaluation is a tool used to measure organizational outcomes and performance and identify areas that require improvement. Organizational dashboard metrics are used to gauge the organization’s performance based on the available benchmarks, thus identifying well-performing and underperforming metrics, therefore informing quality improvement initiatives and interventions. I have reviewed and evaluated an institution’s compliance with set diabetes measures using the institution’s dashboard data and identified performing and underperforming benchmarks. This report presents an evaluation of the diabetes dashboard data of Mercy Medical Center. The report will entail evaluating the benchmark data, challenges in meeting the benchmark can pose to the organization, benchmark underperformance areas, areas that the institution needs to improve, and a proposal for an ethical action that stakeholders can use in the organization to improve benchmark underperformance.

Organizational and Setting Description

The institution of focus in this evaluation is Mercy Medical Center. It is a Villa health-affiliated hospital located in Shakopee, Minnesota. The institutions serve over 30,000 patients from different races across all health populations. It is a top-choice healthcare institution renowned for high healthcare quality. Some of the most common races of patients served in the institution include Asians, Whites, Hispanics-Latinos, and African Americans. The specific department that will be evaluated is the endocrinology department. The benchmarks of focus will include data regarding diabetes in the institution.

Evaluation of Dashboard Metrics

According to the institution’s public health dashboard-in diabetes, 563 new diabetes patients were served in the last quarter of 2020. The factors essential in diabetes management include age, gender, and race. The diabetic patients’ age distribution is 118 patients who are 20 years and below, 51 patients between ages 21-39, 214 patients between ages 40-64, and 180 patients 65 years and above. The percentages for this distribution are 21%, 9%, 38%, and 32% for ages, respectively (Villa Health, n.d.). The patients’ distribution by gender is 214 males, 38%, and 347 females 62%. The distribution by race is as follows; African Americans-3%, American Indians-13%, Asians-6%, Whites 63%, and others-2%, while 13% of the patients declined to provide their racial background (Villa Health, n.d).

Furthermore, the institution has set forth measures of effective diabetes management, which are also used to gauge the organizational performance and quality of healthcare services. Diabetes interventions and measures include eye exams, diabetic foot exams, and HbA1c tests. These measures are evaluated quarterly. From the dashboard, it is noted that the number of patients taking these tests fluctuates significantly. For instance, in the last quarter of 2020, out of 563 patients, only 64, 64, and 62 patients took the HbA1c tests, Eye exams, and Foot exams, respectively.

Benchmarks Set Forth by the Local, State or Federal Laws/Policies 

Mercy Medical Center is keen on internal and external benchmarking, in which the results are used to facilitate learning, quality improvement, and performance evaluation. According to De Rosis, Cerasuolo & Nuti (2020), an internal benchmarking tool may include patients reported measures and compare performance measures in different timelines, such as different quarters, to identify in which quarter the institution did better than the other. External benchmarking is also done using local, state, and federal laws and policies to inform practice improvement and align the institution’s activities with contributing towards meeting healthcare needs.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is one of the organizations the institution uses for external benchmarking. The agency works with the government and other associations, such as the American diabetes association, to prepare benchmark tools and strategies used as benchmark evaluation dashboards. These dashboards aim to direct healthcare institutions and systems to provide high-quality care, promote patient safety, and maintain values in healthcare services (AHRQ, n.d.). 

The AHRQ prepares and releases a National Healthcare Quality and Disparities report annually, which Mercy Medical Center also uses as an external benchmark tool. The report not only the current health disparities in healthcare among various populations but also provides recommendations on the various measures to ensure desirable patient outcomes in different health conditions. For instance, the AHQR notes that the current national health quality and disparities report of 2019 recommended that above 80% of diabetes patients take HbA1c tests annually, above 84% g for diabetes foot exams, and 75% go for eye exams annually (AHRQ, n.d.). 

However, gauging from the percentages of patients going for diabetic foot exams and eye exams and taking HbA1c tests in the institution annually, it is evident that the institution is performing below the prescribed benchmarks. One of the areas of uncertainty in the evaluation is that the data does not provide specific patient characteristics such as age, gender, and ethnicity for the patients going for diabetic foot exams, eye exams, and taking HbA1c tests. The information would improve evaluation results and better inform improvement initiatives by identifying the specific group of patients to focus on.  

Consequences of not meeting Prescribed Benchmarks

Not meeting the prescribed benchmarks has various consequences, considerably impacting healthcare organizations and teams. According to Wong et al. (2020), healthcare institutions that cannot meet prescribed benchmarks may face quality and reputation problems. Since performance is described from some benchmark evaluations, failure to meet them translates to poor performance, which may negatively affect the organization’s reputation. 

According to De Silva et al. (2021), other implications of failure to meet the benchmark include demotivation of the healthcare team. Challenges that might have contributed to benchmark underperformance are inadequate emphasis on diabetes health promotion and patient education to inform the patients on the importance of eye, diabetic foot exams, and HbA1c tests to keep track of their progress and prevent complications.

Benchmark Underperformance Evaluation

The primary benchmark underperformance in this evaluation is the low turn-up for diabetic foot exams, eye exams, and HbA1c tests. These tests are significant to diabetes patients since they help identify diabetes complications early enough and address them as soon as possible (Nano et al., 2020). The benchmark underperformance negatively impacts the health of patients and the community due to increased diabetes complications, diabetes-related hospitalizations, and hospital readmissions. The healthcare team can use this underperformance as an improvement opportunity to promote health and educate diabetic patients, thus enhancing diabetes management and preventing complications.

Ethical and Sustainable Action Required to Address the Benchmark Underperformance

The essence of benchmark evaluations is seen when they are followed up with ethical and sustainable actions to address identified benchmark underperformances. The stakeholders addressing the benchmark underperformances for Mercy Medical Center include endocrinologists, nurses, dieticians, social workers, and community health workers. These stakeholders will address the benchmark underperformances by encouraging diabetes patients to embrace diabetes management best practices, including going for annual eye exams, diabetic food exams, and taking HbA1c tests. The ethical principles of consideration in action include confidentiality and privacy in patient education. The sustainable goal for the benchmark underperformance is a maintained increased number of patients taking HbA1c tests and going for eye and diabetic foot exams annually.                 

Conclusion

The report above has helped us understand the performance of Mercy Medical Center against the set benchmarks. It shows that the institution is underperforming in some critical areas, such as the number of patients taking diabetes foot exams. The report has also proposed an ethical action that can be used to address the underperforming benchmark. The stakeholders identified should work towards improving the underperforming benchmarks and therefore improve care delivery for diabetes patients.              

NHS-FPX6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Paper References

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, (n.d). Practice Improvement. Retrieved 14th March 2023 from https://www.ahrq.gov/practiceimprovement/index.html

De Rosis, S., Cerasuolo, D., & Nuti, S. (2020). Using patient-reported measures to drive change in healthcare: the experience of the digital, continuous and systematic PREMs observatory in Italy. BMC Health Services Research, 20, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05099-4

De Silva, K., Lim, S., Mousa, A., Teede, H., Forbes, A., Demmer, R. T., Jönsson, D., & Enticott, J. (2021). Nutritional markers of undiagnosed type 2 diabetes in adults: Findings of a machine learning analysis with external validation and benchmarking. PloS One, 16(5), e0250832. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250832

Nano, J., Carinci, F., Okunade, O., Whittaker, S., Walbaum, M., Barnard-Kelly, K., Barthelmes, D., Benson, T., Calderon-Margalit, R., Dennaoui, J., Fraser, S., Haig, R., Hernández-Jimenéz, S., Levitt, N., Mbanya, J. C., Naqvi, S., Peters, A. L., Peyrot, M., Prabhaharan, M., Pumerantz, A. & Diabetes Working Group of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) (2020). A standard set of person-centered outcomes for diabetes mellitus: results of an international and unified approach. Diabetic medicine: a journal of the British Diabetic Association, 37(12), 2009–2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14286

Villa Health. (n.d). Dashboard and Healthcare Benchmark Evaluation. Capella University.

Wong, T., Brovman, E. Y., Rao, N., Tsai, M. H., & Urman, R. D. (2020). A Dashboard Prototype for Tracking the Impact of Diabetes on Hospital Readmissions Using a National Administrative Database. Journal of Clinical Medicine Research, 12(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr4029

× How can I help you?