Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation.
Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457 Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5% Writer Classification: PhD competent Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours Revision: Permitted Sources: 4-6 Course Level: Masters/University College Guarantee Status: 96-99% Instructions
Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation.
Benchmarking and Performance Measurement Tools
This article discusses best practices in benchmarking to aid organizations in creating a plan.
Krause, J. (2017, July 28). Four questions to ask about healthcare benchmarking. Retrieved from http://www.managedhealthcareexecutive.com/benchmar…
These resources examine performance measurement tools and benchmarking used for health care delivery.
Behrouzi, F., Shaharoun, A. M., & Ma’aram, A. (2014). Applications of the balanced scorecard for strategic management and performance measurement in the health sector. Australian Health Review, 38(2), 208–217.
Johns Hopkins Medicine. (n.d.). Patient safety and quality. Retrieved from http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/patient_safety_qual…
National Committee for Quality Assurance. (n.d.). HEDIS and performance measurement. Retrieved from http://www.ncqa.org/hedis-quality-measurement
Performance Benchmarks Challenges and Benefits
This study outlines key barriers to measuring and benchmarking quality of mental health care, describes innovations currently underway worldwide to mitigate barriers and offers recommendations for improving quality of mental health care.
Kilbourne, A. M., Beck, K., Spaeth-Rublee, B., Ramanuj, P., O’Brien, R. W., Tomoyasu, N., & Pincus, H. A. (2018). Measuring and improving the quality of mental health care: A global perspective. World Psychiatry, 17(1), 30–38.
This resource discusses future options and challenges with respect to the Affordable Care Act provisions and requirements.
RAND Corporation. (n.d.). The future of U.S. health care: Replace or revise the Affordable Care Act? Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/health/key-topics/health-poli…
This article explores hospital rankings in the United States and how they provide benefit to organizations and consumers in consideration of the Affordable Care Act.
Huerta, T. R., Hefner, J. L., Ford, E. W., McAlearney, A. S., & Menachemi, N. (2014). Hospital website rankings in the United States: Expanding benchmarks and standards for effective consumer engagement. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16(2), e64.
This article discusses key practical issues in the development of performance dashboards.
Ghazisaeidi, M., Safdari, R., Torabi, M., Mirzaee, M., Farzi, J. & Goodini, A. (2015). Development of performance dashboards in healthcare sector: Key practical issues. Acta Informatica Medica, 23(5), 317–321.
Health Care Policies, Laws, Legislation, and Metrics
This resource explains current health care policy in the United States.
Oliver, T. R. (Ed.). (2014). Guide to U.S. health and health care policy. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
This article discusses the most significant reforms to the U.S. health care system as provisions and mandates in the Affordable Care Act.
Martin, E. J. (2015). Healthcare policy legislation and administration: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, 37(4), 407–411.
This resource discusses the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) current payment pathways for physicians relative to quality measures and benchmarks.
American Medical Association. (n.d.). Quality payment program specifics. Retrieved from https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/quali…
Additional Resources for Further Exploration
Capella provides a thorough selection of online resources to help you understand APA style and use it effectively. Please visit Capella’s APA Style and Format for more information.
Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation.
PREPARATION
Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation Simulation
Use the simulation dashboard for your evaluation, review the dashboard, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics within the dashboard that are falling short of prescribed benchmarks.
REPORT REQUIREMENTS
Structure your report in such a way that it would be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need. Be sure to cite relevant local, state, or federal health care laws or policies when evaluating metric performance against prescribed benchmarks. Cite an additional 2–4 credible sources to support your analysis and evaluation of the challenges in meeting the benchmarks, the potential for performance improvement, and your advocacy for ethical action.In your report, be sure to:
Evaluate dashboard metrics against the benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.
Which metrics are below the mandated benchmarks in the organization? Evaluate weaknesses within the entire set of benchmarks.
What are the local, state, or federal health care laws or policies that set these benchmarks?
Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for the organization or for an interprofessional team.
What are the specific challenges or opportunities that the organization or interprofessional team might have in meeting the benchmarks? For example, consider:
Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation.
The strategic direction of the organization.
The organization’s mission.
Available resources:
Staffing.
Operational and capital funding.
Physical space.
Support services (any ancillary department that supports a specific care unit in the organization, such as a pharmacy, cleaning services, and dietary services).
Cultural diversity in the organization.
Cultural diversity in the community.
Organizational processes and procedures.
How might these challenges be contributing to benchmark underperformance?
Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in the organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
Which metric is underperforming its benchmark by the greatest degree?
Which benchmark underperformance is the most widespread throughout the organization or interprofessional team?
Which benchmark affects the greatest number of patients?
Which benchmark affects the greatest number of staff?
How does this underperformance affect the community the organization serves?
Where is the greatest opportunity for improvement in the overall quality or performance of the organization or interpersonal team—and ultimately in patient outcomes?
Advocate for ethical action in addressing the benchmark underperformance that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
At which group of stakeholders should your advocacy be directed? Which group could be expected to take the appropriate action to improve the benchmark metric?
What are some ethical actions that the stakeholder group could take that support improved benchmark performance?
Why should the stakeholder group take action?
Communicate your findings and recommendations in a professional and effective manner.
Ensure that your report is well organized and easy to read.
Write clearly and logically, using correct grammar, punctuation, and mechanics.
Integrate relevant sources to support your arguments, correctly formatting source citations and references using current APA style.
Did you cite relevant local, state, or federal health care laws or policies when discussing the mandated benchmarks?
Did you cite an additional 2–4 credible sources to support your analysis, evaluation, and advocacy?
Note: Your faculty may also use the Writing Feedback Tool to provide feedback on your writing. In the tool, click the linked resources for helpful writing information.
Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation.
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support 91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology 58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow