OM005RUBRIC.docx

OM005: Operational Resources and Productivity: Evaluate productivity against established benchmarks, and recommend changes to improve patient safety metrics.

Assessment Rubric

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

Part I: Productivity Metrics

Sub-Competency 1: Evaluate a healthcare organization’s productivity against national standards.

Learning Objective 1.1:

Identify activities and processes in emergency departments that impact the patient experience.

Identification of activities and processes in emergency departments that impact the patient experience is missing.

Response identifies fewer than 10 activities and processes carried out in the scenario, or it identifies activities and processes not relevant to the patient experience.

The 10 activities and processes, with durations, are inaccurately entered into the productivity metrics dashboard, or fewer than 10 activities and processes are entered.

Response identifies 10 activities and processes carried out in the scenario that impact the patient experience.

Each of the 10 activities and processes, with its duration, is accurately entered in the productivity metrics dashboard.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Activities/processes identified are those that have the greatest potential impact on patient experience.

page1image1131076512

Learning Objective 1.2:

Analyze activities and processes for how they create inefficiency.

Analysis of activities and processes for how they create inefficiency is missing.

page1image1131095088

Analysis identifies fewer than five activities or processes that created inefficiency in the case presented, or the activities identified are not related to issues of efficiency.

Rationale for selection of

Analysis identifies five activities or processes that created inefficiency in the case presented.

Analysis includes a logical rationale for selection of each of the five activities.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Response describes the impact that the inefficiencies have on patient experience.

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

page2image1171771744

page2image1171772704

the five activities creates inefficiency is weak or all five activities are not addressed.

Discrepancies and reasons why they exist are unclear or missing.

Analysis identifies discrepancies and outlines reasons why they exist.

Learning Objective 1.3:

Analyze activities and processes that create inefficiencies against national benchmarks.

Analysis of activities and processes that create inefficiencies against national benchmarks is missing.

Analysis identifies national benchmarks for fewer than five of the identified activities/processes that create inefficiency, or Identification of benchmarks is inaccurate.

National benchmarks are entered incorrectly in the productivity metrics dashboard, or they are missing from the dashboard.

National benchmarks are not supported by a citation, or the citation is irrelevant, or the national averages are not documented.

Analysis accurately identifies the national benchmarks for the five activities/processes identified as creating inefficiency.

National benchmarks are entered correctly in the productivity metrics dashboard.

National benchmarks are supported by a citation for the data, and citations are included in the sources tab of the productivity metrics dashboard.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Response includes national benchmarks for six or more activities/processes carried out in this scenario,

OR

Analysis includes an explanation for any measure that deviates from the national benchmarks.

Learning Objective 1.4:

Analyze activities and processes to determine

Analysis of activities and processes to determine acceptable differentials for

Response partially explains the methodology used to determine acceptable

Response thoroughly explains the methodology used to determine

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

acceptable differentials for a productivity metrics dashboard.

page3image1172437952

a productivity metrics dashboard is missing.

page3image1172377552

differentials for each of the five activities/processes, or not all five activities/processes are addressed.

acceptable differentials for each of the five activities/processes.

Response details the acceptable differentials for six or more activities/processes with relevant rationale.

Part II: Balanced Scorecard Methodology

Sub-Competency 2: Explain the balanced scorecard methodology and its strengths and limitations for a specific healthcare context.

Learning Objective 2.1:

Explain the balanced scorecard methodology.

Explanation of the balanced scorecard methodology is missing.

Response vaguely explains the balanced scorecard methodology, or explains fewer than two strengths and fewer than two limitations, or the strengths/limitations are unclear.

Strengths and weaknesses are not supported by references to academic resources relevant to the best practices in using balanced scorecards, or the references are not relevant.

Response clearly explains the balanced scorecard methodology, including two strengths and two limitations.

Strengths and limitations are supported by references to academic resources relevant to best practices in using balanced scorecards.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Response clearly explains more than two strengths and more than two weaknesses of the balanced scorecard methodology.

Learning Objective 2.2:

Explain the benefits of using the balanced scorecard methodology in a specific healthcare context.

Explanation of the benefits of using the balanced scorecard methodology in the context of the case presented is missing.

page3image1172702976

Response provides an unclear explanation of the benefits of using the balanced scorecard methodology, or the explanation does not

Response clearly explains the benefits of using the balanced scorecard for each of the five activities/processes identified in the case

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Response clearly explains the benefits of using the

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

address each of the five activities/processes identified in the case presented.

Benefits of using balanced scorecards are not supported by references to academic resources, or the resources are not relevant.

presented.

Benefits of using balanced scorecards are supported by references to relevant academic resources.

balanced scorecard for six or more activities/processes identified in the case presented.

Part III: Balanced Scorecard Creation

Sub-Competency 3: Create a balanced scorecard using both quantitative and qualitative metrics.

page4image1173402320

Learning Objective 3.1:

Create a balanced scorecard for a healthcare organization.

Balanced scorecard for a healthcare organization is missing.

Response includes an illogical or incomplete balanced scorecard, or does not relate to the case presented.

Balanced scorecard does not include both quantitative and qualitative metrics for each of the five activities/processes identified in the case presented, or the metrics provided are not accurate.

Response includes a logical and cohesive balanced scorecard for the case presented.

Balanced scorecard includes both quantitative and qualitative metrics for each of the five activities/processes identified in the case presented.

Metrics provided are accurate.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Balanced scorecard includes both quantitative and qualitative metrics for six or more activities/processes identified in the case presented.

page4image1173492176

Learning Objective 3.2:

Explain why specific metrics are identified and used for a

Explanation of why specific metrics are identified and used for a balanced scorecard is missing.

page4image1173511104

Response incompletely or unclearly explains why specific qualitative and quantitative metrics were

Response clearly explains why specific qualitative and quantitative metrics were chosen for the

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

balanced scorecard.

page5image1173836448

page5image1173837056

chosen for the balanced scorecard.

Response is vague about how the targets were identified.

balanced scorecard.

Response clearly explains how the targets were identified.

Response includes an explanation of how the metrics relate to patient care.

Part IV: Balanced Scorecard Presentation

Sub-Competency 4: Present and defend evaluation data, and recommend changes to improve patient safety metrics.

Learning Objective 4.1:

Explain and defend best practices for collecting data for a productivity metrics dashboard.

Explanation and defense of best practices for collecting data for a productivity metrics dashboard is missing.

Response clearly explains fewer than three best practices for collecting data for a productivity metrics dashboard, or the explanation is unclear.

Defense for each practice is not logical or is missing.

Response clearly explains three best practices for collecting data for a productivity metrics dashboard.

Response provides a logical defense for each practice.

Response is supported by relevant academic resources.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Response clearly explains and defends more than three best practices for collecting data for a productivity metrics dashboard.

page5image1174083488

Learning Objective 4.2:

Explain and defend best practices for analyzing and acting on data from a productivity metrics dashboard.

Explanation and defense of best practices for analyzing and acting on data from a productivity metrics dashboard is missing.

Response clearly explains fewer than three best practices for analyzing and acting on data from a productivity metrics dashboard, or provides an unclear explanation.

Defense for each practice is not logical or is missing.

Response clearly explains three best practices for analyzing and acting on data from a productivity metrics dashboard.

Response provides a logical defense for each practice.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Response clearly explains more than three best practices for analyzing and acting on data from a productivity metrics dashboard.

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

page6image1173083920

page6image1173062368

Response is not supported by references to academic resources, or the resources are not relevant.

Response is supported by references to relevant academic resources.

Learning Objective 4.3:

Explain productivity metrics results and critique against national benchmarks.

page6image1173090864

Explanation of productivity metrics results and critique against national benchmarks is missing.

page6image1173241440

Response incompletely or unclearly explains productivity metrics results for the case presented.

Critique for each metric identified is not based on national benchmarks or is missing.

Response clearly explains productivity metrics results for the case presented.

Response provides a critique for each metric based on national benchmarks.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Response includes both benefits and limitations of the productivity metrics for the case presented.

Learning Objective 4.4:

Recommend high-level processes to collect, track, and measure the data for the metrics for a productivity metrics dashboard.

Recommendation of high- level processes to collect, track, and measure the data for the metrics for a productivity metrics dashboard is missing.

Response includes fewer than three logical recommendations for a high-level process to collect, track, and measure the data for the metrics that will represent productivity for the case presented, or the recommendations unclear or illogical.

Response is not supported by references to academic resources, or the resources are not relevant.

Response includes three logical recommendations for a high-level process to collect, track, and measure the data for the metrics that will represent productivity for the case presented.

Response is supported by references to relevant academic resources.

Demonstrates the same level of achievement as “2,” plus the following:

Response includes both benefits and limitations for the recommendations of the performance metrics dashboard and an explanation of how the metrics relate to patient care.

PS001: Written Communication: Demonstrate graduate-level writing skills.

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

Learning Objective PS 1.1: Use proper grammar, spelling, and mechanics.

Multiple major and minor errors in grammar, spelling, and/or mechanics are highly distracting and seriously impact readability.

Multiple minor errors in grammar, spelling, and/or mechanics are distracting and negatively impact readability.

Writing reflects competent use of standard edited American English.

Errors in grammar, spelling, and/or mechanics do not negatively impact readability.

Grammar, spelling, and mechanics reflect a high level of accuracy in standard American English and enhance readability.

page7image1183036224

Learning Objective PS 1.2: Organize writing to enhance clarity.

page7image1183002864

page7image1183188096

Writing is poorly organized and incoherent. Introductions, transitions, and conclusions are missing or inappropriate.

page7image1183233888

Writing is loosely organized. Limited use of introductions, transitions, and conclusions provides partial continuity.

Writing is generally well- organized. Introductions, transitions, and conclusions provide continuity and a logical progression of ideas.

Writing is consistently well-organized. Introductions, transitions, and conclusions are used effectively to enhance clarity, cohesion, and flow.

Learning Objective PS 1.3: Apply APA style to written work.

APA conventions are not applied.

APA conventions for attribution of sources, structure, formatting, etc., are applied inconsistently.

APA conventions for attribution of sources, structure, formatting, etc., are generally applied correctly in most instances. Sources are generally cited appropriately and accurately.

APA conventions for attribution of sources, structure, formatting, etc., are applied correctly and consistently throughout the paper. Sources are consistently cited appropriately and accurately.

Learning Objective PS 1.4: Use appropriate vocabulary and tone for the audience and purpose.

page7image1183341488

Vocabulary and tone are inappropriate and negatively impact clarity of concepts to be conveyed.

page7image1183352096

Vocabulary and tone have limited relevance to the audience.

page7image1183359472

Vocabulary and tone are generally appropriate for the audience and support communication of key concepts.

Vocabulary and tone are consistently tailored to the audience and effectively and directly support communication of key concepts.

PS003: Technology: Use technology tools effectively.

Learning Objective

Images and layout are

Images or layout provide

Images and layout

Images and design

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

PS 3.1:

Use images and layout of presentations to effectively communicate content to a specific audience.

page8image1183094464

inappropriate, hard to read, and/or impede audience understanding of key concepts.

page8image1182989264

limited support for audience understanding of key concepts.

generally support audience understanding of key concepts.

elements are used purposefully, and they effectively support audience engagement and understanding of key concepts.

PS005: Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: Use critical-thinking and problem-solving skills to analyze professional issues and inform best practice.

Learning Objective PS 5.1: Analyze assumptions and fallacies.

Analysis of assumptions is missing.

Response is weak in assessing the reasonableness of assumptions in a given argument.

Response does not adequately identify and discuss the implications of fallacies or logical weaknesses in a given argument.

Response generally assesses the reasonableness of assumptions in a given argument.

Response identifies and discusses the implications of fallacies and/or logical weaknesses in a given argument.

Response clearly and comprehensively assesses the reasonableness of assumptions in a given argument.

Response provides a detailed and compelling analysis of implications of fallacies and logical weaknesses in a given argument.

page8image1183781024

Learning Objective PS 5.2: Generate reasonable and appropriate assumptions.

Assumptions are missing.

Response does not adequately present and discuss key assumptions in an original argument.

page8image1183803104

Response presents and discusses key assumptions in an original argument.

Response justifies the reasonableness and need for assumptions in an original argument.

Learning Objective PS 5.3: Assess multiple perspectives and alternatives.

Assessment of multiple perspectives is missing.

Response does not identify nor adequately consider multiple perspectives or alternatives.

Response identifies and considers multiple perspectives and alternatives.

Response justifies selection of chosen alternative relative to others.

Learning Objective

Problems and solutions are

Response presents

Response presents

Response presents

0 Not Present

1 Needs Improvement

2 Meets Expectations

3 Exceeds Expectations

PS 5.4:

Use problem-solving skills.

not identified.

solutions, but they are ineffective in addressing the specific problem.

solutions that are practical and work in addressing the specific problem.

compelling supporting arguments for proposed solutions.