Three to five objectives are presented for a proposed intervention to improve patient care. A rationale is provided for each objective explaining how findings relate to the topic and intervention. The proposed project and objectives aim to advocate for patient autonomy and social justice for diverse populations.

1. Discussion: Improve Care for Patients
Discussion: Improve Care for PatientsORDER HERE FOR ORIGINAL, PLAGIARISM-FREE
PAPERS ON Discussion: Improve Care for PatientsCapstone Change Project Objectives 250
to 500 words NRS493 please see attached for details and rubric.
Thanks.benchmark___capstone_change_project_objectives_rubric.xlsxbenchmark_capstone_
change_project_objectives.docxsources___objectives_week.docxUnformatted Attachment
PreviewCourse Code NRS-493 Class Code NRS-493-IO9210 Criteria Content Percentage
80.0% Objectives 25.0% Rationale for How Findings Relate to the Topic and Proposed
Intervention 30.0% Rationale for How Proposed Project and Objectives Advocate for
Autonomy and Social Justice for Individuals and Diverse Populations (C1.5) 25.0%
Organization and Effectiveness 15.0%Thesis Development and Purpose 5.0% Argument
Logic and Construction 5.0% Criteria 3Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation,
grammar, language use) 5.0% Format 5.0% Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment) 2.0% Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references,
bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 3.0% Total Weightage 100%
Assignment Title Benchmark – Capstone Change Project Objectives 1: Unsatisfactory
(0.00%) A list of objectives for the proposed intervention is omitted.Fewer than three
objectives are presented. Rationale for each objective is omitted. Rationale for how
proposed project and objectives advocate for autonomy and social justice for individuals
and diverse populations is omitted. Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or
organizing claim. Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion
does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Template is not used
appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Sources are not
documented. Discussion: Improve Care for PatientsTotal Points 5.0 2: Less Than
Satisfactory (75.00%) NA Rationale is incomplete. There are omissions. Rationale provided
does not explain the relationship of findings to the topic and proposed intervention.
Incomplete rationale for how proposed project and objectives advocate for autonomy and
social justice for individuals and diverse populations is presented. Advocacy is not
established.Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Sufficient
justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in
the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Frequent and repetitive mechanical
errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure,

2. or word choice are present.Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken;
lack of control with formatting is apparent. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or
incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. 3:
Satisfactory (79.00%) NA General rationale is provided for each objective and generally
summarizes the relationship of most findings to the topic and proposed intervention. There
are some inaccuracies or minor omissions. Rationale for how proposed project and
objectives advocate for autonomy and social justice for individuals and diverse populations
is summarized. Some advocacy is established. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to
purpose.Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents
minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the
purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Some
mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.
Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Template is used,
and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Sources are
documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may
be present. 4: Good (89.00%) NA Rationale is provided for each objective and explains the
relationship of findings to the topic and proposed intervention. Some detail is needed for
clarity. Rationale for how proposed project and objectives advocate for autonomy and social
justice for individuals and diverse populations is presented. Advocacy is generally
established.Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive
and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Argument shows logical
progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of
claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Prose is largely free
of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and
effective figures of speech are used. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in
formatting style. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and
format is mostly correct. 5: Excellent (100.00%) Three to five objectives are
presented.Rationale is clearly provided for each objective and thoroughly explains the
relationship of the findings to the topic and proposed intervention. Well-supported
rationale for how proposed project and objectives advocate for autonomy and social justice
for individuals and diverse populations is presented. Advocacy for autonomy and social
justice for individuals and diverse populations is clearly established. Thesis is
comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose
of the paper clear.Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a
distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. Writer is clearly in
command of standard, written, academic English. Comments All format elements are
correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is free of error. Points Earned Benchmark – Capstone Change Project
Objectives Review your problem or issue and the cultural assessment. Consider how the
findings connect to your topic and intervention for your capstone change project. Write a
list of three to five objectives for your proposed intervention. Below each objective, provide
a one or two sentence rationale. After writing your objectives, provide a rationale for how
your proposed project and objectives advocate for autonomy and social justice for

3. individuals and diverse populations. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric
prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful
completion. You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Benchmark
Information This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic
competencies: RN to BSN 1.5: Advocate for autonomy and social justice for individuals and
diverse populations. The next step in developing an evidence-based practice change
proposal for the capstone project is to conduct a thorough review of the literature
pertaining to the chosen topic. In this topic, students will examine the research literature
and utilize library resources to locate quality, peer-reviewed sources to support their
chosen topic and solution. Students will use the PICOT question process to create a PICOT
question for their topic. Objectives: 1.Critique evidence-based research to support the
development of the capstone project change proposal. 2. Create a PICOT question
incorporating an evidence-based nursing practice intervention. 3. Create objectives for an
evidence-based nursing practice change proposal. 4. Integrate reflective practice into the
practicum reflective journal. 5. Demonstrate interprofessional collaboration during the
creation of the capstone project change proposal.SOURCES Read “Translating Research for
Evidence-Based Practice,” by Bowen and Forrest, from Access (2017). URL:
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&
db=ccm&AN=120577496 &site=ehost-live&scope=site Read “The Effect of Translating
Research Into Practice Intervention to Promote Use of Evidence-Based Fall Prevention
Interventions in Hospitalized Adults: A Prospective Pre-Post Implementation Study in the
U.S.,” by Titler et al., from Applied Nursing Research (2016). URL: https://www-
sciencedirect-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S0897189715002384 Read
“Selecting the Best Theory to Implement Planned Change,” by Mitchell, from Nursing
Management (2013). URL:
http://home.nwciowa.edu/publicdownload/Nursing%20Department%5CNUR310%5CSele
cting%20the%20Best%20Theo ry%20to%20Implement%20Planned%20Change.pdf Read
“Science of Improvement: Testing Changes,” located on the Institute for Healthcare
Improvement website. URL:
http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/HowtoImprove/ScienceofImprovementTestingChang
es.aspx Read “Asking Focused Questions,”located on the Centre for Evidence-Based
Medicine website. URL: http://www.cebm.net/asking-focused-questions/ Read
“Formulating a Researchable Question: A Critical Step for Facilitating Good Clinical
Research,” by Aslam and Emmanuel, from Indian Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases
and AID (2010). URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3140151/ Read
“Research Questions, Hypotheses and Objectives,” by Farrugia, Petrisor, Farrokhyar, and
Bhandari, from Canadian Journal of Surgery (2010). URL:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2912019/ Explore Nursing Theory
website. This website provides information on leading nursing theories. URL:
http://nursing-theory.org/ Explore the Nursing Theories page of the Current Nursing
website. This website provides information on leading nursing theories. URL:
http://currentnursing.com/nursing_theory/Discussion: Improve Care for Patients