This document outlines an assignment requiring the interview of a patient or family member to assess their spiritual needs. It provides guidelines for creating a spiritual needs assessment tool including asking a minimum of five questions. Students are instructed to record interview responses, analyze the interview experience, and submit both the transcript and analysis in one document. The analysis should discuss what went well, any barriers, how the tool can assist in providing interventions, and if illness amplified spiritual concerns with examples. Students are warned to be careful and improve previous grades. A rubric assesses content, analysis, organization, mechanics, format, and documentation.

1. Details:
This assignment requires you to interview one person and
requires an analysis of your interview experience.
Part I: Interview
Select a patient, a family member, or a friend to interview. Be
sure to focus on the interviewee's experience as a patient,
regardless of whom you choose to interview.
Review The Joint Commission resource found in topic
materials, which provides some guidelines for creating spiritual
assessment tools for evaluating the spiritual needs of patients.
Using this resource and any other guidelines/examples that you
can find, create your own tool for assessing the spiritual needs
of patients.
Your spiritual needs assessment survey must include a minimum
of five questions that can be answered during the interview.
During the interview, document the interviewee's responses.
The transcript should include the questions asked and the
answers provided. Be sure to record the responses during the
interview by taking detailed notes. Omit specific names and
other personal information through which the interviewee can
be determined.
Part II: Analysis
Write a 500-750 word analysis of your interview experience. Be
sure to exclude specific names and other personal information
from the interview. Instead, provide demographics such as sex,
age, ethnicity, and religion. Include the following in your
response:
What went well?
Were there any barriers or challenges that inhibited your ability
to complete the assessment tool? How would you address these
in the future or change your assessment to better address these
challenges?
How can this tool assist you in providing appropriate
interventions to meet the needs of your patient?
Did you discover that illness and stress amplified the spiritual

2. concern and needs of your interviewee? Explain your answer
with examples.
Submit both the transcript of the interview and the analysis of
your results. This should be submitted as one document. The
interview transcript does not figure into the word count.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the
APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An
abstract is not required.
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 required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please
refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
This benchmark assignment assesses the following
competencies:
CONHCP Program Competencies for the RN-BSN:
5.2
: Assess for the spiritual needs and provide appropriate
interventions for individuals, families, and groups.
PLEASE I NEED YOU TO BE CAREFUL WITH THIS
ASSIGNMENT, IT HAS AN INTERVIEW AND THEN AN
ANALYSIS OF THAT INTERWIEW. ANALIZE ALL THE
ASPECTS THE PROFESSOR IS ASKING FOR AND THE
RUBRIC FOR THAT ASSIGNMENT. I NEED TO IMPROVE
MY GRADES BECAUSE THE OTHER GRADES FROM THE
PREVIOUS ASSIGNMENTS ARE TOO BAD.
RUBRICS
Benchmark Assignment - Spiritual Needs Assessment and
Reflection
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%

3. 2
Less Than Satisfactory
65.00%
3
Satisfactory
75.00%
4
Good
85.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
70.0 %
Content
40.0 %
Tool for Assessing the Spiritual Needs of Patients CONHCP:
5.2
Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients show little to
no relevance to the experiences of patients. A transcript of the
interview is either missing or not relevant.
Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is present but
lacks focus on experiences of patients. A clear transcript of the
interview is provided.
Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is present and
focuses on experiences of patients. A clear transcript of the
interview is provided.
Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is present and
focuses on experiences of patient. The tool uses reliable
methods for gathering data. A clear transcript of the interview is
provided.
Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is present and
focuses on experiences of patients. The tool uses effective
methods for gathering data that produces the results intended. A
clear transcript of the interview is provided.

4. 30.0 %
Analysis of Interview Experience
An analysis of the interview experience shows little to no
relevance to the assignment instructions.
An analysis of the interview experience is included but
addresses a few of the points included in the assignment
instructions.
An analysis of the interview experience is included and
addresses most of the points included in the assignment
instructions.
An analysis of the interview experience is included and
addresses all of the points included in the assignment
instructions.
An analysis of the interview experience is included and
addresses all of the points included in the assignment
instructions. The analysis shows a deep understanding of the
connections.
20.0 %
Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 %
Thesis Development and Purpose
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or
vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to
purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development
of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the
arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the
paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the
purpose of the paper clear.
8.0 %

5. Argument Logic and Construction
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The
conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is
incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some
sources have questionable credibility.
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.
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of
argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of
claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are
authoritative.
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a
distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are
authoritative.
5.0 %
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or
sentence construction are used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice
are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly
distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure
and audience-appropriate language are employed.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may
be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence
structures and figures of speech.

6. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
10.0 %
Format
5.0 %
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and
assignment)
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is
rarely followed correctly.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or
mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although
some minor errors may be present.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors
in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.
5.0 %
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references,
bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
Sources are not documented.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting
errors.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style,
although some formatting errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style,
and format is mostly correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
100 %
Total Weightage