8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool Page 2 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails CRITERIA 1 Analyze the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an adverse event or near miss. COMPETENCY Plan quality improvement initiatives in response to routine data surveillance. NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not list the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an adverse event or near miss. BASIC: Lists the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an adverse event or near miss, but fails to analyze how they led to the adverse event or near miss. PROFICIENT: Analyzes the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an adverse event or near miss. DISTINGUISHED: Analyzes the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an adverse event or near miss, and identifies knowledge gaps, unknowns, missing information, unanswered questions, or areas of uncertainty (where further information could improve the analysis). Comments: Alexander, great work on your analysis of the missed steps leading to the security issue of the technology attack at Mountain View Medical Facility. In your analysis you discussed some of the knowledge gaps and unknowns as being the lack security measures. (15%) 8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool Page 3 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails CRITERIA 2 Analyze the implications of the adverse event or near miss for all stakeholders. COMPETENCY Plan quality improvement initiatives in response to routine data surveillance. NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not list the implications of the adverse event or near miss for all stakeholders. BASIC: Lists possible impacts of the adverse event or near miss for stakeholders, but fails to analyze their short- or long-term implications for the stakeholders. PROFICIENT: Analyzes the implications of the adverse event or near miss for all stakeholders. DISTINGUISHED: Analyzes the implications of the adverse event or near miss for all stakeholders, and identifies assumptions on which the analysis is based. Comments: Alexander, you did a great job addressing the implications related to the missed steps leading security issues. Your discussion was comprehensive including all stakeholders. You also spoke to your assumptions which you based your thoughts. Well done in this section! (15%) 8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool Page 4 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-web/gradingdetails CRITERIA 3 Evaluate quality improvement technologies related to the event that are required to reduce risk and increase patient safety. COMPETENCY Plan quality improvement initiatives in response to adverse events and near-miss analyses. NON_PERFORMANCE: Does not list quality improvement technologies related to the event that are required to reduce risk and increase patient safety. BASIC: Lists quality improvement technologies related to the event that could r ...

1. 8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool
Page 2 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-
web/gradingdetails
CRITERIA 1
Analyze the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an
adverse event or near
miss.
COMPETENCY
Plan quality improvement initiatives in response to routine data
surveillance.
NON_PERFORMANCE:
Does not list the missed steps or protocol deviations related to
an adverse event or near miss.
BASIC:
Lists the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an
adverse event or near miss, but fails to analyze
how they led to the adverse event or near miss.
PROFICIENT: Analyzes the missed steps or protocol deviations
related to an adverse event or near miss.
DISTINGUISHED:

2. Analyzes the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an
adverse event or near miss, and identifies
knowledge gaps, unknowns, missing information, unanswered
questions, or areas of uncertainty (where
further information could improve the analysis).
Comments:
Alexander, great work on your analysis of the missed steps
leading to the security issue of the technology
attack at Mountain View Medical Facility. In your analysis you
discussed some of the knowledge gaps and
unknowns as being the lack security measures.
(15%)
8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool
Page 3 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-
web/gradingdetails
CRITERIA 2
Analyze the implications of the adverse event or near miss for
all stakeholders.
COMPETENCY
Plan quality improvement initiatives in response to routine data

3. surveillance.
NON_PERFORMANCE:
Does not list the implications of the adverse event or near miss
for all stakeholders.
BASIC:
Lists possible impacts of the adverse event or near miss for
stakeholders, but fails to analyze their short- or
long-term implications for the stakeholders.
PROFICIENT: Analyzes the implications of the adverse event
or near miss for all stakeholders.
DISTINGUISHED:
Analyzes the implications of the adverse event or near miss for
all stakeholders, and identifies
assumptions on which the analysis is based.
Comments:
Alexander, you did a great job addressing the implications
related to the missed steps leading security issues.
Your discussion was comprehensive including all stakeholders.
You also spoke to your assumptions which
you based your thoughts. Well done in this section!
(15%)

4. 8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool
Page 4 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-
web/gradingdetails
CRITERIA 3
Evaluate quality improvement technologies related to the event
that are required to
reduce risk and increase patient safety.
COMPETENCY
Plan quality improvement initiatives in response to adverse
events and near-miss analyses.
NON_PERFORMANCE:
Does not list quality improvement technologies related to the
event that are required to reduce risk and
increase patient safety.
BASIC:
Lists quality improvement technologies related to the event that
could reduce risk or increase patient
safety, but fails to evaluate how those technologies were used,
or how they could be more usefully
employed.
PROFICIENT:

5. Evaluates quality improvement technologies related to the event
that are required to reduce risk and
increase patient safety.
DISTINGUISHED:
Evaluates quality improvement technologies related to the event
that are required to reduce risk and
increase patient safety, and identifies criteria that can be used
to evaluate the technologies.
Comments:
Alexander, good job identifying the need for modern
technology. This is a great idea to provide a safer
environment. To achieve a higher-grade level consider speaking
to a specific technology that would help
prevent the insecurity event from occurring, how you would use
or implement something to help keep some
of the information safe? You need to also include the criteria
you will use to evaluate the improvement.
(14%)
8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool
Page 5 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-
web/gradingdetails

6. CRITERIA 4
Incorporate relevant metrics of the adverse event or near miss
incident to support need
for improvement.
COMPETENCY
Evaluate quality improvement initiatives using sensitive and
sound outcome measures.
NON_PERFORMANCE:
Does not identify relevant metrics of the adverse event or near
miss incident to support need for
improvement.
BASIC:
Attempts to identify some metrics relevant to the adverse event
or near miss incident, but omits some
relevant data or fails to meaningfully show how metrics relate
to the event or incident.
PROFICIENT:
Incorporates relevant metrics of the adverse event or near miss
incident to support need for improvement.
DISTINGUISHED:
Incorporates relevant metrics of the adverse event or near miss
incident to support need for improvement,

7. and evaluates the quality of the data.
Comments:
Alexander, Thank you for providing the areas that your metric
information would come from that you would
use to develop the metric to improve a safe information
environment. To achieve a higher grade, consider
providing numerical data to justify the need for intervention?
What about the quality of the data at your facility
and once researching technologies what is the quality of the
data in the literature?
(14%)
8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool
Page 6 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-
web/gradingdetails
CRITERIA 5
Outline a quality improvement initiative to prevent a future
adverse event or near miss.
COMPETENCY
Plan quality improvement initiatives in response to routine data
surveillance.

8. NON_PERFORMANCE:
Does not outline a quality improvement initiative to prevent a
future adverse event or near miss.
BASIC:
Attempts to outline a quality improvement initiative to prevent
a future adverse event or near miss, but it
is not clear that QI suggestions are based on research or best
practices.
PROFICIENT: Outlines a quality improvement initiative to
prevent a future adverse event or near miss.
DISTINGUISHED:
Outlines a quality improvement initiative to prevent a future
adverse event or near miss, and impartially
considers conflicting data and other perspectives.
Comments:
Alexander, I appreciate your identification of the importance of
the communication for your QI project. Now,
what should be done? What is the focus Who should implement?
How will staff be trained? How will the
initiative be evaluated? Make sure that your plan is based upon
best evidence supported by the literature and
speak to conflicting data and multiple perspectives to meet the
distinguished benchmark.

9. (14%)
8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool
Page 7 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-
web/gradingdetails
CRITERIA 6
Communicate analysis and proposed initiative in a professional
and effective manner,
writing content clearly and logically with correct use of
grammar, punctuation, and
spelling.
COMPETENCY
Apply effective communication strategies to promote quality
improvement of interprofessional care.
NON_PERFORMANCE:
Does not communicate analysis and proposed initiative in a
professional and effective manner; does not
write content clearly and logically with correct use of grammar,
punctuation, and spelling.
BASIC:
Attempts to communicate analysis and proposed initiative in a
professional and effective manner, but

10. content is not consistently clear and logical, or errors in use of
grammar, punctuation, or spelling distract
from the message.
PROFICIENT:
Communicates analysis and proposed initiative in a professional
and effective manner, writing content
clearly and logically with correct use of grammar, punctuation,
and spelling.
DISTINGUISHED:
Communicates analysis and proposed initiative in a professional
and effective manner. Content is clear,
logical, and persuasive; grammar, punctuation, and spelling are
without errors.
Comments:
You did a great job of communicating your analysis clearly with
respect for your colleagues and stakeholders.
Content is clear, logical, and persuasive; grammar, punctuation,
and spelling are without errors.
(14%)
8/19/19, 10(03 PMCapella University Scoring Guide Tool
Page 8 of 9https://scoringguide.capella.edu/grading-

11. web/gradingdetails
CRITERIA 7
Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly
formatting citations and
references using current APA style.
COMPETENCY
Apply effective communication strategies to promote quality
improvement of interprofessional care.
NON_PERFORMANCE:
Does not integrate relevant sources to support arguments; does
not correctly format citations and
references using current APA style.
BASIC: Sources lack relevance or are poorly integrated, or
citations or references are incorrectly formatted.
PROFICIENT:
Integrates relevant sources to support arguments, correctly
formatting citations and references using
current APA style.
DISTINGUISHED:
Integrates relevant sources to support assertions, correctly
formatting citations and references using current
APA style. Citations are free from all errors.

12. Comments:
You did a good job with your APA formatting within your body
of the paper. There are a few issues that need
to be addressed with the format on the reference page. Please
see my comments on your paper as well as
refer to your Resource tab in the course for additional APA and
writing support. You can also reach out to
your tutor for additional help. Capella uses the 6th edition APA
guidelines which can be purchased in book
form if that is easier for you. Here is a Smarthinking link for
you to utilize as
well. https://campus.capella.edu/web/tutoring/home# Here is a
link to the Capella Writing Center that is very
helpful. https://campus.capella.edu/web/writing-center/
(14%)
https://campus.capella.edu/web/tutoring/home
https://campus.capella.edu/web/writing-center/
Overview
Deliver a 5 page analysis of an existing quality improvement
initiative at your workplace. The QI initiative you choose to
analyze should be related to specific disease, condition, or
public health issue of personal or professional interest to you.
Too often, discussions about quality health care, care costs, and
outcome measures take place in isolation—each group talking
among themselves about results and enhancements. Because

13. nurses are critical to the delivery of high-quality, efficient
health care, it is essential that they develop the proficiency to
review, evaluate performance reports, and be able to effectively
communicate outcome measures related to quality initiatives.
The nursing staff's perspective and the need to collaborate on
quality care initiatives are fundamental to patient safety and
positive institutional health care outcomes.
By successfully completing this assessment, you will
demonstrate your proficiency in the following course
competencies and assessment criteria:
· Competency 2: Plan quality improvement initiatives in
response to routine data surveillance.
· Recommend additional indicators and protocols to improve
and expand quality outcomes of a quality initiative.
· Competency 3: Evaluate quality improvement initiatives using
sensitive and sound outcome measures.
· Analyze a current quality improvement initiative in a health
care setting.
· Evaluate the success of a current quality improvement
initiative through recognized benchmarks and outcome
measures.
· Competency 4: Integrate interprofessional perspectives to lead
quality improvements in patient safety, cost effectiveness, and
work-life quality
· Incorporate interprofessional perspectives related to initiative
functionality and outcomes.
· Competency 5: Apply effective communication strategies to
promote quality improvement of interprofessional care.
· Communicate evaluation and analysis in a professional and
effective manner, writing content clearly and logically with
correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
· Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly
formatting citations and references using current APA style.
Assessment Instructions

14. Preparation
You have been asked to prepare and deliver an analysis of an
existing quality improvement initiative at your workplace. The
QI initiative you choose to analyze should be related to a
specific disease, condition, or public health issue of personal or
professional interest to you. The purpose of the report is to
assess whether specific quality indicators point to improved
patient safety, quality of care, cost and efficiency goals, and
other desired metrics.
Your target audience consists of nurses and other health
professionals with specializations or interest in your selected
condition, disease, or issue. In your report, you will define the
disease, analyze how the condition is managed, identify the core
performance measurements used to treat or manage the
condition, and evaluate the impact of the quality indicators on
the health care facility:
Note: Remember, you can submit all, or a portion of, your draft
to Smarthinking for feedback, before you submit the final
version of your analysis for this assessment. However, be
mindful of the turnaround time for receiving feedback, if you
plan on using this free service.
The numbered points below correspond to grading criteria in the
scoring guide. The bullets below each grading criterion further
delineate tasks to fulfill the assessment requirements. Be sure
that your Quality Improvement Initiative Evaluation addresses
all of the content below. You may also want to read the scoring
guide to better understand the performance levels that relate to
each grading criterion.
1. Analyze a current quality improvement initiative in a health
care setting.
· Evaluate a QI initiative and explain what prompted the
implementation. Detail problems that were not addressed and
any issues that arose from the initiative.
2. Evaluate the success of a current quality improvement
initiative through recognized benchmarks and outcome
measures.

15. · Analyze the benchmarks that were used to evaluate success.
Detail what was the most successful, as well as what outcome
measures are missing or could be added.
3. Incorporate interprofessional perspectives related to initiative
functionality and outcomes.
· Integrate the perspectives of interprofessional team members
involved in the initiative. Detail who you talked to, their
professions, and the impact of their perspectives on your
analysis.
4. Recommend additional indicators and protocols to improve
and expand quality outcomes of a quality initiative.
· Recommend specific process or protocol changes as well as
added technologies that would improve quality outcomes.
5. Communicate evaluation and analysis in a professional and
effective manner, writing content clearly and logically with
correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
6. Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly
formatting citations and references using current APA style.
Submission Requirements
. Length of submission: A minimum of five but no more than
seven double-spaced, typed pages.
. Number of references: Cite a minimum of four sources (no
older than seven years, unless seminal work) of scholarly peer
reviewed or professional evidence that support your
interpretation and analysis.
. APA formatting: Resources and citations are formatted
according to current APA style and formatting.
Overview
Write a 5 page a comprehensive analysis on an adverse event or
near miss from your professional nursing experience. Integrate
research and data on the event and use as a basis to propose a
quality improvement (QI) initiative in your current
organization.
Health care organizations strive for a culture of safety. Yet

16. despite technological advances, quality care initiatives,
oversight, ongoing education and training, laws, legislation and
regulations, medical errors continue to occur. Some are small
and easily remedied with the patient unaware of the infraction.
Others can be catastrophic and irreversible, altering the lives of
patients and their caregivers and unleashing massive reforms
and costly litigation.
The goal of this assessment is to focus on a specific event in a
health care setting that impacts patient safety and related
organizational vulnerabilities and to propose a quality
improvement initiative to prevent future incidents.
By successfully completing this assessment, you will
demonstrate your proficiency in the following course
competencies and assessment criteria:
· Competency 1: Plan quality improvement initiatives in
response to adverse events and near-miss analyses.
· Evaluate quality improvement technologies related to the
event that are required to reduce risk and increase patient
safety.
· Competency 2: Plan quality improvement initiatives in
response to routine data surveillance.
· Analyze the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an
adverse event or near miss.
· Analyze the implications of the adverse event or near miss for
all stakeholders.
· Outline a quality improvement initiative to prevent a future
adverse event or near miss.
· Competency 3: Evaluate quality improvement initiatives using
sensitive and sound outcome measures.
· Incorporate relevant metrics of the adverse event or near miss
incident to support need for improvement.
· Competency 5: Apply effective communication strategies to
promote quality improvement of interprofessional care.
· Communicate analysis and proposed initiative in a
professional and effective manner, writing content clearly and
logically with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and

17. spelling.
· Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly
formatting citations and references using current APA style.
Assessment Instructions
Preparation
Prepare a comprehensive analysis on an adverse event or near-
miss from your professional nursing experience that you or a
peer experienced. Integrate research and data on the event and
use as a basis to propose a Quality Improvement (QI) initiative
in your current organization.
Note: Remember, you can submit all, or a portion of, your draft
to Smarthinking for feedback, before you submit the final
version of your analysis for this assessment. However, be
mindful of the turnaround time for receiving feedback, if you
plan on using this free service.
The numbered points below correspond to grading criteria in the
scoring guide. The bullets below each grading criterion further
delineate tasks to fulfill the assessment requirements. Be sure
that your Adverse Event or Near-miss Analysis addresses all of
the content below. You may also want to read the scoring guide
to better understand the performance levels that relate to each
grading criterion.
1. Analyze the missed steps or protocol deviations related to an
adverse event or near miss.
· Describe how the event resulted from a patient’s medical
management rather than from the underlying condition.
· Identify and evaluate the missed steps or protocol deviations
that led to the event.
· Discuss the extent to which the incident was preventable.
· Research the impact of the same type of adverse event or near
miss in other facilities.
2. Analyze the implications of the adverse event or near miss
for all stakeholders.
· Evaluate both short-term and long-term effects on the
stakeholders (patient, family, interprofessional team, facility,

18. community). Analyze how it was managed and who was
involved.
· Analyze the responsibilities and actions of the
interprofessional team. Explain what measures should have been
taken and identify the responsible parties or roles.
· Describe any change to process or protocol implemented after
the incident.
3. Evaluate quality improvement technologies related to the
event that are required to reduce risk and increase patient
safety.
· Analyze the quality improvement technologies that were put in
place to increase patient safety and prevent a repeat of similar
events.
· Determine whether the technologies are being utilized
appropriately.
· Explore how other institutions integrated solutions to prevent
these types of events.
4. Incorporate relevant metrics of the adverse event or near miss
incident to support need for improvement.
· Identify the salient data that is associated with the adverse
event or near miss that is generated from the facility’s
dashboard. (By dashboard, we mean the data that is generated
from the information technology platform that provides
integrated operational, financial, clinical, and patient safety
data for health care management.)
· Analyze what the relevant metrics show.
· Explain research or data related to the adverse event or near
miss that is available outside of your institution. Compare
internal data to external data.
5. Outline a quality improvement initiative to prevent a future
adverse event or near miss.
· Explain how the process or protocol is now managed and
monitored in your facility.
· Evaluate how other institutions addressed similar incidents or
events.
· Analyze QI initiatives developed to prevent similar incidents,

19. and explain why they are successful. Provide evidence of their
success.
· Propose solutions for your selected institution that can be
implemented to prevent future adverse events or near-miss
incidents.
6. Communicate analysis and proposed initiative in a
professional and effective manner, writing content clearly and
logically with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and
spelling.
7. Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly
formatting citations and references using current APA style.
Submission Requirements
. Length of submission: A minimum of five but no more than
seven double-spaced, typed pages.
. Number of references: Cite a minimum of three sources (no
older than seven years, unless seminal work) of scholarly or
professional evidence that support your evaluation,
recommendations, and plans.
. APA formatting: Resources and citations are formatted
according to current APA style and formatting.