1. Quality Improvement Proposal, HLT-362V
Quality Improvement Proposal, HLT-362VQuality Improvement Proposal, HLT-362VORDER
COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION PAPERS ON Quality Improvement Proposal, HLT-
362VDescribe the problem or issue and propose a quality improvement initiative based on
evidence-based practice. Apply ”The Road to Evidence-Based Practice” process,
illustrated in Chapter 4 of your textbook, to create your proposal.Include a minimum of
three peer-reviewed sources published within the last 5 years, not included in the course
materials or textbook, that establish evidence in of the quality improvement proposed.**I
am attaching the Assignment instructions, along with the rubrics to follow to get 100%, the
study links and most importantly i have attached the chapter 4 referenced in the
assignment instructions.Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total PointsHLT-362V
HLT-362V-O502 Quality Improvement Proposal 150.0Criteria Percentage 1: Unsatisfactory
(0.00%) 2: Less Than Satisfactory (65.00%) 3: Satisfactory (75.00%) 4: Good (85.00%) 5:
Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points EarnedContent 70.0%Problem or Issue in Practice
or Organization 5.0% Overview of the problem and the setting in which the problem or
issue occurs is not described. Overview of the problem and the setting in which the problem
or issue occurs is partially described. More information is needed to fully understand the
problem and the scope of the organization or practice. Overview of the problem and the
setting in which the problem or issue occurs is summarized. Some information is needed to
fully understand the problem or the scope of the organization or practice. Overview of the
problem and the setting in which the problem or issue occurs is described. Some detail is
need for clarity. Overview of the problem and the setting in which the problem or issue
occurs is described in detail.aSignificance of Quality Improvement in Practice or
Organization 10.0% Explanation of why the quality improvement initiative is needed is
omitted. Explanation of why the quality improvement initiative is needed is partially
presented. More information is needed to understand why the quality improvement is
relevant to the problem or setting. The expected outcome is unclear. Explanation of why the
quality improvement initiative is needed is summarized. Some information is needed to
understand why the quality improvement is relevant to the problem or setting. The
expected outcome is generally presented. Explanation of why the quality improvement
initiative is needed is discussed. It appears that the quality improvement initiative would
help address the problem within the described setting. The expected outcome is described.
Some information or rationale is needed for or clarity. Explanation of why the quality
improvement initiative is need is clearly discussed. The quality improvement initiative
2. would help address the problem within the described setting presented. The expected
outcome is thoroughly described. Overall, the explanation is clear and well ed. Quality
Improvement Proposal, HLT-362VDemonstration of From Previous Research 15.0% The
use of research to demonstrate for the quality improvement initiative and its projected
outcomes is omitted. Three peer-reviewed sources published within the last 5 years are
omitted. The use of research to demonstrate for the quality improvement initiative and its
projected outcomes is incomplete. Overall, the research results do not demonstrate for the
initiative or projected outcomes. Fewer than three peer-reviewed sources published within
the last 5 years were used. The use of research to demonstrate for the quality
improvement initiative and its projected outcomes is generally presented. The research
results generally demonstrate for the initiative and projected outcomes. Three peer-
reviewed sources published within the last 5 years were used. The use of research to
demonstrate for the quality improvement initiative and its projected outcomes is
presented. The research results demonstrate for the initiative and projected outcomes.
The three peer-reviewed sources meet all assignment criteria. The use of research to
demonstrate for the quality improvement initiative and its projected outcomes is clearly
presented. The research results strongly demonstrate for the initiative and projected
outcomes. The three peer-reviewed sources meet all assignment criteria and provide
critical for the initiative.Steps Necessary to Implement Quality Improvement Initiative
15.0% The steps necessary to implement the quality improvement initiative are omitted.
The steps necessary to implement the quality improvement initiative are incomplete. It is
unclear how the steps presented will lead to implementation. More information is needed.
The steps necessary to implement the quality improvement initiative are summarized.
Some steps are vague. More evidence or rationale is needed for . The steps necessary to
implement the quality improvement initiative are discussed. Some evidence or rationale is
needed for or clarity. The steps necessary to implement the quality improvement initiative
are thoroughly discussed. The implantation steps are well ed with evidence and
rationale.Evaluation of Quality Improvement 15.0% An explanation for how the quality
improvement initiative will be measured is omitted. An explanation for how the quality
improvement initiative will be measured is partially presented. It is unclear how the
evaluation will measure improvement; or it is unclear how the evaluation relates to the
quality improvement initiative. A general explanation for how the quality improvement
initiative will be measured is summarized. The evaluation is generally appropriate to the
quality improvement initiative. An explanation for how the quality improvement initiative
will be measured is presented. The evaluation is appropriate to the quality improvement
initiative. An explanation for how the quality improvement initiative will be measured is
presented in detail. The evaluation is appropriate to the quality improvement initiative.
Evaluation proposed is well ed.Identification of Variables, Hypothesis Test, and Statistical
Test 10.0% The variables, hypothesis, and statistical tests needed to prove the quality
improvement succeeded are omitted. The variables, hypothesis, and statistical tests needed
to prove the quality improvement succeeded are partially presented; one is omitted. The
proposed elements are not relevant to proving the quality improvement succeeded. The
variables, hypothesis, and statistical tests needed to prove the quality improvement
3. succeeded are summarized. There are inaccuracies. The variables, hypothesis, and
statistical tests needed to prove the quality improvement succeeded are presented. Overall,
the proposed elements are relevant to proving the quality improvement succeeded. The
variables, hypothesis, and statistical tests needed to prove the quality improvement
succeeded are presented and accurate. The proposed elements will prove whether the
quality improvement succeeded.Organization and Effectiveness 20.0%Thesis Development
and Purpose 7.0% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is
insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate
to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive
and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive
and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper
clear.Argument Logic and Construction 8.0% Statement of purpose is not justified by the
conclusion. The conclusion does not 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, s 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. Quality Improvement Proposal, HLT-362VMechanics of
Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% Surface errors are
pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice
or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence
structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they
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. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.Format 10.0%Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5.0% 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.Documentation of
Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment
and style) 5.0% 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,
4. and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.Total Weightage 100%
