DUE January 24, 2025
The Assignment: (2–3 pages)
Evidence Based Practice II
Data Collection and Plan for AnalysisHow you collect, manage, and assess data can affect the evaluation of the implementation. If the data collection resources are not functional and/or are not measuring what was meant to be measured, the evaluation and dissemination of results will be flawed. Therefore, it is important to consider how you will assess the data collected and determine if what you are using is working.
For this Assignment, you will assess the data you have collected thus far in the implementation. Using your data, determine whether your scorecard is functional and appropriate. You will explore the best approach for analysis to ultimately evaluate the implementation.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
Learning Resources
Required Readings
· White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terhaar, M. F. (Eds.). (2019).
Translation of evidence into nursing and healthcare (3rd ed.). Springer Publishing.
· Chapter 11, “Data Management and Evaluation of Translation” (pp. 245–254)
· Benetato, B. B., Tillman, J., Corbett, R. W., & Hodges, A. (2021).
The doctor of nursing practice project data collection tool: A teaching strategy for data collectionLinks to an external site..
Nursing Education Perspectives, 42(6), E72–E73.
· Bohm, V., Lacaille, D., Spencer, N., & Barber, C. E. H. (2021).
Scoping review of balanced scorecards for use in healthcare settings: Development and implementationLinks to an external site..
BMJ Open Quality, 10(3), e001293.
· Mailat, D., Stoica, D.-A., Surgun, M. B., Traistaru, N. I., & Vranceanu, A. (2019).
Balanced scorecard vs. dashboard: Implications and managerial prioritiesLinks to an external site..
Academic Journal of Economic Studies, 5(1), 170.
· Victor, S., & Farooq, A. (2021).
Dashboard visualisation for healthcare performance management: Balanced scorecard methodLinks to an external site..
Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management, 16(2).
· Wyatt, J. (2004).
Scorecards, dashboards, and KPIs keys to integrated performance measurementLinks to an external site..
Healthcare Financial Management, 58(2), 76–80.
To Prepare
· Review the Learning Resources concerning data collection and plan for analysis.
· Assess the data collection thus far from your implementation.
The Assignment: (2–3 pages)
Construct a paper describing your organized data collection and plan for analysis. Assess whether your scorecard is functional and whether it measures what it was developed to measure. Explain how you are managing your dashboard.
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references.
Rubric
NURS_8503_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
|
NURS_8503_Week9_Assignment_Rubric
|
|
Criteria
|
Ratings
|
Pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe your organized data collection.
|
|
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response comprehensively and clearly describes the organized data collection for the project change implementation.
|
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The response clearly describes the organized data collection for the project change implementation.
|
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely describes the organized data collection for the project change implementation.
|
13 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the organized data collection for the project change implementation, or it is missing.
|
|
20 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe your plan for analysis.
|
|
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response comprehensively and clearly explains the plan for analysis of the data. … The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the analysis plan.
|
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The response clearly explains the plan for analysis of the data. … The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the analysis plan.
|
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the plan for analysis of the data. … The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the analysis plan.
|
13 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the plan for analysis of the data, or it is missing. … The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the analysis plan, or it is missing.
|
|
20 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAssess and describe the scorecard functionality.
|
|
25 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
The response comprehensively and fully assesses the scorecard functionality. … The response comprehensively and clearly describes whether the scorecard measures what it is intended to measure. … The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the assessment of the scorecard functionality.
|
22 to >19.0 pts
Good
The response clearly assesses the scorecard functionality. … The response clearly describes whether the scorecard measures what it is intended to measure. … The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the assessment of the scorecard functionality.
|
19 to >17.0 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely assesses the scorecard functionality. … The response inaccurately or vaguely describes whether the scorecard measures what it is intended to measure. … The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the assessment of the scorecard functionality.
|
17 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely assesses the scorecard functionality, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely describes whether the scorecard measures what it is intended to measure, or it is missing. … The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support assessment of the scorecard functionality, or it is missing.
|
|
25 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how you are managing your dashboard.
|
|
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and clearly explains how you are managing your dashboard. … The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanation.
|
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The response accurately explains how you are managing your dashboard. … The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanation.
|
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair
The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how you are managing your dashboard. … The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanation.
|
13 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how you are managing your dashboard, or it is missing. … The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanation, or it is missing.
|
|
20 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.
|
|
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria.
|
4 to >3.5 pts
Good
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive.
|
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic.
|
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. … Purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion were not provided.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
|
|
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors
|
4 to >3.5 pts
Good
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors
|
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors
|
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (more than five) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
|
|
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct APA format with no errors
|
4 to >3.5 pts
Good
Contains a few (one or two) APA format errors
|
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (three or four) APA format errors
|
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (more than five) APA format errors
|
|
5 pts
|
|
Total Points: 100
|
