MHC6303 WEEK 4 PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS/ DETERMINE THE ROOT CAUSE: 5 WHYS

MHC6303 WEEK 4 PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS/ DETERMINE THE ROOT CAUSE: 5 WHYS

In week 3, you identify the weakness (the area for improvement) that you wish to continue to work on for your Course Project Task 2 due in this week. In other words, you use the same healthcare setting, for instance ER, to continue and complete your Course Project Task 2 in week 4.

Below are the tasks to be completed in your Course Project Task 2.

  • Visit the following link:

Determine-root-cause-5-whys

  • Read the introduction to RCA.
  • Read the RCA process.
  • Conduct and report an RCA for the area of improvement you selected. Include in your analysis:
    • A diagram of the clinical or workflow process
    • A fishbone diagram of constraints
    • The steps for improvement, utilizing the five-whys tool
    • Suggested changes for making the improvement

Here examples of ER Workflow from AHRQ https://www.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/professionals/quality-patient-safety/quality-resources/tools/cap-toolkit/ed-workflowdiagrams.pdf

PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS ATTACHED.

MHC6303 WEEK 4 PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS AND RUBRIC

Instructions

Before beginning work on this assignment, please review the expanded grading rubric for specific instructions relating to content and formatting.

Course Project Task 2

Using the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis you did in Week 3, select an area of improvement in the healthcare setting. You will do an RCA for this area this week.

Tasks:

· Visit the following link:

Determine-root-cause-5-whyshttps://www.isixsigma.com/tools-templates/cause-effect/determine-root-cause-5-whys/

· Read the introduction to RCA.

· Read the RCA process.

· Conduct and report an RCA for the area of improvement you selected. Include in your analysis:

· A diagram of the clinical or workflow process

· A fishbone diagram of constraints

· The steps for improvement, utilizing the five-whys tool

· Suggested changes for making the improvement

Submission Details:

· To support your work, use your course and textbook readings and also use the South University Online Library. As in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references for the citations in APA format.

· Your assignment should be addressed in a 2- to 3-page document.

· Name your document SU_MHC6303_W4P_LastName_FirstInitial.doc and submit to the Submissions Area by the due date assigned.

RUBRIC

Criteria

No Evidence

0 points

Unsatisfactory

4 points

Emerging

8 points

Proficient

12 points

Exemplary

15 points

Criterion Score

Includes all assignment components and meets graduate level critical thinking. A purpose statement is identified for the response.

Student did not submit assignment

Work minimally meets assignment expectations. No purpose statement is provided.

Assignment meets some expectations with minimal depth and breath. Purpose statement is vague.

Assignment meets most of expectations with all components being addressed in good depth and breadth. Purpose statement is present and appropriate for the assignment.

Assignment meets all expectations with exceptional depth and breath. A comprehensive purpose statement delineates all requirements of the assignment.

/ 15

Integrates and understands assignments concepts and topics.

Student did not submit assignment

Shows some degree of understanding of assignment concepts.

Demonstrates a clear understanding of assignment concepts.

Demonstrates the ability to evaluate and apply key assignment concepts.

Demonstrates the ability to evaluate, apply and integrate key assignment concepts.

/ 15

Synthesizes, analyses, and evaluates resources to apply concepts in the assignment.

Student did not submit assignment

Does not interpret, apply, and synthesize concepts, and/or strategies.

Summarizes information gleaned from sources to support major points, but does not synthesize. Provides minimal justification to support major topics. Uses 1 credible resource in the assignment.

Synthesizes and justifies (defends, explains, validates, confirms) information gleaned from sources to support major points presented. Uses a minimum of 2 credible resources in the assignment.

Synthesizes and justifies (defends, explains, validates, confirms) information gleaned from sources to support major points presented. Uses 3 credible resources for the assignment, including at least 1 scholarly peer-reviewed resource.

/ 15

This table lists criteria and criteria group name in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method.

Criteria

No Evidence

0 points

Unsatisfactory

1 point

Emerging

3 points

Proficient

4 points

Exemplary

5 points

Criterion Score

Uses correct spelling, grammar, and professional vocabulary. Provides credible resources using correct APA format.

Student did not submit assignment

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, punctuation and APA errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

Contains a few (3-4) grammar, spelling, punctuation and APA errors.

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Contains a few (1–2) APA format errors.

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Uses correct APA format with no errors.

/ 5

Rubric Total ScoreTotal

/ 50

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply