Quality Improvement Proposal: Kaiser Permanente

Quality Improvement Proposal

Identify a quality improvement opportunity in your organization or practice. In a 1,250-1,500 word paper, describe 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 the following:
Provide an overview of the problem and the setting in which the problem or issue occurs.
Explain why a quality improvement initiative is needed in this area and the expected outcome.
Discuss how the results of previous research demonstrate support for the quality improvement initiative and its projected outcomes. 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 support of the quality improvement proposed.
Discuss steps necessary to implement the quality improvement initiative. Provide evidence and rationale to support your answer.
Explain how the quality improvement initiative will be evaluated to determine whether there was improvement.
Support your explanation by identifying the variables, hypothesis test, and statistical test that you would need to prove that the quality improvement initiative succeeded.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. References should be three to five
Please follow the rubric very well, Thak you.
RUBRIC BELLOW { Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
HLT-362V HLT-362V-OL191 Quality Improvement Proposal 150.0

Criteria 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 Earned
Content 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.

Significance 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 support or clarity. Explanation of why the quality improvement initiative is need is clearly discussed. The quality improvement initiative would help address the problem within the described setting presented. The expected outcome is thoroughly described. Overall, the explanation is clear and well supported.

Demonstration of Support From Previous Research 15.0% The use of research to demonstrate support 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 support for the quality improvement initiative and its projected outcomes is incomplete. Overall, the research results do not demonstrate support 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 support for the quality improvement initiative and its projected outcomes is generally presented. The research results generally demonstrate support for the initiative and projected outcomes. Three peer-reviewed sources published within the last 5 years were used. The use of research to demonstrate support for the quality improvement initiative and its projected outcomes is presented. The research results demonstrate support for the initiative and projected outcomes. The three peer-reviewed sources meet all assignment criteria. The use of research to demonstrate support for the quality improvement initiative and its projected outcomes is clearly presented. The research results strongly demonstrate support for the initiative and projected outcomes. The three peer-reviewed sources meet all assignment criteria and provide critical support 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 support. The steps necessary to implement the quality improvement initiative are discussed. Some evidence or rationale is needed for support or clarity. The steps necessary to implement the quality improvement initiative are thoroughly discussed. The implantation steps are well supported 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 supported.

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 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 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.

Mechanics 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, 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%