HCM 620 Final Project Milestone Two Guidelines and Rubric Overview: In this milestone, you will submit Sections IIA, IIB, IIC, and IID of the Requirements Specifications section of your final project, which should include the specifications of internal and external interfaces, user interfaces, data elements and formats, and overall capability of the system

Subject:BusinessPrice:11.99 Bought8

Share With

HCM 620 Final Project Milestone Two Guidelines and Rubric Overview: In this milestone, you will submit Sections IIA, IIB, IIC, and IID of the Requirements Specifications section of your final project, which should include the specifications of internal and external interfaces, user interfaces, data elements and formats, and overall capability of the system. The requirements specification should include details on how the system should support meaningful use and HIE. Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed: II. Requirements Specifications A. What are the requirements for the patient-centric system with regard to supporting clinical care, business management, and legal reporting capabilities? B. Standardized Data and Terminology Definitions 1. What data and terminology definitions are currently being used by the organization? 2. To what extent are these terminology schemes standardized or compatible with those of other systems? Be sure to justify your reasoning. 3. Will new data and terminology schemes need to be implemented for moving the organization closer to standardization? Why or why not? C. Interoperability 1. How well do you feel the organization’s internal systems interact with one another? Explain your reasoning. 2. How well do you feel the organization’s internal systems interact with systems that are external to the organization? Explain your reasoning. 3. To what extent does the organization maintain information security and privacy in internal and external system transactions? Be sure to provide specific examples to support your claims. 4. Do you see any room for improvement? Why or why not? D. Technological needs for achieving meaningful use 1. At which stage of meaningful use achievement (i.e., Stage 1, Stage 2, or Stage 3 per The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [CMS]) is the organization currently? 2. Which of the EHR Incentive Program’s Eligible Hospital and CAH Core Objectives are being met by the organization’s current technology? Be sure to provide specific examples to support your claims. 3. Which of the EHR Incentive Program’s Eligible Hospital and CAH Menu Set Objectives are being met by the organization’s current technology? Be sure to provide specific examples to support your claims. 4. What technical strategies would you propose to move the organization closer to achieving optimal meaningful use for maximizing its reimbursement? Be sure to justify your response. Guidelines for Submission: This milestone must be 2 pages in length (plus a cover page and references) and must be written in APA format. Use double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. All references cited in APA format. Rubric Critical Elements Requirements Specifications: Requirements Exemplary (100%) Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the nuanced relationship between technology and organizational requirements Proficient (90%) Articulates requirements for patient-centric system with regard to supporting clinical care, business management, and legal reporting capabilities Requirements Specifications: Definitions Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight regarding data and terminology definition schemes Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight regarding data and terminology definition schemes Accurately identifies data and terminology definitions currently being used by organization Assesses the extent to which terminology schemes are standardized or compatible with those of other systems, justifying reasoning Requirements Specifications: New Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight regarding data and terminology definition schemes Determines if new data and terminology schemes will need to be implemented for standardization, explaining why Requirements Specifications: Internal Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides detailed explanation of the internal systems’ interactions Articulates how well the organization’s internal systems interact with one another, explaining reasoning Requirements Specifications: External Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into internal and external system interoperability Articulates how well the organization’s internal systems interact with external systems, explaining reasoning Requirements Specifications: Standardized Needs Improvement (70%) Articulates requirements for patient-centric system with regard to supporting clinical care, business management, and legal reporting capabilities, but with gaps in detail, clarity, or logic Identifies data and terminology definitions currently being used by organization, but with gaps in detail, clarity, or accuracy Assesses the extent to which terminology schemes are standardized or compatible with those of other systems, but response or reasoning is cursory or illogical Determines if new data and terminology schemes will need to be implemented for standardization, but with gaps in accuracy or support Articulates how well the organization’s internal systems interact with one another, but response or reasoning is cursory or illogical Articulates how well the organization’s internal systems interact with external systems, but response or reasoning is cursory or illogical Not Evident (0%) Does not articulate requirements for patientcentric system with regard to supporting clinical care, business management, and legal reporting capabilities Value 8 Does not identify data and terminology definitions currently being used by organization Does not assess the extent to which terminology schemes are standardized or compatible with those of other systems and does not justify reasoning 8 Does not determine if new data and terminology schemes will need to be implemented for standardization and does not explain why Does not articulate how well the organization’s internal systems interact with one another, and does not explain reasoning Does not articulate how well the organization’s internal systems interact with external systems, and does not explain reasoning 8 8 8 8 Requirements Specifications: Security and Privacy Meets “Proficient” criteria and examples provided demonstrate exceptional knowledge of organization’s information security and privacy efforts Assesses the extent to which the organization maintains information security and privacy in internal and external transactions, providing specific examples for support Requirements Specifications: Improvement Meets “Proficient” criteria and examples provided demonstrate exceptional knowledge of organization’s information security and privacy efforts Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the achievement stages of meaningful use Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the capabilities of the organization’s current technology Discusses whether there is room for improvement, explaining why or why not Requirements Specifications: Menu Set Objectives Requirements Specifications: Optimal Requirements Specifications: Stage Requirements Specifications: Core Objectives Assesses the extent to which the organization maintains information security and privacy in internal and external transactions, but response is cursory or illogical, or examples are not supportive Discusses whether there is room for improvement, but response or reasoning is cursory or illogical Does not assess the extent to which the organization maintains information security and privacy in internal and external transactions and does not provide specific examples for support Does not discuss whether there is room for improvement and does not explain why or why not 8 Does not identify the stage of meaningful use organization has currently achieved 8 Accurately determines which of the EHR Incentive Program’s Eligible Hospital and CAH Core Objectives are being met by organization’s current technology, providing specific examples for support Identifies the stage of meaningful use organization has currently achieved, but with gaps in accuracy Determines which of the EHR Incentive Program’s Eligible Hospital and CAH Core Objectives are being met by organization’s current technology, but with gaps in accuracy, detail, or support 8 Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the capabilities of the organization’s current technology Accurately determines which of the EHR Incentive Program’s Eligible Hospital and CAH Menu Set Objectives are being met by organization’s current technology, providing specific examples for support Determines which of the EHR Incentive Program’s Eligible Hospital and CAH Menu Set Objectives are being met by organization’s current technology, but with gaps in accuracy, detail, or support Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the nuanced interrelationship among technology, meaningful use, and reimbursement Proposes appropriate technical strategies for moving organization closer to achieving optimal meaningful use for maximizing reimbursement, justifying response Proposes technical strategies for moving organization closer to achieving meaningful use for reimbursement, but response or justification is cursory or illogical Does not determine which of the EHR Incentive Program’s Eligible Hospital and CAH Core Objectives are being met by organization’s current technology and does not provide specific examples for support Does not determine which of the EHR Incentive Program’s Eligible Hospital and CAH Menu Set Objectives are being met by organization’s current technology and does not provide specific examples for support Does not propose appropriate technical strategies for moving organization closer to achieving optimal meaningful use for maximizing reimbursement Accurately identifies the stage of meaningful use organization has currently achieved 8 8 8 Articulation of Response Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-toread format Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas Total 4 100% HCM 630 Milestone Two Guidelines and Rubric In this second milestone, you will develop a force field analysis (FFA). FFA is a method for listing, discussing, and assessing the various forces for and against a proposed change. FFA encourages you to look at the big picture by assessing all of the forces impacting the change and weighing the pros and cons. Having identified these, you can then develop strategies to reduce the impact of the opposing forces and strengthen the supporting forces. FFA is especially useful when you want to overcome resistance to change and to define and resolve a quality issue in the healthcare environment. You will be expected to incorporate feedback on the milestone assignments into the final paper. Address the following critical elements in your Milestone Two paper: II. Force Field Analysis a) Develop an FFA that includes likely compelling forces (goals) and hindering forces (barriers) of the three actions you have selected that require improvement. b) Once you have determined the goals and barriers for the three actions that require improvement, create a table of goals and corresponding barriers, including the title of the improvement project, such as shown in the following example: Title of Improvement Project: Decrease the Number of Incorrect Medications Administered to Patients Goals Barriers Just as identifying a patient by two unique identifiers, A few drugs have only one name (e.g., Heparin). Software will not allow space for more than require a brand AND generic name for each drug one name on the medication administration record or permit Tallman lettering. What if the drug has more than one brand name, and what if that brand name differs from the one ordered by the physician? How can we ensure the brand and generic names provided actually pertain to the same drug? Utilize a barcode scanner for drugs and patient Cost of the scanner, software, and armband system is prohibitive for the entire organization armband before administration and will require quite a bit of training for staff. How will you manage the scanner for patients in isolation precautions? How is the scanner cleaned between users? Additionally, nurses may resist adding another step in the medication administration process. Medication that is not intended for a patient is never Medication dispensing cabinets are limited and are quite a distance from some rooms. One of taken into that patient’s room nurses’ time-saving methods is to obtain medications for several patients at one time. Leaving unsecured medications for another patient outside of the room is unacceptable. What if a nurse carrying medications for a patient is called into a room to help? Rubric Guidelines for Submission: This paper should be 1–2 pages in length, not including the cover page or reference page. APA format is to be used for the reference list and all internal citations. Include at least three scholarly research articles. Critical Elements Analysis Table of Goals and Barriers Scholarly Research Articulation of Response Exemplary (100%) Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates exceptional insight into managing continuous quality improvement in healthcare settings Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates exceptional insight into managing continuous quality improvement in healthcare settings Meets “Proficient” criteria by including three or more scholarly research articles that give in-depth details supporting identified improvement Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, and syntax and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format Proficient (90%) Develops a logical force field analysis that includes likely goals and barriers of the three actions selected for improvement Needs Improvement (70%) Develops a force field analysis that includes likely goals and barriers of the three actions selected for improvement but with gaps in logic or necessary detail Creates a table of goals and barriers but it is not based on force field analysis or has gaps in necessary detail Not Evident (0%) Does not develop a force field analysis that includes likely goals and barriers of the three actions selected for improvement Value 30 Does not create a table of goals and barriers 30 Includes two scholarly research articles that give in-depth details supporting identified improvement Includes some scholarly research but does not give indepth support to identified improvement Does not include scholarly research 20 Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, or syntax Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, or syntax that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, or syntax that prevent understanding of ideas 20 Creates a comprehensive table of goals and barriers based on force field analysis Total 100%