Public Reporting

. Target

15 points

A description of the selected health care organization is thorough.

 

4. Acceptable

13.8 points

A description of the selected health care organization is detailed.

 

3. Approaching

13.2 points

A description of the selected health care organization is present.

 

2. Insufficient

12 points

A description of the selected health care organization is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the selected health care organization is not present.

 

collapse Role of HCAHPS and HAIs assessment

Role of HCAHPS and HAIs

18 points

Criteria Description

Role of HCAHPS and HAIs

 

5. Target

18 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is thorough.

 

4. Acceptable

16.56 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is detailed.

 

3. Approaching

15.84 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is present.

 

2. Insufficient

14.4 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is not present.

 

collapse HCAHPS and HAIs Data assessment

HCAHPS and HAIs Data

18 points

Criteria Description

HCAHPS and HAIs Data

 

5. Target

18 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is thorough.

 

4. Acceptable

16.56 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is detailed.

 

3. Approaching

15.84 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is present.

 

2. Insufficient

14.4 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is not present.

 

collapse Role of Consumer Satisfaction assessment

Role of Consumer Satisfaction

18 points

Criteria Description

Role of Consumer Satisfaction

 

5. Target

18 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is thorough.

 

4. Acceptable

16.56 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is detailed.

 

3. Approaching

15.84 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is present.

 

2. Insufficient

14.4 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is not present.

 

collapse Intent and Outcomes of Public Reporting assessment

Intent and Outcomes of Public Reporting

18 points

Criteria Description

Intent and Outcomes of Public Reporting

 

5. Target

18 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is thorough.

 

4. Acceptable

16.56 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is detailed.

 

3. Approaching

15.84 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is present.

 

2. Insufficient

14.4 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is not present.

 

collapse Leadership Actions Based on HCAHPS and HAIs Data assessment

Leadership Actions Based on HCAHPS and HAIs Data

18 points

Criteria Description

Leadership Actions Based on HCAHPS and HAIs Data

 

5. Target

18 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is thorough.

 

4. Acceptable

16.56 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is detailed.

 

3. Approaching

15.84 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is present.

 

2. Insufficient

14.4 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is not present.

 

collapse Thesis, Position, or Purpose assessment

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

 

5. Target

10.5 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

 

4. Acceptable

9.66 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

 

3. Approaching

9.24 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

 

2. Insufficient

8.4 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

 

collapse Development, Structure, and Conclusion assessment

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

12 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

 

5. Target

12 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

 

4. Acceptable

11.04 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

 

3. Approaching

10.56 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

 

2. Insufficient

9.6 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

 

collapse Evidence assessment

Evidence

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.

 

5. Target

7.5 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

 

4. Acceptable

6.9 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

 

3. Approaching

6.6 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

 

2. Insufficient

6 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

 

collapse Mechanics of Writing assessment

Mechanics of Writing

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

 

5. Target

7.5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

 

4. Acceptable

6.9 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

 

3. Approaching

6.6 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

 

2. Insufficient

6 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

 

collapse Format/Documentation assessment

Format/Documentation

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

 

5. Target

7.5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

 

4. Acceptable

6.9 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

 

3. Approaching

6.6 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

 

2. Insufficient

6 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

 

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.