Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. The originality report that is provided when you submit your task can be used as a guide.

You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.

A. Examine a healthcare organization that has significance to you, using the American Hospital Directory (AHD) and the Care Compare websites found in the Web Links section, and complete the following:

1. Identify the healthcare organization you selected from the AHD by name and location.

2. Explain why you chose the healthcare organization in part A1 and any significance the organization has to you, including specific examples.

3. Describe (suggested length 1–2 paragraphs) the healthcare organization from A1 and the “type of facility” it is, according to AHD website, and the types of services this kind of facility typically provides.

a. Explain what the “type of control”, according to AHD website, means for this healthcare organization identified in part A1 and how it informs the services typically provided at this healthcare organization.

4. Discuss the facility’s Overall Star Rating from the Care Compare website and identify how the Star Rating is measured. If the facility does not have an Overall Star Rating explain why.

a. Identify one credible additional source of quality data on healthcare organizations.

5. Discuss two organizational ethics that are reflected in the type of facility and the type of control listed for this organization, including specific examples.

6. Discuss the nurse’s role in fiscal responsibility for this type of organization related to value-based care, including specific examples.

7. Describe one healthcare organizational change that could improve the delivery of value-based healthcare for the healthcare organization from part A1.

B. Compare the financial structure and data of the healthcare organization you discussed in part A with another organization listed on the AHD and Care Compare websites that is within the same or an adjacent state, including specific examples from each healthcare organization.

1. Discuss which healthcare organization from part B is more aligned with value-based healthcare, including one scholarly evidence source published within the last five years to support the discussion.

2. Discuss which healthcare organization from part B is more supportive of equitable patient-centered care, including one scholarly evidence source published within the last five years to support the discussion.

3. Discuss one financial and one quality data source that could inform organizational transformation in any healthcare organization.

C. Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.

D. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.

https://www.ahd.com/ (American Hospital Directory)

https://www.medicare.gov/care-compare/ (Care Compare)

Grading Rubric

A1:HEALTHCARE ORGANIZATION SIGNIFICANCE

Not Evident: The submission does not identify a healthcare facility.

Approaching Competence: The submission is missing the healthcare facility’s name or location, or the organization is not selected from the AHD website.

Competent: The submission identifies the healthcare facility by the organization’s name and location, and the organization is selected from the AHD website.

A2:SIGNIFICANCE OF FACILITY

Not Evident: The submission does not explain why the healthcare organization identified in part A1 was chosen.

Approaching Competence: The submission does not explain the significance the organization has to the learner, or the submission is not supported with specific examples.

Competent: The submission explains why the healthcare organization identified in part A1 was chosen and any significance it has to the learner, and the submission is supported with specific examples.

A3:TYPE OF FACILITY

Not Evident: A description of the organization from part A1 is not provided.

Approaching Competence: The submission does not accurately describe the organization identified in part A1 or does not include the “type of facility” it is. Or the description does not accurately include the types of services typically provided at this kind of organization.

Competent: The submission accurately describes the organization identified in part A1, including the “type of facility” it is and the types of services typically provided at this kind of organization.

A3a:TYPE OF CONTROL

Not Evident: The submission does not explain the “type of control” for the healthcare organization identified in part A1.

Approaching Competence: The submission does not provide a logical explanation of what “type of control” means for the healthcare organization identified in part A1. Or the submission does not logically explain how the “type of control” informs the services typically provided at this healthcare organization.

Competent: The submission provides a logical explanation of what “type of control” means for the healthcare organization identified in part A1 and how the specific “type of control” informs the services typically provided at this healthcare organization.

A4:OVERALL STAR RATING

Not Evident: The submission does not discuss the Overall Star Rating or identify any relevant measures of the Star Rating for the healthcare organization from part A1.

Approaching Competence: The submission does not logically discuss the organization’s Overall Star Rating or what this rating means for the healthcare organization from part A1. Or the submission does not correctly identify the relevant measures used to generate the Star Rating.

Competent: The submission logically discusses the organization’s Overall Star Rating and what this rating means for the healthcare organization from part A1. The submission correctly identifies all relevant measures used to generate the Star Rating.

A4a:Source of Quality Data

Not Evident: The submission does not identify 1 additional source of quality data on healthcare organizations.

Approaching Competence: The submission identifies 1 additional source of quality data on healthcare organizations, but the chosen source is not credible.

Competent: The submission identifies 1 credible additional source of quality data on healthcare organizations.

A5:Organizational Ethics

Not Evident: The submission does not discuss any organizational ethics reflected in the “type of facility” and “type of control” listed for the chosen organization.

Approaching Competence: The submission discusses only 1 of the organizational ethics, or 1 or both of the ethics are not reflected in the “type of facility” or “type of control” listed for this organization. Or 1 or both ethics discussed are not plausible. Or the discussion does not provide specific examples of how both ethics are reflected in the organization.

Competent: The submission discusses 2 plausible organizational ethics that are reflected in the type of facility and type of control listed for the chosen organization. Both ethics are plausible, and the discussion provides specific examples of how both ethics are reflected in the organization.

A6:Nursing Role in Value-Based Care

Not Evident: The submission does not discuss the nurse’s role in fiscal responsibility.

Approaching Competence: The submission does not present a logical discussion of the nurse’s role in fiscal responsibility for this type of organization. Or the nursing role discussed is not related to value-based care, or the discussion does not provide specific examples.

Competent: The submission presents a logical discussion of the nurse’s role in fiscal responsibility for this type of organization as related to value-based care, and the discussion provides specific examples.

A7:Organizational Change for Value-Based Healthcare

Not Evident: A description of 1 healthcare organizational change that could improve the delivery of value-based healthcare is not provided.

Approaching Competence: The description of 1 healthcare organizational change that could improve the delivery of value-based healthcare is irrelevant or implausible for the healthcare organization from part A1.

Competent: The description of 1 healthcare organizational change that could improve the delivery of value-based healthcare for the healthcare organization from part A1 is relevant and plausible.

B:Compare Financial Structures

Not Evident: A comparison of the financial structures and data of the healthcare organization from part A and another organization is not provided.

Approaching Competence: The comparison of the financial structures and data of the organization discussed in part A and a second healthcare organization is inaccurate or illogical. Or the comparison does not include the name or location of the second healthcare organization, or the location is not within the same or an adjacent state. Or the comparison does not include specific examples from each healthcare organization’s financial structure.

Competent: The comparison of the financial structures and data of the organization discussed in part A and a second healthcare organization is accurate and logical. The comparison includes the name and location of the second healthcare organization, and the organization is in the same or an adjacent state. The comparison includes specific examples from each healthcare organization’s financial structure.

B1:Alignment with Value-Based Healthcare

Not Evident: A discussion of which healthcare organization from part B is more aligned with value-based healthcare is not provided.

Approaching Competence: The submission does not present a logical discussion of which healthcare organization from part B is more aligned with value-based healthcare, or the discussion does not provide relevant supporting details. Or the discussion is not supported with 1 scholarly evidence source that was published within the last 5 years.

Competent: The submission presents a logical discussion of which healthcare organization from part B is more aligned with value-based healthcare, with relevant supporting details. The discussion is supported with 1 scholarly evidence source that was published within the last 5 years.

B2:Equitable Patient-Centered Care

Not Evident: A discussion of which healthcare organization is more supportive of equitable patient-centered care is not provided.

Approaching Competence: The submission does not present a logical discussion of which healthcare organization from part B is more supportive of equitable patient-centered care, or the discussion does not provide relevant supporting details. Or the discussion is not supported with 1 scholarly evidence source that was published within the last 5 years.

Competent: The submission presents a logical discussion of which healthcare organization from part B is more supportive of equitable patient-centered care, with relevant supporting details. The discussion is supported with 1 scholarly evidence source that was published within the last 5 years.

B3:Sources to Inform Organizational Transformation

Not Evident: The submission discusses neither 1 financial nor 1 quality data source.

Approaching Competence: The submission does not discuss both 1 financial and 1 quality data source. Or 1 or more of the data sources are implausible or irrelevant to informing organizational transformation in a healthcare organization.

Competent: The submission discusses 1 plausible financial and 1 plausible quality data source that are relevant to informing organizational transformation in a healthcare setting.

C:Sources

Not Evident: The submission does not include both in-text citations and a reference list for sources that are quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.

Approaching Competence: The submission includes in-text citations for sources that are quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and a reference list; however, the citations or reference list is incomplete or inaccurate.

Competent: The submission includes in-text citations for sources that are properly quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and a reference list that accurately identifies the author, date, title, and source location as available. 

After reviewing the air and water quality, which do you think is the most important in your community–water quality or air quality? Which do you think has a greater effect on the community? Provide a rationale for your response.

For this assignment, develop a PowerPoint presentation explaining the applied doctoral dissertation process at NU to a colleague or prospective student interested in the DHA program. Your presentation should discuss, at a minimum: major differences between applied doctoral projects and theoretical research dissertations (e.g., Ph.D.), key milestones and deliverables for each applied dissertation course (DIS9911-DIS9914), the 3-section dissertation manuscript, and the professional presentation/dissertation defense. In addition, your presentation should discuss potential barriers or risks to completing your project and strategies you will implement to minimize the risks. 

Length: 8-10 slides, one slide per dissertation section, and additional slides as needed. Include speaker notes of 100-150 words, a title page, and a references page

References:  Include a minimum of 3 peer-reviewed journals.

website: https://resources.nu.edu/adcenter/home

• Identify the reinforcement schedule for each example presented. (Enter the information into the table.)
• Explain how each of the four schedules work to evoke a behavior and the type of responding that results.
• Describe a naturally occurring reinforcement schedule you have identified in everyday life
• Write a short conclusion.

1. What is the role of the nurse informaticist in big data and health policy? In your response, consider how the nurse informaticist can specifically assist nurses, other healthcare professionals, consumers, policymakers, or other stakeholders in their decision-making. 

1 paragrapgh

 contain at least two citations with corresponding references no later than 2019

Describe a controversial treatment using information from at least one reputable source. Discuss at least one pro statement that supports the use of the treatment. These may come from experts, therapists, parents, or others. Also, discuss at least one con statement that opposes or refutes the treatment. Summarize these statements and evaluate findings. Discuss at least three relevant BACB ethics codes. Explain how to effectively evaluate treatments to determine if they are evidence based or not.  Explain in your conclusion how you would discuss the importance of using evidence-based strategies with colleagues and the families with whom you work while also respecting other professions and the people involved.