Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care
Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care
Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care Avoid using first person narrative The Bill has already been chosen for you. Detailed instructions/rubric are attached in the document below. Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care instructions_rubric_poli Include APA Title Page Include Headings as listed on rubric 5-6 pages long Minimum of 10 references (APA format, no more than 5 years old) I believe this Bill H.R. 1309 Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care and Social Service Workers Act is an easy selection to write about. The link is below. The bill has only passed The House, and not both House and Senate which is a requirement of the assignment. The site gives a summary explaining the bill, further explanation through texts, actions, titles, amendments etc. on several tabs. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1309?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22federal+healthcare+bills%22%5D%7D&r=7&s=5 RUBRIC Policy Brief Policy Brief Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Executive Summary 1. Introduces purpose of the brief, its timeliness, impact, and the potential benefits of solving the problem. 2. Conclusions are supported with relevant data. 3.0 pts Fully Met In 1-2 well developed paragraphs, the executive summary addresses and supports each required component in the directions and statements are supported with relevant numerical figures. 2.5 pts Partially Met The summary adequately addresses the required questions. Support for the students conclusions requires improvement or statistical support is inadequate. 1.0 pts Minimally Met The summary is underdeveloped as evidenced by not addressing each required component, a lack of support for statements, and/or lack of support from relevant facts and figures. The section far exceeds the 2 paragraph limit or fails to effectively summarize the relevant information. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 3.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Background and Significance 1. Discusses SDOH that impact and are impacted by the issues. 2. Discusses how the following impact or are impacted by the issue: (a) health, (b) the economy, (c) the healthcare system (d) nursing practice or advanced nursing practice, (e) the environment, and (f) human rights (eg, ethical factors and theories). 5.5 pts Fully Met The section includes a robust discussion of the social determinants of health and each required factor and its relationship to the selected problem. The section is organized with the use of headings, well developed with supporting statements, and compelling as evidenced by the use of data to illustrate and support conclusions. 4.5 pts Partially Met The required factors are addressed well, but lacks organization. Improved support for one or two factors is needed. Additional use of numerical figures needed to make the section compelling. Alternatively, the section is well developed and supported, but the student omits one of the factor criteria. 2.5 pts Minimally Met Two required factors are missing from the discussion. The support for each factor is underdeveloped and connections to the selected problem are unclear. Numerical support is minimal. Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 5.5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Policy Option/Position Statement 1. Discussion past legislative efforts and addresses their shortcomings. 2. Introduces and supports a recommendation for a current bill. 3. Provides a working link to the bill. 4.0 pts Fully Met The section includes a thorough summary of previous legislation introduced to solve the selected problem, clearly identifies the gaps left by those legislative efforts, and introduces an appropriate bill from the 116th Congress to address the problem. A summary of the current bill is provided, and the section clearly address how the proposed bill closes the gaps left by previous legislation. A working link to the bill is included. 3.0 pts Partially Met The section is adequately developed but is missing or inadequately addresses one of the following required components: a summary of previous legislation, identified gaps, proposed legislation and summary, and discussion of how the proposed legislation closes identified gaps. 1.0 pts Minimally Met The section is missing or inadequately addresses more than one of the following required components: a summary of previous legislation, identified gaps, proposed legislation and summary, and discussion of how the proposed legislation closes identified gaps. A working link to the bill is not included. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 4.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Evidence-Based Strategies 1. Three strategies from the bills are selected and evaluated for their effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. 2. Conclusions are supported with evidence. 5.5 pts Fully Met The section includes a summary of three selected strategies from the chosen bill. For each strategy, there is discussion of its ability to be effective, efficient, and equitable as applicable. All three Es are addressed somewhere in the section. Supporting statements are evidence-based, use numerals for illustration as applicable, and demonstrates correct understanding of the three E definitions as they relate to policy analysis. 4.0 pts Partially Met The section is adequately developed. Support for the three Es demonstrates a rare or occasional incorrect understanding of the terms. Development of support could be improved or is lacking evidence-based support in some instances; additional figures are necessary to illustrate the conclusions. 2.5 pts Minimally Met The section is minimally developed. Support for the Three Es demonstrates incorrect understanding of the terms in several instances. Three distinct bill strategies were not chosen or clearly articulated. Development of support could be improved or is lacking evidence-based support in some instances, and additional figures are necessary to illustrate the conclusions. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 5.5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Recommendations for Action 1. Recommends a revision to at least one aspect of the bill 2. Supports decision be demonstrating how that aspect did not meet effectiveness, efficiency, or equity standards. 3.0 pts Fully Met The section addresses at least one part of the bill that needs to be revised. The reason for the revision is addressed, and an evidence-based solution is provided. The student makes a connection between the proposed revision and one of the three Es. 2.5 pts Partially Met The section adequately identifies at least one part of the bill that needs revision and support is sufficiently developed. The connection between the recommended change and one of the three Es is missing. 1.0 pts Minimally Met The section identifies a portion of the bill that needs to be revised but does not substantiate the need for that decision or does not offer an evidence-based solution. The section does not include a connection to one of the three Es. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 3.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Preparing for the Opposition 1. Introduces potential opposing stance 2. Discusses evidence to support a rebuttal 3.0 pts Fully Met The section both summarizes a potential opposing view and provides a potential rebuttal. The section is well developed and both stances are supported with evidence from the literature. It is appropriate that the opposing stance be cited with a current event as opposed to an EBP article. 2.5 pts Partially Met The section adequately addresses a potential opposing view and provides an appropriate rebuttal. Evidence supporting either the opposing view or the rebuttal requires additional development or the connection to the presented stances are unclear. 1.0 pts Minimally Met The section summarizes an opposing view without addressing a potential rebuttal. The included stances are not supported with evidence from the literature. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 3.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Language and Styling 1. Organization and visual interest 2. Professional language and voice 3.0 pts Fully Met Language maintains professional voice. Visual interest is used well to enhance the message of the policy brief without being overdone or making the document difficult to read. Although students may have varying artistic abilities, effort in formatting is clear. Brief is organized. 2.0 pts Partially Met Attention to styling and/or organization could be improved. Some styling applied to the look of the brief but additional effort required. Language may occasionally stray from professional voice. 1.0 pts Minimally Met Language strays from professional voice, including the use of jargon or derogatory terms (eg, anti-vaxxer). Paper is essentially in APA format with little effort towards styling or visual interest. Organization is poor and the work is difficult to read. (To be clear, this category is not a judgement of the students artistic ability.) 0.0 pts Not Met Language and professional voice are major concerns. Jargon and derogatory terms used frequently. Brief is submitted as an APA-formatted paper or the format is so poorly organized that the required information cannot be ascertained. 3.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Scholarship 1. Scholarly writing skills 2. Additional deductions may occur for scholarship, tardiness, and Turnitin similarity up to the maximum expressed in the syllabus. 3.0 pts Proficient The students application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and illustration of APA format as applicable are exemplary. See PDF instructions on what is and is not required for this assignment. 2.4 pts Competent The students application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of APA format are good with room for minor improvements. Additional assistance outside of class optional. 1.2 pts Developing The students application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of APA format illustrates some competency with room for moderate improvements. Additional assistance outside of class recommended. 0.0 pts Not Met The students application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of APA format are absent with major improvements necessary. Additional assistance outside of class likely required for success in the course. Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care 3.0 pts Total Points: 30.0 Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10
Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care
Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care Avoid using first person narrative The Bill has already been chosen for you. Detailed instructions/rubric are attached in the document below. Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care instructions_rubric_poli Include APA Title Page Include Headings as listed on rubric 5-6 pages long Minimum of 10 references (APA format, no more than 5 years old) I believe this Bill H.R. 1309 Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care and Social Service Workers Act is an easy selection to write about. The link is below. The bill has only passed The House, and not both House and Senate which is a requirement of the assignment. The site gives a summary explaining the bill, further explanation through texts, actions, titles, amendments etc. on several tabs. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1309?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22federal+healthcare+bills%22%5D%7D&r=7&s=5 RUBRIC Policy Brief Policy Brief Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Executive Summary 1. Introduces purpose of the brief, its timeliness, impact, and the potential benefits of solving the problem. 2. Conclusions are supported with relevant data. 3.0 pts Fully Met In 1-2 well developed paragraphs, the executive summary addresses and supports each required component in the directions and statements are supported with relevant numerical figures. 2.5 pts Partially Met The summary adequately addresses the required questions. Support for the students conclusions requires improvement or statistical support is inadequate. 1.0 pts Minimally Met The summary is underdeveloped as evidenced by not addressing each required component, a lack of support for statements, and/or lack of support from relevant facts and figures. The section far exceeds the 2 paragraph limit or fails to effectively summarize the relevant information. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 3.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Background and Significance 1. Discusses SDOH that impact and are impacted by the issues. 2. Discusses how the following impact or are impacted by the issue: (a) health, (b) the economy, (c) the healthcare system (d) nursing practice or advanced nursing practice, (e) the environment, and (f) human rights (eg, ethical factors and theories). 5.5 pts Fully Met The section includes a robust discussion of the social determinants of health and each required factor and its relationship to the selected problem. The section is organized with the use of headings, well developed with supporting statements, and compelling as evidenced by the use of data to illustrate and support conclusions. 4.5 pts Partially Met The required factors are addressed well, but lacks organization. Improved support for one or two factors is needed. Additional use of numerical figures needed to make the section compelling. Alternatively, the section is well developed and supported, but the student omits one of the factor criteria. 2.5 pts Minimally Met Two required factors are missing from the discussion. The support for each factor is underdeveloped and connections to the selected problem are unclear. Numerical support is minimal. Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 5.5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Policy Option/Position Statement 1. Discussion past legislative efforts and addresses their shortcomings. 2. Introduces and supports a recommendation for a current bill. 3. Provides a working link to the bill. 4.0 pts Fully Met The section includes a thorough summary of previous legislation introduced to solve the selected problem, clearly identifies the gaps left by those legislative efforts, and introduces an appropriate bill from the 116th Congress to address the problem. A summary of the current bill is provided, and the section clearly address how the proposed bill closes the gaps left by previous legislation. A working link to the bill is included. 3.0 pts Partially Met The section is adequately developed but is missing or inadequately addresses one of the following required components: a summary of previous legislation, identified gaps, proposed legislation and summary, and discussion of how the proposed legislation closes identified gaps. 1.0 pts Minimally Met The section is missing or inadequately addresses more than one of the following required components: a summary of previous legislation, identified gaps, proposed legislation and summary, and discussion of how the proposed legislation closes identified gaps. A working link to the bill is not included. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 4.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Evidence-Based Strategies 1. Three strategies from the bills are selected and evaluated for their effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. 2. Conclusions are supported with evidence. 5.5 pts Fully Met The section includes a summary of three selected strategies from the chosen bill. For each strategy, there is discussion of its ability to be effective, efficient, and equitable as applicable. All three Es are addressed somewhere in the section. Supporting statements are evidence-based, use numerals for illustration as applicable, and demonstrates correct understanding of the three E definitions as they relate to policy analysis. 4.0 pts Partially Met The section is adequately developed. Support for the three Es demonstrates a rare or occasional incorrect understanding of the terms. Development of support could be improved or is lacking evidence-based support in some instances; additional figures are necessary to illustrate the conclusions. 2.5 pts Minimally Met The section is minimally developed. Support for the Three Es demonstrates incorrect understanding of the terms in several instances. Three distinct bill strategies were not chosen or clearly articulated. Development of support could be improved or is lacking evidence-based support in some instances, and additional figures are necessary to illustrate the conclusions. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 5.5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Recommendations for Action 1. Recommends a revision to at least one aspect of the bill 2. Supports decision be demonstrating how that aspect did not meet effectiveness, efficiency, or equity standards. 3.0 pts Fully Met The section addresses at least one part of the bill that needs to be revised. The reason for the revision is addressed, and an evidence-based solution is provided. The student makes a connection between the proposed revision and one of the three Es. 2.5 pts Partially Met The section adequately identifies at least one part of the bill that needs revision and support is sufficiently developed. The connection between the recommended change and one of the three Es is missing. 1.0 pts Minimally Met The section identifies a portion of the bill that needs to be revised but does not substantiate the need for that decision or does not offer an evidence-based solution. The section does not include a connection to one of the three Es. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 3.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Preparing for the Opposition 1. Introduces potential opposing stance 2. Discusses evidence to support a rebuttal 3.0 pts Fully Met The section both summarizes a potential opposing view and provides a potential rebuttal. The section is well developed and both stances are supported with evidence from the literature. It is appropriate that the opposing stance be cited with a current event as opposed to an EBP article. 2.5 pts Partially Met The section adequately addresses a potential opposing view and provides an appropriate rebuttal. Evidence supporting either the opposing view or the rebuttal requires additional development or the connection to the presented stances are unclear. 1.0 pts Minimally Met The section summarizes an opposing view without addressing a potential rebuttal. The included stances are not supported with evidence from the literature. 0.0 pts Not Met The section is absent, minimally developed, or addresses material other than what was required. 3.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Language and Styling 1. Organization and visual interest 2. Professional language and voice 3.0 pts Fully Met Language maintains professional voice. Visual interest is used well to enhance the message of the policy brief without being overdone or making the document difficult to read. Although students may have varying artistic abilities, effort in formatting is clear. Brief is organized. 2.0 pts Partially Met Attention to styling and/or organization could be improved. Some styling applied to the look of the brief but additional effort required. Language may occasionally stray from professional voice. 1.0 pts Minimally Met Language strays from professional voice, including the use of jargon or derogatory terms (eg, anti-vaxxer). Paper is essentially in APA format with little effort towards styling or visual interest. Organization is poor and the work is difficult to read. (To be clear, this category is not a judgement of the students artistic ability.) 0.0 pts Not Met Language and professional voice are major concerns. Jargon and derogatory terms used frequently. Brief is submitted as an APA-formatted paper or the format is so poorly organized that the required information cannot be ascertained. 3.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Scholarship 1. Scholarly writing skills 2. Additional deductions may occur for scholarship, tardiness, and Turnitin similarity up to the maximum expressed in the syllabus. 3.0 pts Proficient The students application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and illustration of APA format as applicable are exemplary. See PDF instructions on what is and is not required for this assignment. 2.4 pts Competent The students application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of APA format are good with room for minor improvements. Additional assistance outside of class optional. 1.2 pts Developing The students application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of APA format illustrates some competency with room for moderate improvements. Additional assistance outside of class recommended. 0.0 pts Not Met The students application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of APA format are absent with major improvements necessary. Additional assistance outside of class likely required for success in the course. Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care 3.0 pts Total Points: 30.0 Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10
Use Promo Code: FIRST15