NURS FPX 6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation
University:
Capella University
NURS FPX 6004 Assessment 1 Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation
Paper Instructions
Write a 4-6-page report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance, with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.
Introduction
In the era of health care reform, many of the laws and policies set forth by government at the local, state, and federal levels have specific performance benchmarks related to care delivery outcomes that organizations must achieve. It is critical for organizational success that the interprofessional care team is able to understand reports and dashboards that display the metrics related to performance and compliance benchmarks.
Maintaining standards and promoting quality in modern health care are crucial, not only for the care of patients, but also for the continuing success and financial viability of health care organizations. In the era of health care reform, health care leaders must understand what quality care entails and how quality in health care connects to the standards set forth by relevant federal, state, and local laws and policies. An understanding of relevant benchmarks that result from these laws and policies, and how they relate to quality care and regulatory standards, is also vitally important.
Health care is a dynamic, complex, and heavily regulated industry. For this reason, you will be expected to constantly scan the external environment for emerging laws, new regulations, and changing industry standards. You may discover that as new policies are enacted into law, ambiguity in interpretation of various facets of the law may occur. Sometimes, new laws conflict with preexisting laws and regulations, or unexpected implementation issues arise, which may warrant further clarification from lawmakers. Adding partisan politics and social media to the mix can further complicate understanding of the process and buy-in from stakeholders.
Note: Your evaluation of dashboard metrics for this assessment is the foundation on which all subsequent assessments are based. Therefore, you must complete this assessment first.
Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.
Review the performance dashboard metrics, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.
Note: Remember that you can submit all, or a portion of, your draft report to Smarthinking for feedback, before you submit the final version for this assessment. If you plan on using this free service, be mindful of the turnaround time of 24-48 hours for receiving feedback.
Preparation
Choose one of the following three options for a performance dashboard to use as the basis for your evaluation
Option 1: Dashboard Metrics Evaluation Simulation
Use the data presented in the Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation multimedia activity as the basis for your evaluation.
Note: The writing that you do as part of the simulation could serve as a starting point to build upon for this assessment.
Option 2: Actual Dashboard
Use an actual dashboard from a professional practice setting for your evaluation. If you decide to use actual dashboard metrics, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:
- The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
- The specific type of care delivery.
- The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
- The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.
Note: Ensure your data are Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.
Option 3: Hypothetical Dashboard
If you have a sophisticated understanding of dashboards relevant to your own practice, you may also construct a hypothetical dashboard for your evaluation. Your hypothetical dashboard must present at least four different metrics, at least two of which must be underperforming the prescribed benchmark set forth by a federal, state, or local laws or policies. In addition, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:
- The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
- The specific type of care delivery.
- The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
- The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.
Note: Ensure your data are HIPAA compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.
Instructions
Note: Your evaluation of dashboard metrics for this assessment is the foundation on which all subsequent assessments are based. Therefore, you must complete this assessment first.
Write a report for a senior leader that communicates your evaluation of current organizational or interprofessional team performance with respect to prescribed benchmarks set forth by government laws and policies at the local, state, and federal levels. In addition, advocate for ethical action to address benchmark underperformance and explain the potential for improving the overall quality of care and performance, as reflected on a performance dashboard.
Review the performance dashboard metrics, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks. Structure your report so that it will be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need, and be sure to cite the relevant health care policies or laws when evaluating metric performance against established benchmarks.
We Work Hard So That You Don’t
We’ll write a 100% plagiarism-free paper in under 1 hour.
Sample Answer
In everyday health practice, health care practitioners and organizations work to achieve a set target. They commit their energy and resources to meet the desired levels of care quality and patient safety as legally, ethically and professionally required. To achieve the desired outcomes, health care providers are guided by performance benchmarks. From a health care perspective, dashboards serve as the most reliable analytic tools for monitoring key performance indicators.
They contain metrics that enable health care providers to access crucial patient statistics and intervene approximately as areas of underperformance obligate. Based on the dashboard data for substance use disorder (SUD) at an emergency room (ER), this paper explains the implications of underperformance in key areas and the role of stakeholders in performance improvement.
Dashboard Metrics for CareM Medical Center (ER) Last quarter 2019
| Area of Performance | Status | Target | Compliance Percentage |
| SUD screening | 450 | 400 | 100% |
| Waiting hour average | 80 minutes | 40 minutes | 50% |
| Motivational interviewing for SUD | 180 | 150 | 100% |
| Number of beds | 10 | 20 | 50% |
| Nurse patient ratio | 1:5 | 1:4 | 80% |
Hospital overview
CareM Medical Center is located in Bakersfield, California. Operating majorly in an under-resourced setting, the facility targets low-income earners. For a while, substance use disorder (SUD) has been a key focus area in the center’s emergency room. The data indicates areas of underperformance, implying that interventions are necessary to change the described state.
Evaluation Metrics not Meeting Organizational Benchmark
Health care organizations must meet benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies. The targets indicated on the dashboard are quality performance standards that CareM Medical Center should strive to meet consistently. Based on this data, the metrics not meeting the benchmark include SUD screening, waiting hour average, number of beds, and nurse to patient ratio. It is a genuine concern considering the areas affected critically affect patient outcomes.
Health Care Policies Establishing the Benchmarks
Located in Bakersfield, CareM Medical Center is primarily regulated by California laws. The number of patients served daily, referrals, and emergency care should follow California health law. It is also crucial to consider what federal policies recommend about the stated benchmark metrics. The average waiting time in an emergency room (ER) is forty minutes. The other area governed by law is the nurse to patient ratio in the ER. California recommends a ratio of 1 4 (Dembosky, 2020).
The number of beds should be adequate to prevent overcrowding. From this evaluation, attention should shift to practices that can reduce waiting time in the ER. However, the evaluation could have been better if there was data to compare progress over time. For instance, data in the other three quarters in 2019 can help examine the progress to ascertain whether attention should be on reducing waiting time to meet the federal recommendations or other areas.
Challenges Associated with Meeting Prescribed Benchmarks
Meeting the prescribed benchmarks is always challenging from an organizational perspective. To ensure that patients are adequately served, health care providers and medical equipment must be sufficient. Interprofessional collaboration should be high enabled by modern health technologies, among other means. To achieve this, health care organizations must look for the necessary resources to address current and emerging needs.
They are forced to search for operational and capital funding and invest resources to get the required financial resources. Support services must be plenty too. Since health care organizations are not investment-oriented, the inadequacy of resources usually hinders them from serving patients and the community as their strategic missions envisage.
Financial and operational challenges are central to the underperformance seen in staffing. For health care organizations to have the required number of health care providers, adequate financial resources are vital. Processes such as recruitment, motivation, and performance appraisal depend on financial resources. Salaries for the extra workforce and facilities such as accommodation are money-based. Accordingly, the nurse patient ratio will depend on the organization’s resources to a considerable extent. Based on CareM’s setting, the nurse-patient ratio of 1 5 is sensible, albeit the need for improvement.
Benchmark with Great Impacts on Overall Performance
From the highlighted underperformance areas, the nurse patient ratio in the ER can significantly improve overall performance. Nurse patient ratio affects nurses’ productivity since it can deter their motivation and ability to work due to heavy workload if the ratio is too high (Gutsan et al., 2018). Overworking as nurses try to achieve the set benchmarks leads to nurse burnout.
The nurse patient ratio in the ER determines how nurses approach routine care without making medication errors. Handling a manageable number of patients allows nurses to work on patients quickly and avoid overcrowding in emergency rooms (Hawk & D’Onofrio, 2018). If not overwhelmed, nurses would also be better positioned to liaise with outside physicians to determine whether patients require emergency visits accurately.
Benchmark of Interest Average Waiting Hour
Together with the number of beds, the average waiting hour is the benchmark I chose for improvement. In the medical center, the average waiting time is eighty minutes, double the allowable average of forty minutes. A review of the causes of high waiting time in emergency rooms revealed that beds’ inadequacy is a leading cause. The other reason is that medical facilities do not give outside physicians the privilege to admit patients, making ER visits higher than usual. Unless the issue of referrals is addressed, the situation is unlikely to change soonest to improve health outcomes.
Regarding the benchmark underperformance that is most widespread throughout the organization, the inadequate number of beds deserves a lot of attention. It is more of an administrative problem than a policy issue. A low number of beds implies that SUD patients cannot be released for admission and pave the way to screen other patients since they must stay in beds. Accordingly, this problem becomes the most impacting on patients and staff. To patients, the waiting time increases, risking their health further. It can be a source of demotivation to serve for nurses since the number waiting to be served is proportional to the waiting time.
Impacts of Underperformance on the Community
Ethically and professionally, health care organizations are mandated to provide excellent quality care and prioritize patient safety. High waiting time is a disservice to the community served and violates the principle of health care equity. According to Reese (2019), high waiting time in emergency rooms affects the health of millions of Americans yearly, and many usually leave health care facilities without attendance or partially attended.
This disservice is also a leading cause of more extended hospital stays since the chances of health complications as patients wait to be served are high. High waiting time increases medical errors and patients’ death rates (Martinez et al., 2019). As a result, the community health is affected adversely, and attention to enhance performance is necessary.
Opportunity to Improve the Overall Quality of Care
CareM Medical Center can prevent risking patients’ lives by addressing the issue of high waiting time. In the current setup, the best way to lower waiting is to ensure that the ER has adequate beds to accommodate more patients as they receive SUD services. If possible, administrative interventions to increase the number of registered nurses to match the State’s threshold are crucial. Doing so will ensure that nurses are more empowered and supported to serve patients irrespective of the increasing numbers.
Ethical Action
Health care facilities operate as they follow administrative and legal policies. Internal and external policies guide them, and violation of the set policies has severe legal and ethical implications. In the current setup at CareM Medical Center, a huge portion of the patients visiting the emergency room are referred by outside physicians. They (outside physicians) refer many patients to the ER since they are not professionally mandated to provide complete SUD care.
Outside physicians lack admitting privileges. They cannot admit a patient directly, implying that almost all the medical center’s admissions come through the ER. Accordingly, it is crucial to increase outside physicians admitting privileges to reduce unnecessary visits to the ER. Visits to the ER should be reserved for critically ill patients. Responsible Stakeholders play a critical role in the running of health care facilities. Their decisions have huge implications on how an organization functions and policies made every day.
To improve waiting time at CareM Medical Center, the best-positioned group of stakeholders is the quality service board. The board consists of the facility’s administration, and patients, community, and legal representatives. Its work is quality assurance and searching for resources to enhance performance, particularly donation. The board is also responsible for policy formulation to ensure that services meet the expected quality standards.
Importance of Action
Always, health care facilities should be concerned when their services fail to meet the desired benchmark. Underperformance has huge implications on the quality of care and patient safety, and interventions to match the legally and ethically set standards are imperative. When facilitated to serve, nurses will also be motivated to offer their services, and the chances of burnout will reduce. CareM Medical Center will also be safe from legal violations. Such interventions will enable the facility to continue serving the community diligently as its mission statement envisages.
Supporting Improved Benchmark Performance
The stakeholder group can apply several strategies to support improved benchmark performance. It can improve interprofessional collaboration between outside physicians and the ER nurses to prevent unnecessary ER visits. When outside physicians and ER nurses collaborate to assess a patient, physicians would be more empowered to admit patients directly without an ER visit. However, such a change in the work structure needs some policy formulations to advance the role of outside physicians that is somewhat limited.
In conclusion, quality health delivery is challenging when a health care facility is underperforming in some areas. Dashboard metrics are reliable reference points to determine whether a health care facility performs as the local, state, or federal laws obligate. CareM Medical Center’s close assessment shows that it needs to improve on nurse patient ratio, average waiting hours, and the number of beds in the ER. Policy and administrative interventions to change the current state include giving outside physicians more admission privileges, increasing the number of nurses, and looking for financial resources to buy more beds in the emergency room.
References
- Dembosky, A. (2020, Dec 30). California is overriding its limits on nurse workloads as COVID-19 surges. npr. https //www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/12/30/950177471/california-is-overriding-its-limits-on-nurse-workloads-as-covid-19-surges
- Gutsan, E., Patton, J., Willis, W. K., & PH, C. D. (2018). Burnout syndrome and nurse-to-patient ratio in the workplace. Marshall University. https //mds.marshall.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https //www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1196&context=mgmt_faculty
- Hawk, K., & D’Onofrio, G. (2018). Emergency department screening and interventions for substance use disorders. Addiction science & clinical practice, 13(1), 1-6. https //ascpjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13722-018-0117-1
- Martinez, D. A., Zhang, H., Bastias, M., Feijoo, F., Hinson, J., Martinez, R., … & Prieto, D. (2019). Prolonged wait time is associated with increased mortality for Chilean waiting list patients with non-prioritized conditions. BMC public health, 19(1), 1-11. https //bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-019-6526-6
- Reese, P. (2019, May 17). As ER wait times grow, more patients leave against medical advice. KHN. https //khn.org/news/as-er-wait-times-grow-more-patients-leave-against-medical-advice/
We Work Hard So That You Don’t
We’ll write a 100% plagiarism-free paper in under 1 hour