Developing a small informatics project for your organization, part 2:

Ace your studies with our custom writing services! We've got your back for top grades and timely submissions, so you can say goodbye to the stress. Trust us to get you there!


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

The assignment is about introducing an EHR where Alerts will notify medical staff of critical results or patient safety issues.  Please follow the Rubric uploaded. Please use only  Peer-reviewed journal articles . 

NURS_8210_Week9_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

All documents from Part 1 are included in the Part 2 submission.

150 to >134.0 pts

Excellent

All documents and tracking tools submitted from Part 1 have been revised and accurately updated in detail to sufficiently support the proposed small nursing informatics project.

134 to >119.0 pts

Good

All documents and tracking tools submitted from Part 1 have been revised and updated to support the proposed small nursing informatics project.

119 to >104.0 pts

Fair

All documents and tracking tools submitted from Part 1 have been inaccurately or vaguely revised and may support the proposed small nursing informatics project.

104 to >0 pts

Poor

All documents and tracking tools from Part 1 have been inaccurately and vaguely revised, and do not lend support to the proposed small nursing informatics project, or it is missing.

150 pts

Is the project staying within scope?

40 to >35.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether the project is staying within scope…. The response accurately and clearly adheres to the project scope provided in the final submission.

35 to >31.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether the project is staying within scope. … The response accurately adheres to the project scope provided in the final submission.

31 to >27.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether the project is staying within scope. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the project scope provided in the final submission.

27 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether the project is staying within scope, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely adheres to the project scope provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

40 pts

Were all of the gaps identified?

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether all the gaps were identified for the proposed small nursing informatics project. … The response accurately and clearly adheres to the Gap Analysis provided in the final submission.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether all the gaps were identified for the proposed small nursing informatics project…. The response accurately adheres to the Gap Analysis provided in the final submission.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether all the gaps were identified for the proposed small nursing informatics project. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the Gap Analysis provided in the final submission.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether all the gaps were identified for the proposed small nursing informatics project, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely adheres to the Gap Analysis provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

20 pts

Is the project following the timeline?

40 to >35.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether the project is following the timeline. … The response accurately and clearly adheres to the project timeline provided in the final submission.

35 to >31.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether the project is following the timeline. … The response accurately adheres to the project timeline provided in the final submission.

31 to >27.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether the project is following the timeline. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the project timeline provided in the final submission.

27 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether the project is following the timeline, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely adheres to the project timeline provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

40 pts

If you had a budget, is it on track?

40 to >35.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether the project is adhering to the proposed budget.

35 to >31.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether the project is adhering to the proposed budget.

31 to >27.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether the project is adhering to the proposed budget.

27 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether the project is adhering to the proposed budget, or it is missing.

40 pts

Were all of the work activities correctly assigned?

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether all the work activities were correctly assigned. … The response accurately and clearly adheres to the Work Breakdown Structure provided in the final submission.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether all the work activities were correctly assigned. … The response accurately adheres to the Work Breakdown Structure provided in the final submission.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether all the work activities were correctly assigned. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the Work Breakdown Structure provided in the final submission.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether all the work activities were correctly assigned, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the Work Breakdown Structure provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

20 pts

Are team members responsible?

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether all team members were responsible for the proposed small nursing informatics project. … The response accurately and clearly adheres to the responsibility chart provided in the final submission.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether all team members were responsible for the proposed small nursing informatics project. … The response accurately adheres to the responsibility chart provided in the final submission.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether all team members were responsible for the proposed small nursing informatics project. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the responsibility chart provided in the final submission.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether all team members were responsible for the proposed small nursing informatics project, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely adheres to the responsibility chart provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

20 pts

Did the project start on time, inline to meet due dates?

40 to >35.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether the small nursing informatics project started on time and is inline to meet due dates. … The response accurately and clearly adheres to the Gantt chart provided in the final submission.

35 to >31.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether the small nursing informatics project started on time and is inline to meet due dates. … The response accurately adheres to the Gantt chart provided in the final submission.

31 to >27.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether the small nursing informatics project started on time and is inline to meet due dates. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the Gantt chart provided in the final submission.

27 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether the small nursing informatics project started on time and is inline to meet due dates, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely adheres to the Gantt chart provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

40 pts

Are you holding weekly status meetings and documented all activities? Are all team members in attendance and communicated with?

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether weekly status meetings and documentation of all activities for the project has occurred. … The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether all team members have participated, attended, and been in active communication for the project. … The response accurately and clearly adheres to the communication plan provided in the final submission.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether weekly status meetings and documentation of all activities for the project has occurred. … The response accurately explains whether all team members have participated, attended, and been in active communication for the project. … The response accurately adheres to the communication plan provided in the final submission.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether weekly status meetings and documentation of all activities for the project has occurred. … The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether all team members have participated, attended, and been in active communication for the project. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the communication plan provided in the final submission.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether weekly status meetings and documentation of all activities for the project has occurred, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether all team members have participated, attended, and been in active communication for the project, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely adheres to the communication plan provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

20 pts

Are all changes approved and documented?

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether all changes for the small nursing informatics project were approved and documented. … The response accurately and clearly adheres to the change management plan provided in the final submission.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether all changes for the small nursing informatics project were approved and documented. … The response accurately adheres to the change management plan provided in the final submission.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether all changes for the small nursing informatics project were approved and documented. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the change management plan provided in the final submission.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether all changes for the small nursing informatics project were approved and documented, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely adheres to the change management plan provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

20 pts

Are all risks identified, prioritized, assigned an owner, and mitigation plan developed?

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail whether all risks were identified, prioritized, assigned an owner, and whether mitigation plans were developed. … The response accurately and clearly adheres to the risk management plan provided in the final submission.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains whether all risks were identified, prioritized, assigned an owner, and whether mitigation plans were developed. … The response accurately adheres to the risk management plan provided in the final submission.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains whether all risks were identified, prioritized, assigned an owner, and whether mitigation plans were developed. … The response inaccurately or vaguely adheres to the risk management plan provided in the final submission.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains whether all risks were identified, prioritized, assigned and owner, and whether mitigation plans were developed, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely adheres to the risk management plan provided in the final submission, or it is missing.

20 pts

A final summary that includes complete evaluation of the full project and lessons learned: what went well and what needs updated and revised.

55 to >48.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly summarizes in detail a complete and comprehensive evaluation of the proposed small nursing informatics project. … The response accurately and clearly explains in detail lessons learned from the proposed small nursing informatics project.

48 to >43.0 pts

Good

The response accurately summarizes a complete evaluation of the proposed small nursing informatics project. … The response accurately explains lessons learned from the proposed small nursing informatics project.

43 to >37.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes a complete evaluation of the proposed small nursing informatics project. … The response inaccurately or vaguely explains lessons learned from the proposed small nursing informatics project.

37 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes a complete evaluation of the proposed small nursing informatics project, or it is missing. … The response inaccurately and vaguely explains lessons learned from the proposed small nursing informatics project, or it is missing.

55 pts

Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

5 pts

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

5 pts

Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts

Total Points: 500

NURS_8210_Week9_Assignment_Rubric

SWOT ANALYSIS

STRENGTH

· Reduces medical errors

· Alerts significant lab results

· Make health information available

WEAKNESSES

· Risk of violating privacy

· Outdated data, if not updated

· Alert fatigue on Staff

OPPORTUNITIES

· Expand software testing

· Increase the usability of EHR software

· Reducing clinically irrelevant warning

THREATS

· Lack of computer skills

· Unfamiliarity with the system

· Technical glitches

Gantt Chart

Activity

Timeline

April

May

June

July

August

4/26

5/1

6/8

7/15

Creating core team

Developing project plan and timeline for selection and implementation

Identifying EHR critical components and requirements.

Develop the Request for Implementation

Identifying and evaluating vendors

Complete EHR demos for identified vendors

Finalize the contract and continue with EHR implementation.

Communication Plan

The communication strategy should set a communication network based on the project team’s organizational structure. The network should connect every organization horizontally and vertically and feature formal and informal communication channels.

Communication

Method

Frequency

Goal

Owner

Audience

Project Status Report

Email

Weekly

Review project status & discuss possible issues.

Project Manager

Project Team & Sponsor

Team Standup

Meeting

Daily

Discuss each team member’s responsibilities

Project Manager

Project Team

Project Review

Meeting

At milestones

Project deliveries were examined, and feedback was gathered for the next meeting.

Project Manager

Project Team & Sponsor

Postmortem Meeting

Meeting

At the end of the project

Evaluating what worked and what did not work.

Project Manager

Project Team

Task progress Updates

Team Gantt

Daily

Share daily progress

Project Manager

Project Team

Risk Management Plan

Various risks can occur during implementation hence the need for a risk management plan. The process that will be used to reduce the occurrence of risks during implementation includes:

Identifying all potential risks that may impact the project is essential. The risks can easily be identified through brainstorming a possible solution

Risk assessment: It is essential to assess an identified risk to determine its possible impact in case it occurs. Also, evaluating risk will enable the team to determine its potential to occur.

Monitoring risk: lastly, monitoring the identified risks throughout is essential to ensure they are controlled effectively.

Risk Management Plan

Controlling the risk: The team will develop control measures to reduce the chances of it occurring. Some control helps to eliminate the threat.

image1.png

Writerbay.net

Looking for top-notch essay writing services? We've got you covered! Connect with our writing experts today. Placing your order is easy, taking less than 5 minutes. Click below to get started.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper