Benchmark – Risk Management Program Analysis
Order ID | 53563633773 |
Type | Essay |
Writer Level | Masters |
Style | APA |
Sources/References | 4 |
Language | English |
Description/Paper Instructions The purpose of this assignment is to analyze how an organization’s quality and improvement processes contribute to its risk management program. This assignment builds on the Risk Management Program Analysis – Part One assignment you completed in Topic 1 of this course. Assume that the sample risk management program you analyzed in Topic 1 was implemented and is now currently in use by your health care employer/organization. Further assume that your supervisor has asked you to create a high‐level summary brief of this new risk management program to share with a group of administrative personnel from a newly created community health organization in your state who has enlisted your organization’s assistance in developing their own risk management policies and procedures. Compose a 1,250‐1,500 word summary brief that expands upon the elements you first addressed in the Topic 1 assignment. In this summary brief, address the following points regarding your health care organization and its risk management program:
In addition to your textbook, you are required to support your analysis with a minimum of three peer‐reviewed references. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance. Benchmark Information This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies: BS Health Sciences 3.3 Explain the ethical and legal responsibilities of health care professionals related to risk management assessment and policies. Risk Management Program Introduction The healthcare sector just like other sectors faces numerous risks that may affect the functionality of an organization if they were to occur or materialize. One such risk and which forms the basis of this paper is physical security. Physical security is crucial to the safety of the personnel, hardware and software found within a healthcare setting (Alguliyev, Imamverdiyev & Sukhostat, 2018). However, certain internal and external factors such as theft, manmade catastrophes, accidents, vandalism, and natural disasters among others may cause very serious damages and loss to a healthcare facility (World Health Organization, 2017). Given the potential damages that can occur to a healthcare facility due to physical security breaches, the topic is very important. Rationale As observed in the introduction, health facilities face many threats to their physical security. Despite this many healthcare facilities’ risk management programs increasingly focus on ensuring prevention of the threats that are considered more technical such as the prevention of malware and cyber-attacks especially since the advent and spread of digital technologies (World Health Organization, 2017). Given this, the purpose of the proposed risk management education program is to equip the employees with the knowledge to not only identify potential threats to physical security but also on the reporting mechanisms and the immediate responses to any breach in physical security. Support According to Peltier, (2016), physical security is a very crucial yet ignored topic when it comes to risk management in the health sector. This is because it forms the basis through which healthcare facilities can ensure the protection of all other information technologies, personnel and even patient. Moreover, unlike most threats that occur to a healthcare facility, physical security is very easy to breach unless a facility has taken adequate protective and preventive measures (Fennelly, 2016). Employees within a healthcare facility constitute crucial stakeholders in the management of physical security risks. This is because not only do they contribute to many physical security breaches through accidents, vandalism and even theft but can be very useful in detecting potential threats to physical security and initiating recovery measures in the event of a disaster (Fennelly, 2016). Training employees on physical security is therefore very important in ensuring quick and efficient recovery from disasters and even prevention. Implementation The education risk management program will be implemented using the steps described in the preceding section. First, the organization will communicate the purpose of the program to all employees as a basis for obtaining support towards it and ensuring clarity regarding the objectives and expectations of the program (Müller, Strukava, Scholl, Härter, Diouf, Légaré & Buchholz, 2019). Secondly, the implementers will seek approval and identify the required resources for implementing the program. Once this is achieved, the program implementers will select employees to take part in the training and who in turn will be expected to train other employees within the organization (World Health Organization, 2017). This will reduce the time and costs required to implement the program saving the organization crucial resources. Expected challenges The main challenge that is expected some resistance from employees since they have been used to acting in a given manner. However, though clear communication and engagement both in the development and implementation of the program the challenge will be addressed. In ddiyion, the program may face certain resource constraints which however can be addressed through partnerships and management support. Evaluation. Data on the implementation of the project will be continuously collected. Subsequently, indicators of the expected outcomes will be developed (Peltier, 2016). These indicators will be measures against the actual outcomes from the program to check whether it has met its expectations and within the planned and available budgets or resources. Opportunities Besides training employees on physical security, the organization can implement training programs on the protection of technologies and software to safeguard it from any potential beaches in future hence reducing the costs associated with risk mitigation and management. References Alguliyev, R., Imamverdiyev, Y., & Sukhostat, L. (2018). Cyber-physical systems and their security issues. Computers in Industry, 100, 212-223. Fennelly, L. J. (2016). Effective physical security. Butterworth-Heinemann. Hopkin, P. (2018). Fundamentals of risk management: understanding, evaluating and implementing effective risk management. Kogan Page Publishers. Müller, E., Strukava, A., Scholl, I., Härter, M., Diouf, N. T., Légaré, F., & Buchholz, A. (2019). Strategies to evaluate healthcare provider trainings in shared decision-making (SDM): a systematic review of evaluation studies. BMJ open, 9(6), e026488. Peltier, T. R. (2016). Information Security Policies, Procedures, and Standards: guidelines for effective information security management. Auerbach Publications. World Health Organization. (2017). Patient safety: making health care safer (No. WHO/HIS/SDS/2017.11). World Health Organization. |
Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | |||
HLT-308V | HLT-308V-O501 | Benchmark – Risk Management Program Analysis – Part Two | 150.0 | |||
Criteria | Percentage | 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | 2: Less Than Satisfactory (65.00%) | 3: Satisfactory (75.00%) | 4: Good (85.00%) | 5: Excellent (100.00%) |
% Scaling | 100.0% | |||||
Role of the MIPPA-Approved Accreditation Body in Evaluation of the Quality Improvement and Risk Management Processes of an Organization | 15.0% | An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is not included. | An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient. | An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components. | An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is present and incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support. | An explanation of the role that the MIPPA-approved accreditation body plays in the evaluation of the quality improvement and risk management processes of an organization is comprehensive. The submission further incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate. |
Administrative Roles Relevant to Employer-Employee-Focused Risk Management Strategies and Operational Policies | 15.0% | A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is not included. | A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is partially incorporated, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient. | A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components. | A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support. | A description of the roles administrative personnel play relevant to employer-employee-focused risk management strategies and operational policies is comprehensive. The submission incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate. |
Support of Patient Rights and Responsibilities by Risk Management Programs and Quality Improvement Processes | 15.0% | An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is not included. | An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is partially incorporated, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient. | An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components. | An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support. | An illustration of how the rights and responsibilities of a patient are supported by risk management programs and quality improvement processes is comprehensive. The submission incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate. |
Legal and Ethical Responsibilities of Health Care Professionals to Uphold Risk Management Policies and Administer Safe Health Care (C3.3) | 15.0% | An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is not included. | An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is partially incorporated, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient. | An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components. | An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support. | An explanation of the legal and ethical responsibilities of health care professionals to uphold risk management policies and administer safe health care is comprehensive. The submission incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate. |
How Quality Improvement Processes in a Health Care Organization Support Its Journey to Excellence | 15.0% | Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its journey to excellence is not included. | Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its Journey to Excellence is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient. | Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its Journey to Excellence is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components. | Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its Journey to Excellence is incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support. | Evidence of how the quality improvement processes of a health care organization support its Journey to Excellence is comprehensive. The submission further incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate. |
Thesis Development and Purpose | 5.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
Argument Logic and Construction | 5.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
Total Weightage | 100% |
https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!! |