Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper
Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper
In this assignment, students will pull together the change proposal project components they have been working on throughout the course to create a proposal inclusive of sections for each content focus area in the course. At the conclusion of this project, the student will be able to apply evidence-based research steps and processes required as the foundation to address a clinically oriented problem or issue in future practice.
ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED SOLUTION PAPERS
Students will develop a 1,250-1,500 word paper that includes the following information as it applies to the problem, issue, suggestion, initiative, or educational need profiled in the capstone change proposal: Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper
- Background
- Problem statement
- Purpose of the change proposal
- PICOT
- Literature search strategy employed
- Evaluation of the literature
- Applicable change or nursing theory utilized
- Proposed implementation plan with outcome measures
- Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation, and a discussion of how these could be overcome
- Appendix section, if tables, graphs, surveys, educational materials, etc. are created
Review the feedback from your instructor on the Topic 3 assignment, PICOT Statement Paper, and Topic 6 assignment, Literature Review. Use the feedback to make appropriate revisions to the portfolio components before submitting.
ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED SOLUTION PAPERS
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required. Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Rubic_Print_Format
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | |||||
| NRS-490 | NRS-490-O501 | Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal | 300.0 | |||||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory 0-71% (0.00%) | Less Than Satisfactory 72-75% (75.00%) | Satisfactory 76-79% (79.00%) | Good 80-89% (89.00%) | Excellent 90-100% (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 60.0% | |||||||
| Background | 5.0% | Background section is not present.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Background section is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Background section is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. | Background section is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Background section is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Problem Statement | 5.0% | Problem statement is not present. | Problem statement is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. | Problem statement is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. | Problem statement is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Problem statement is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Change Proposal Purpose | 5.0% | Purpose of change proposal is not present.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Purpose of change proposal is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. | Purpose of change proposal is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Purpose of change proposal is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Purpose of change proposal is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| PICOT | 5.0% | PICOT is not present. | PICOT is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. | PICOT is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. | PICOT is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | PICOT is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Literature Search Strategy | 5.0% | Literature search strategy is not present.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Literature search strategy is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. | Literature search strategy is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Literature search strategy is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Literature search strategy is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Literature Evaluation | 5.0% | Literature evaluation is not present.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Literature evaluation is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. | Literature evaluation is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Literature evaluation is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Literature evaluation is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Utilization of Change or Nursing Theory (2.2) | 5.0% | Theory utilization is not present.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Theory utilization content is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. | Theory utilization content is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. | Theory utilization content is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Theory utilization content is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Proposed Implementation Plan with Outcome Measures (3.2) | 5.0% | Implementation plan is not present. | Implementation plan is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Implementation plan is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. | Implementation plan is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Implementation plan is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation, and a discussion of how these could be overcome (2.3) | 5.0% | Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation and /or discussion component is not present.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation with a discussion component is present, but is incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. | Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation with a discussion component is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. | Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation with a discussion component is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation with a discussion component is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Appendices Inclusive of Practice Immersion Clinical Documentation (1.2) | 5.0% | Appendices are not present. | Appendices are present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. | Appendices are present with minor elements missing that do not impede understanding. | Appendices are present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. | Appendices are present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. | ||
| Evidence of Revision | 10.0% | Final paper does not demonstrate incorporation of feedback or evidence of revision on research critiques. | Incorporation of research critique feedback or evidence of revision is incomplete.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | Incorporation of research critique feedback and evidence of revision are present. | Evidence of incorporation of research critique feedback and revision is clearly provided. | Evidence of incorporation of research critique feedback and revision is comprehensive and thoroughly developed. | ||
| Organization and Effectiveness | 30.0% | |||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 10.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | 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 | 10.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | 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) | 10.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | 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. | ||
| Format | 10.0% | |||||||
| 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.Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper | 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% |
PICOT Statement for Inadequate Nurse Staffing
Professional Capstone Project
NRS- 490-0501
Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal Paper
