Herzing University Proposal for Accredited Health Plans Paper

/in /by

Herzing University Proposal for Accredited Health Plans Paper

Herzing University Proposal for Accredited Health Plans Paper

Unit 3 Assignment – Proposal for Accredited Health Plans

Submit Assignment

  • Due Sunday by 11:59pm
  • Points 30
  • Submitting a text entry box, a website url, a media recording, or a file upload

The National Committee for Quality Assurance ensures the quality of managed care plans as well as offering accreditation programs and programs to drive quality health care services. Certification and physician recognition programs support the focus on quality patient care rather than volume. Herzing University Proposal for Accredited Health Plans Paper

ORDER   A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER   NOW

Instructions

  • Research the Health Plan Accreditations.
  • Develop a proposal for your local Department of Health outlining the need for accredited health plans in your local area.
  • Your proposal should include specific information regarding the accreditations available, and how these accreditations can improve the overall health status of your community.
  • Your proposal should be at least 450 words, using data from the accreditation website you chose to support your claims and recommendations.

Rubric

Unit 3 Assignment – Proposal for Accredited Health Plans

Unit 3 Assignment – Proposal for Accredited Health Plans 
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
10.0 ptsLevel 5 

Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors. Herzing University Proposal for Accredited Health Plans Paper

 9.0 ptsLevel 4 

Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement, thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, and problem statement is adequately detailed.

 8.0 ptsLevel 3 

Begins to demonstrate the ability to construct a problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, but problem statement is superficial.

 7.0 ptsLevel 2 

Demonstrates a limited ability in identifying a problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement or related contextual factors.

 6.0 ptsLevel 1 

Demonstrates the ability to explain contextual factors but does not provide a defined statement.

 0.0 ptsLevel 0 

There is no evidence of a defined statement.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysisPRICE-P
10.0 ptsLevel 5 

Organizes and compares evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.

 9.0 ptsLevel 4 

Organizes and interprets evidence to reveal patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.

 8.0 ptsLevel 3 

Organizes and describes evidence according to patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.

 7.0 ptsLevel 2 

Organizes evidence, but the organization is not effective in revealing patterns, differences, or similarities.

 6.0 ptsLevel 1 

Describes evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus.

 0.0 ptsLevel 0 

Lists evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
5.0 ptsLevel 5 

The paper exhibits an excellent command of written English languageconventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling.

 4.5 ptsLevel 4 

The paper exhibits a good command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics or spelling with minor grammatical errors that impair the flow of communication.

 4.0 ptsLevel 3 

The paper exhibits a basic command of written English language conventions. The paper has minor errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impact the flow of communication.

 3.5 ptsLevel 2 

The paper exhibits a limited command of written English language conventions. The paper has frequent errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impede the flow of communication.

 3.0 ptsLevel 1 

The paper exhibits little command of written English language conventions. The paper has errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader to stop and reread parts of the writing to discern meaning.

 0.0 ptsLevel 0 

The paper does not demonstrate command of written English language conventions. The paper has multiple errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader difficulty in discerning the meaning.
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPAPRICE-I
5.0 ptsLevel 5 

The required APA elements are all included with correct formatting, including in-text citations and references.

 4.5 ptsLevel 4 

The required APA elements are all included with minor formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.

 4.0 ptsLevel 3 

The required APA elements are all included with multiple formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.

 3.5 ptsLevel 2 

The required APA elements are not all included and/or there are major formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.

 3.0 ptsLevel 1 

Several APA elements are missing. The errors in formatting demonstrate a limited understanding of APA guidelines, in-text-citations, and references.

 0.0 ptsLevel 0 

There is little to no evidence of APA formatting and/or there are no in-text citations and/or references.
5.0 pts
Total Points: 30.0