250-350 Words- APA Style Format

To Prepare for This Discussion:

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

Conduct an online search to find a legal case, journal article, or detailed news article that describes a recent criminal case involving the kind of health care facility in which you are interested in working. The case you select may involve fraud or abuse (such as defrauding the Medicare or Medicaid programs, the Stark self-referral law, anti-kickback statute, or price-fixing) or other criminal act, such as patient abuse, murder, or theft. Evaluate the laws that are involved in your case, and consider the ramifications of this criminal action on the individuals and organizations involved.

A good source for cases is the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit. Consider looking through one or two state websites, which can be accessed at: http://www.namfcu.net/states.

As you analyze your case and prepare for the Discussion, consider possible motivations behind this criminal act. What could an administrator do to prevent this from happening or to address it effectively once it is detected? Would a compliance program (see “Compliance 101” in this week’s Learning Resources) be of value in preventing or detecting and then correcting this criminal issue?https://oig.hhs.gov/compliance/compliance-resource…

Briefly describe the case you selected. Evaluate the state and/or federal laws that are involved in your case. (If you are an international student, evaluate the regional laws that are involved in your case.) Then explain the ramifications of this criminal action for the individuals and organizations involved (for example, states work with the federal government in capturing fraud).

Discussion Posting Content
Points:

Points Range: 22 (55%) – 24 (60%)

Discussion posting demonstrates an excellent understanding of all of the concepts and key points presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting provides significant detail (including multiple relevant examples); evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources; and discerning ideas.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 19 (47.5%) – 21 (52.5%)

Discussion posting demonstrates a good understanding of most of the concepts and key points presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting provides moderate detail (including at least one pertinent example); evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources; and discerning ideas.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 17 (42.5%) – 18 (45%)

Discussion posting demonstrates a fair understanding of the concepts and key points as presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting may be lacking or incorrect in some area, or in detail and specificity, and/or may not include sufficient pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 16 (40%)

Discussion posting demonstrates poor or no understanding of the concepts and key points of the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting is incorrect and/or shallow and/or does not include any pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings.

Feedback:

Peer Feedback and Interaction
Points:

Points Range: 8 (20%) – 8 (20%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions are excellent and fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 7 (17.5%) – 7 (17.5%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions are good but may not fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 6 (15%) – 6 (15%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions only partially contribute to the quality of interaction by offering insufficient constructive critique or suggestions, shallow questions, or providing poor quality additional resources.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (12.5%)

Student does not interact with peers (0 points) or the feedback postings and responses to questions do not contribute to the quality of interaction by offering any constructive critique, suggestions, questions, or additional resources.

Feedback:

Writing
Points:

Points Range: 8 (20%) – 8 (20%)

Postings are well organized, use scholarly tone, contain original writing and proper paraphrasing, follow APA style, contain very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and are fully consistent with graduate-level writing style.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 7 (17.5%) – 7 (17.5%)

Postings are mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style. Postings may have some small organization, scholarly tone, writing, or APA style issues, and/or may contain a few writing and spelling errors.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 6 (15%) – 6 (15%)

Postings are somewhat below graduate-level writing style. Postings may be lacking in organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and/or contain many writing and/or spelling errors, or show moderate reliance on quoting vs. original writing and paraphrasing.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (12.5%)

Postings are well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and writing, or show heavy reliance on quoting.

Feedback:

Show Descriptions
Show Feedback

DISCUSSION POSTING CONTENT–
Levels of Achievement:
EXCELLENT22 (55%) – 24 (60%)
Discussion posting demonstrates an excellent understanding of all of the concepts and key points presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting provides significant detail (including multiple relevant examples); evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources; and discerning ideas.

GOOD19 (47.5%) – 21 (52.5%)

Discussion posting demonstrates a good understanding of most of the concepts and key points presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting provides moderate detail (including at least one pertinent example); evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources; and discerning ideas.

FAIR17 (42.5%) – 18 (45%)

Discussion posting demonstrates a fair understanding of the concepts and key points as presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting may be lacking or incorrect in some area, or in detail and specificity, and/or may not include sufficient pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings.

POOR0 (0%) – 16 (40%)

Discussion posting demonstrates poor or no understanding of the concepts and key points of the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting is incorrect and/or shallow and/or does not include any pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings.

Feedback:

PEER FEEDBACK AND INTERACTION–
Levels of Achievement:
EXCELLENT8 (20%) – 8 (20%)
The feedback postings and responses to questions are excellent and fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.

GOOD7 (17.5%) – 7 (17.5%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions are good but may not fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.

FAIR6 (15%) – 6 (15%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions only partially contribute to the quality of interaction by offering insufficient constructive critique or suggestions, shallow questions, or providing poor quality additional resources.

POOR0 (0%) – 5 (12.5%)

Student does not interact with peers (0 points) or the feedback postings and responses to questions do not contribute to the quality of interaction by offering any constructive critique, suggestions, questions, or additional resources.

Feedback:

WRITING–
Levels of Achievement: