NUR 690 GCU Phoenix VA Healthcare Center Projects Scope Essay Guide
Walden University Week 8 High Increase in The Number of Chronic Diseases
June 22, 2021HIM 500 Southern New Hampshire University Intersection of Ethics and Policy Ques
June 22, 2021NUR 690 GCU Phoenix VA Healthcare Center Projects Scope Essay Guide
NUR 690 GCU Phoenix VA Healthcare Center Projects Scope Essay
School: Grand Canyon University
Description
For this assignment, you will develop a scope document that details the stakeholders understanding of what is “in scope” and “out of scope” for your project. Meet with your mentor and stakeholders to outline the scope of the project. Write an essay (1,000–1,500 words) addressing the following:
- State the scope of the project.
- Discuss what is out of scope for the project.
- List high-level deliverables.
- Discuss the completion criteria.
- Discuss the success criteria (completed within budget and on schedule).
Refer to “Nursing Informatics Practicum Project Overview,” located in Course Materials, for further information.
ORDER ASSIGNMENT NOW: ORIGINAL PAPER WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH AND WELL FORMATTED
PREVIEW
The success criteria reviewed during meetings consist of project completion timeline, functional requirements, quality target controls and project deliverables, and keeping stakeholders up to date with any nuances or unforeseen events that could extend the project completion date.
The expected outcomes in this practicum project are based on changes in behavior and measurable data. Expected outcomes include: Phoenix VA Healthcare System will shift to structured data entry in the hemodialysis documentation template for nurses with a discrete field to record vital signs. End users will use the discrete fields for vital signs entry. All the entries in that field are captured correctly by the vital signs tracking system and can track and trend vitals signs recorded in the hemodialysis unit. Also, end users continue to use it after the completion of project.
ORDER ASSIGNMENT NOW: ORIGINAL PAPER WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH AND WELL FORMATTED
State the scope of the project
Will Just focus on changing free text vital signs entry in hemodialysis template to structured discrete field to record vital signs.
There are more changes needed to the to the template but that will be considered once this project for vital signs are done. So, everything else is “out of scope” for this project
The scope of the project is what is to be accomplished. When the requirements are met within the limitations it can be called “in scope”. But when things go beyond expectations it is called “out of scope” of the project. In other words, we can say that “in scope” is what we know or what we expect, and “out of scope” is what is unseen or thing that must be added or changed on the way to complete the project. One task can affect the timing of another task. It can also affect the planning and goal pursuit (Goswami & Urminsky, 2020). This can cause a snowball effect that pushes the project out of budget and over time. NUR 690 GCU Phoenix VA Healthcare Center Projects Scope Essay
Goswami, I., & Urminsky, O. (2020). More time, more work: How time limits bias estimates of task scope and project duration. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(6), 994.
High level Deliverables
Charting correctly
Users using it
Users using it even after project is completed
Vitals captured correctly by vitals tracking system in CPRS (Computerized patient record system)
Completion Criteria
Complete on schedule
Approved by Medical Records Committee
Users using it.
Success Criteria (NUR 690 GCU Phoenix VA Healthcare Center Projects Scope Essay)
I think it is a combination of High-Level Deliverables and Completion criteria
ORDER ASSIGNMENT NOW: ORIGINAL PAPER WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH AND WELL FORMATTED
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | ||||||
| NUR-690 | NUR-690-O500 | Establish the Project Scope | 45.0 | ||||||
| Criteria | Percentage | 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | 2: Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%) | 3: Satisfactory (88.00%) | 4: Good (92.00%) | 5: Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned | |
| Content | 70.0% | ||||||||
| Project Scope | 20.0% | An explanation of project scope is missing. | A vague explanation as to what is within and outside of scope is provided. | An explanation as to what is within and outside of scope is provided. | A detailed explanation as to what is within and outside of scope is provided. | A thorough and clear explanation as to what is within and outside of scope is provided. | |||
| Deliverables | 10.0% | A list of high-level deliverables is missing. | An incomplete list of high-level deliverables is provided. | A list of high-level deliverables is provided. | A detailed list of high-level deliverables is provided. | A thorough and exhaustive list of high-level deliverables is provided. | |||
| Completion Criteria | 20.0% | Completion criteria are not provided. | Completion criteria are briefly discussed and missing key information. | Completion criteria are discussed. | A discussion of completion criteria is detailed. | A thorough and clear discussion of completion criteria is provided. | |||
| Success Criteria | 20.0% | Success criteria are not provided. | Success criteria are briefly discussed and missing key information. | Success criteria are provided. | Detailed success criteria are provided. | A thorough and clear discussion of success criteria is provided. | |||
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% | ||||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | 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 | 8.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | 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 progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that 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. | |||
| 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. | Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | 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% |