Order Details/Description
Objectives are 1.educate staff on different meal types available from dietary. 2. lessen hospital stays with proper nutrition 3. decrease complications associated with malnutrition 4. achieve optimal patient centered care.
2.1 Literature Review: Provide a review of the relevant literature that supports your proposed project. The focus will be on evidence-informed best practices to integrate the evidence in your project implementation and evaluation. The literature review will support your project in clarifying the issue, providing rationale, and explaining the benefit to the target population in the practice setting and to yourself (i.e., why this project is needed for “them” and why it’s an appropriate project for “you” as a beginning professional), and developing a sound implementation plan. In addition, the project linkage to the SCBScN program outcome(s) will be supported by evidence. The literature review will incorporate evidence from both nursing and interdisciplinary sources.
Target population will be the elderly
Pls read the rubric I will be sending as I will be marked according to the rubric.
Student Name: Agency: Project Title:
Phase 2 Faculty Feedback:
Student requirements prior to Phase 3 Approval:
1.
2.
PHASE 2 Total
Literature Review /100 /20
Implementation Strategy /100 /10
Evaluation Plan /100 /5
Product /100 /5
Organization, Mechanics of Style, & APA deduction: ( – )
TOTAL /40
PHASE 2 Implementation Plan: Literature Review, Updated Proposal, Implementation Strategy, Evaluation Plan & Product (40%)
Description of Components Outstanding Performance100-90 Very Good Performance89-80 Above Average Performance79-70 Satisfactory Performance69-60 Minimally Acceptable Performance 59-50 Unacceptable PerformanceBelow 49
Literature Review
Review of literature that supports project with clear synthesis and integration of ideas
Displays evidenced informed best practices through clear articulation of key messages
Clear grasp of the subject matter by clarifying the issue, providing rationale & benefits.
Connection to project objectives, curriculum & application to practice.
Note: This section must include updated proposal, if required, following phase 1 feedback and additional research.
Outstanding review of literature that supports project with clear synthesis and integration of ideas
Outstanding ability to display evidenced informed best practice through clear articulation of key messages.
Insightful and comprehensive grasp of the subject matter
An outstanding demonstration of connection to project objectives, curriculum & application to practice
A very good review of literature that supports project with clear synthesis and integration of ideas
A very good ability to display evidenced informed practice through clear articulation of key messages.
A comprehensive grasp of the subject matter
A very good demonstration of connection to project objectives, curriculum & application to practice
A good review of literature that supports project with clear synthesis and integration of ideas
A good ability to display evidence informed practice through clear articulation of key messages
A substantial grasp of the subject matter
An above average demonstration of connection to project objectives, curriculum & application to practice
A satisfactory review of literature that supports project with some synthesis and integration of ideas
Generally satisfactory ability to display evidence informed practice through articulate key messages
An acceptable basic grasp of the subject matter
A generally satisfactory demonstration of connection to project objectives, curriculum & application to practice
Some review of literature. Synthesis and/or integration of ideas is minimal
A fair ability to articulate key messages. Lacks evidence informed practice
A familiarity with the subject matter but lacks clarification of issue, rationale or benefits
A barely acceptable demonstration of connection to project objectives, curriculum & application to practice
Overall unacceptable review of literature
May include:
Missing significant discussion of one or more components of literature review.
Failure to update original proposal, if required.
Failure to incorporate interdisciplinary sources.
Implementation Strategy
Description of proposed implementation plan (how the plan will accomplish objectives).
List of essential resources (material & human) for project
Specifics of how and when your project will be implemented, including input from experts
Outstanding description of the implementation plan.
Excellent, comprehensive list of essential resources
Excellent project implementation detail, with input from experts
A very good description of the
implementation plan.
A very good list of essential resources
A very good project implementation detail, with input from experts
A good description of the
implementation plan.
A good list of resources
A good project implementation detail, with input from experts
Satisfactory description of the
implementation plan.
Satisfactory list of resources. Missing some resources
Satisfactory project implementation detail, with minimal input from experts
Vague description of the implementation plan.
List of essential resources is missing significant detail
A very good project implementation detail, with input from experts
Implementation strategy fails to provide 1) description of plan, 2) essential resources OR 3) specifics of how & when project will be implemented
No clear evidence of input from experts for implementation of project
Evaluation Plan
Clear plan of project evaluation that is measurable.
Identifies plan to seek agency feedback by sharing project (required)
Supported by literature/references
An outstanding, detailed & measurable evaluation plan
Identifies excellent plan to seek agency feedback
Excellent support grounded in the literature
A very good, detailed & measurable evaluation plan
Identifies very good plan to seek agency feedback
Very good support grounded in the literature
A good measurable evaluation plan
Identifies above average plan to seek agency feedback
Support provided. Some connection to references
Satisfactory, basic evaluation plan
Identifies simple plan to seek agency feedback
Some satisfactory support provided
Evaluation plan lacks clarity
Minimal plan provided to seek agency feedback
No references provided to support evaluation plan
Unacceptable:
Either no clear evaluation plan provided and/or no plan to seek agency feedback through sharing of project with agency.
Product: (Appendix)
Synthesis of material to product
Insight, relevance & originality. Includes a draft of product or detailed description of what will be implemented.
An outstanding demonstration of synthesis of material to product
An insightful, relevant & original product or description
A very good demonstration of synthesis of material to product
A very good, relevant & original product or description
An above average demonstration of synthesis of material to product
A good relevant product or description
A generally satisfactory demonstration of synthesis of material to product
A usable product with some relevance or satisfactory description
A barely acceptable demonstration of synthesis of material to product.
Minimally relevant product or minimal description provided.
Product not useful or no draft or description provided.
(Mandatory requirement prior to phase 3)
Organization, Mechanics of Style & Use of APA No errors in organization, mechanics, or APA.(No deductions) No errors in organization, mechanics, or APA.(No deductions)
No errors in organization, mechanics, or APA.(No deductions) 1 – 2 errors in organization, mechanics, or APA. (1 mark deduction) 2 – 3 errors in organization, mechanics, or APA.(2 mark deduction) 3 or more errors in organization, mechanics, or APA. (3 – 4 max mark deduction)