HCMT 515 SUNY SB Dana Farber Cancer Institute System Design & Innovation Case Study

HCMT 515 SUNY SB Dana Farber Cancer Institute System Design & Innovation Case Study
The case study “Dana-Farber Cancer Institute”. Dana-Farber is a world-class cancer research and treatment facility. A patient’s death led to the discovery of major systems issues. You will be exploring this case through the lens of Systems Thinking. As you read the case study, keep in mind that organizations have multiple internal and external stakeholders and customers. Every functional area in a healthcare organization supports other areas/departments of the organization. Inputs into one area go through a process and become outputs that are handed off to other areas/departments in the organization. As such, each and every functional area in an organization is both a customer of and a supplier to other areas. The dynamics of the Dana-Farber case demonstrate the complexity of healthcare organizations and what can happen when the right-hand does not know what the left hand is doing. You will need to reread lectures 1-­1, 2-­1, 3-­1 and 4­-1. Begin to analyze this case by creating two lists. One will be labeled, What’s Working and the other will be What’s Not Working. Think deeply and come up with everything you can think of to include on each of these lists. Please be in detail. You might want to consider the following as you delve into the case: Organizational structureDrug administration protocolsThe design and performance of the care delivery system. Patient safetyBoston Globe story of March 23, 1995Risk reductionMedication errorsImmediate response to the issue at handAdverse eventsHuman failureSystems failureProcess failureOrganizational cultureComplacencyUnforgiving environment for mistakesComplex research protocolsAccess to needed informationCommunications, verbal and writtenNon­standard languagePatient handoffs between different providersError tracking and reportingDenial of fallibilityOversightPsychological safety of the teamAutomationTeam compositionStaffing levels The above points might seem exhaustive, but they are just a place to begin. After you create what is working and then what’s not working lists, set aside the what’s working list. For each item on the what’s not working list, respond to the following 6 – Questions:Do you think personal mastery and/or mental models contributed to the death that occurred? Why or why not? Please be in detail. Consider each one of the 11 laws of systems and select the one that you feel best applies to each item on the What’s Not Working List. Spell out the law. For example, “Today’s problems come from yesterday’s solutions.Write a Shared Vision statement that you feel would embody the values, desires, and aspirations of the staff at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Incorporate any of the items from the what’s working list, that you feel would be appropriate. The vision statement should be no longer than one page in length.What’s Working List What’s not Working List, with the two points listed above for each item, spelled out. Conclusion with complete assessment of the case – minimum 2 pages for this. References

HC 306 Herzing University Statement of Operations Revenue Presentation

HC 306 Herzing University Statement of Operations Revenue Presentation
InstructionsIn previous units, we discussed the importance and purpose of maintaining financial statements. In this assignment, you will interpret those financial statements for a diverse group of stakeholders.You are the Chief Financial Officer of People’s Community Clinic. You are responsible for delivering a financial overview presentation at the year-end meeting. Your audience will include employees and leadership team members of PCC, financial donors, and community members (who may be potential donors, if they are pleased with the information you present!)People’s Community Clinic. (2015). People’s Community Clinic Annual Report (Links to an external site.). (Links to an external site.) [PDF]People’s Community Clinic (n.d.). People’s Community Clinic (Links to an external site.)[Website]Using the content of the attached annual report document, prepare a 10-minute Powerpoint or Prezi presentation.Include a voice-over or written script (in the speaker’s notes section)You may include visuals of the important sections of the financial statements, ensuring the content is easy to read for your audience.Create graphs or charts to illustrate important data.Your closing two slides should summarize the year-end status, and summarize assumptions for the year in-progress (i.e. do you expect to be profitable, experience loss, why or why not).Your final slide should include any references, in APA format, used to complete your presentation.Please review the rubric to ensure that your assignment meets criteria. Submit:Financial Overview Presentation – PowerPoint file (.ppt), URL to your Prezi presentation, or export the PowerPoint to .mp4, upload to YouTube, and provide the YouTube URLRubricHC306 Unit 6 Assignment 1 – Financial Overview PresentationHC306 Unit 6 Assignment 1 – Financial Overview PresentationCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis of KnowledgePRICE-P5.0 pts5Connects and extends knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) from one’s own academic study/ field/ discipline to civic engagement and to one’s own participation in civic life, politics, and government.4.0 pts4Analyzes knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) from one’s own academic study/ field/ discipline making relevant connections to civic engagement and to one’s own participation in civic life, politics, and government.3.0 pts3Begins to connect knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) from one’s own academic study/ field/ discipline to civic engagement and to tone’s own participation in civic life, politics, and government.2.0 pts2Begins to identify knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) from one’s own academic study/ field/ discipline that is relevant to civic engagement and to one’s own participation in civic life, politics, and government.1.0 pts1There Is some evidence that knowledge is identified (facts, theories, etc.) from one’s own academic study/ field/ discipline that is somewhat relevant to civics engagement and to one’s own participation in civic life, politics, and government.0.0 pts0There is little to no evidence that knowledge is identified (facts, theories, etc.) from one’s own academic study/ field/ discipline that is somewhat relevant to civics engagement and to one’s own participation in civic life, politics, and government.5.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDefines Content20.0 pts5Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors.18.0 pts4Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement, thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, and problem statement is adequately detailed16.0 pts3Begins 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.14.0 pts2Demonstrates a limited ability in identifying a problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement or related contextual factors.12.0 pts1Demonstrates the ability to explain contextual facts but does not provide a defined statement.0.0 pts0There is no evidence of a defined statement.20.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRelationship to research10.0 pts5Evaluates materials for scholarly significance and relevance within and/or across the various disciplines, evaluating them according to their contributions and consequences.9.0 pts4Examines materials for scholarly significance within and/or across the various disciplines to explore contributions in relation to important questions.8.0 pts3Uses materials in the context of scholarship to develop a foundation of disciplinary knowledge and to raise and explore important questions.7.0 pts2Engages materials with the intention and expectation of building topical and world knowledge.6.0 pts1Approaches materials in the context of assignments with the intention and expectation of finding right answers and learning facts and concepts to display for credit.0.0 pts0There is little to no evidence of engagement with outside materials used in a scholarly manner.10.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion and related Outcomes5.0 pts5Conclusions (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect informed evaluation and the ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order.4.0 pts4Conclusions are logically tied to and reflect student’s informed evaluation in priority order and are clearly identified.3.0 pts3Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information and are identified clearly.2.0 pts2Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion).1.0 pts1Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed and oversimplified.0.0 pts0Conclusion is either not present, unclear, or does not reflect the information presented.5.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting5.0 pts5The paper exhibits an excellent command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling.4.0 pts4The paper exhibits a good command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, or spelling and minor error do not impair the flow of communication.3.0 pts3The paper exhibits an acceptable command of written English language conventions. The paper has minor errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impact the flow of communication.2.0 pts2The 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.1.0 pts1The 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 pts0The 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 discerning the meaning.5.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPAPRICE-I5.0 pts5The required APA elements are all included with correct formatting, including in-text citations and references.4.0 pts4The required APA elements are all included with minor formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.3.0 pts3The required APA elements are all included with multiple formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.2.0 pts2The required APA elements are not all included. AND/OR there are major formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.1.0 pts1Several APA elements are missing. The errors in formatting demonstrate limited understanding of APA guidelines, in-text-citations, and references.0.0 pts0There is little to no evidence of APA formatting. AND/OR there are no in-text citations AND/OR references.5.0 ptsTotal Points: 50.0

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL – NO PLAGIARISM

(USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)

CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS

The Best Custom Essay Writing Service

About Our Service

We are an online academic writing company that connects talented freelance writers with students in need of their services. Unlike other writing companies, our team is made up of native English speakers from countries such as the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, Ireland, and New Zealand.

Qualified Writers

Our Guarantees:

CLICK TO SUBMIT YOUR ORDER