Florida National University Dementia Health Problem Case study
Sample Answer for Florida National University Dementia Health Problem Case study Included After Question
Description
This is a continuation of the health promotion program proposal, part one, which you submitted previously. Please approach this assignment as an opportunity to integrate instructor feedback from part I and expand on ideas adhering to the components of the MAP-IT strategy. Include necessary levels of detail you feel appropriate to assure stakeholder buy-in.
Directions
You have already completed the steps 1-4. Make sure you revise this initial submission according to your instructor’s comments.
1. Describe the health problem. Using data and statistics support your claim that the issue you selected is a problem. What specifically will you address in your proposed health promotion program? Be sure your proposed outcome is realistic and measurable.
2. Describe the vulnerable population and setting. What are the risk factors that make this a vulnerable population? Use evidence to support the risk factors you have identified.
3. Provide a review of literature from scholarly journals of evidence-based interventions that address the problem. After completing a library search related to effective interventions for your chosen health promotion activity, you will write a review that evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of all the sources you have found. You might consult research texts for information on how to write a review of the literature found in your search.
4. Select an appropriate health promotion/disease prevention theoretical framework or conceptual model that would best serve as the framework guiding the proposal. Provide rationale for your selection which includes discussion of the concepts of the selected model
For this assignment add criteria 5-8 as detailed below:
5. Propose a health promotion program using an evidence-based intervention found in your literature search to address the problem in the selected population/setting. Include a thorough discussion of the specifics of this intervention which include resources necessary, those involved, and feasibility for a nurse in an advanced role. Be certain to include a timeline. (2 to 4 paragraph. You may use bullets if appropriate).
6. Thoroughly describe the intended outcomes. Describe the outcomes in detail concurrent with the SMART goal approach. (1 paragraph).
7. Provide a detailed plan for evaluation for each outcome. (1 paragraph).
8. Thoroughly describe possible barriers/challenges to implementing the proposed project as well as strategies to address these barriers/challenges. (1 paragraph).
9. Conclude the paper with a Conclusion paragraph. Don’t type the word “Conclusion”. Here you will share your insights about this strategy and your expectations regarding achieving your goals. (1 paragraph).
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Main Postinga | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||