NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/p>\n
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Compare two organizational readiness tools. Identify the tool you selected and explain why it is most appropriate for assessing your organization.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The two organizational readiness tool that I had chosen are The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness<\/a> Care (PACIC) and the Organization Readiness Change Assessment (ORCA). \u00a0The organization\u2019s readiness assessment for change is a crucial factor in the implementation phase of any given public health intervention (\u201cSelecting A Tool\u201d, n.d.). These tools can assist in evidenced-based practice (EBP) interventions. The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care Questionnaire also known as PACIC is a tool that is used to make an evaluation of the perspective of the patient with regards to the receipt of patient care delivery in the 5 domains namely: activation, delivery system, goal setting, problem solving, and follow-up (Gensichen et al., 2011). PACIC tool can be used for conditions that incurable and illnesses that lasts for a prolonged period time. On the other hand, the ORCA tool has 4 main purposes: learning about the degree of motivation, assessment of organizational abilities, improvement of organizational capacities, and empowerment of organizations (Dearing, 2018).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The most appropriate tool for assessing my organization is the ORCA tool because it can help with identifying and monitoring of organizational strengths and weakness or an organization (“Organizational Readiness”, 2017).By using this tool in clinical settings which it was originally intended for, can help with providing support and success of EBP.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Dearing, J. (2018). Organizational readiness tools for global health intervention: A review. Frontiers In Public Health.\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fpubh.2018.00056<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Gensichen J, Serras A, Paulitsch MA, Rosemann T, K\u00f6nig J, Gerlach FM, Petersen JJ. (2011).The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care questionnaire: Evaluation in patients with mental disorders in primary care. Community Ment Health J, 47(4):447-53. doi: 10.1007\/s10597-010-9340-2.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u201cOrganizational Readiness\u201d. (2017). National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools.\u00a0http:\/\/www.nccmt.ca\/resources\/search\/187.<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n “Selecting A Tool”.(n.d.). National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. https:\/\/www.nccmt.ca\/knowledge-repositories\/search\/279<\/p>\n Organizational readiness assessments allow for change leaders and champions to assess key areas of organization structure, stability and culture in order to make an informed decision as to whether or not a change or improvement initiative is going to be successful, and the right intervention at the right time (HRSA, 2021).\u00a0Upon comparison of two different examples of organizational readiness assessments designed for healthcare, there are certainly similarities but also differences that must be considered when selecting one that is right for a particular organization and initiative.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) has an evidence-based safety and teamwork communication program by the name of TeamSTEPPS.\u00a0This evidence-based program has been around for 20 years, and is now an evidence-based intervention effective at improving perceptions of teamwork, communication and trust, as well as sound data supporting improved patient safety metrics in an organization (AHRQ, 2021).\u00a0With this, a readiness assessment is highlighted as a key part of the process to ensure an organization is ready for TeamSTEPPS implementation.\u00a0Utilizing the\u00a0AHRQ TeamSTEPPS Readiness Assessment, areas of defined need, readiness for change in culture, time\/resources\/personnel, and sustainment of the change are assessed in a checklist format that is easy-to-use for any individual assessing whether or not this intervention is right for one’s organization (AHRQ, 2021).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Comparatively, the Maryland Healthcare Commission (2019) provides a tool for healthcare organizations interested in implementing a standardized telehealth program with aim to improve the safety, quality, fiscal stewardship and patient experience side of healthcare.\u00a0The readiness assessment provided- includes core readiness, financial considerations, operations, staff engagement and patient readiness.\u00a0Maryland Healthcare Commission highlights a toolkit they’ve created to guide the assessment of successful improvement of one’s healthcare system telehealth practices.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Upon comparison of these two organizational readiness assessments, I believe that both highlight similar high-level aims, such as resources, leadership support and current human culture and openness to change.\u00a0However, due to the current state of my place of employment, the TeamSTEPPS organizational readiness assessment appears to be targeted toward our highlighted goals of patient safety and teamwork\/communication among staff.\u00a0With these key areas highlighted in the assessment, and a pre-survey attached to the AHRQ readiness assessment to gauge with sound validity and reliability the perceptions of the caregivers, I believe this would be best suited for my current organization.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n US Department of Health and Human Services (2021).\u00a0Readiness assessment & developing project aims.\u00a0Https:\/\/www.hrsa.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/quality\/toolbox\/508pdfs\/readinessassessment.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2021).\u00a0Readiness assessment.\u00a0https:\/\/www.ahrq.gov\/teamstepps\/reaidness\/index.html<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Maryland Healthcare Commission (2019).\u00a0Telehealth readiness assessment toolkit.\u00a0https:\/\/mhcctelehealthtool.herokuapp.com<\/a><\/p>\n There are many challenges in improving the health of populations and one of the biggest challenges has to do with the delivery and utilization of the interventions that are being proposed (Dearing, 2018). When it comes to the delivery of the interventions, it incorporates more than one factor. The factors that are considered in the delivery of the interventions include communication, training, leadership, coordination, and management (Dearing, 2018). When it comes to change, organizational readiness needs to be assessed.\u00a0Two tools that can be used to assess organizational readiness includes the Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment (ORCA) tool and the Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC). As my organization is a Magnet facility and already supports and implements evidence-based practices, I chose the ORIC tool to discuss. The ORIC tool is the most appropriate for assessing my organizations readiness as this tool focuses on the readiness of the organizational members for implementing change. Being a Magnet facility, my organization has proven that they support nursing excellence and to determine if the team members are ready for change implementation, the ORIC tool would be ideal to evaluate this. When the organization\u2019s readiness is high, the members are more likely to initiate and put forth greater effort for implementing change and on the flip side when the organization\u2019s readiness is low, the team members are more than likely to view change as undesirable and may resist change (Shea et al., 2014). With my proposed evidence-based change, it does involve a fully engaged team which is even more of a reason to use the ORIC tool to help determine the team\u2019s readiness for change and hopefully lead to a successful change implementation.<\/p>\n Dearing, J. W. (2018). Organizational readiness tools for global health intervention: A review.\u00a0Frontiers in Public Health, 6,<\/em>\u00a056. doi:10.3389\/fpubh.2018.00056<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Shea, C. M., Jacobs, S. R., Esserman, D. A., Bruce, K., & Weiner, B. J. (2014). Organizational readiness for implementing change: A psychometric assessment of a new measure.\u00a0Implementation Science, 9,\u00a0<\/em>7. doi:10.1186\/1748-5908-9-7<\/p>\n There were so many great organizational readiness tools to use.\u00a0The first tool I researched was the Discussion-Oriented Organizational Self-Assessment (DOSA) which provided a broad view assessment for an organization.\u00a0The outline of the assessment offered discussion topics for each of the seven categories. The tool intended to evaluate the organizations capacity from a bird\u2019s eye view (Resource Centre, 2018).\u00a0The DOSA tool was a great option but I elected to search further for a more appropriate readiness tool.<\/p>\n Upon further research I found the Organizational Capacity Assessment Tool which offers a comprehensive and systematic approach for organizations to evaluate their organizational capacity in seven key areas. The key areas include governance, financial, operations, human resources, program management, project management and organizational sustainability.\u00a0The tool utilizes the self-assessment approach for each of the key areas.\u00a0The tool guides the organization but doesn\u2019t dictate a plan, instead it assists with plan development.\u00a0Therefore, the tool allows the organization to define what\u2019s important to them and ultimately creates their own plan. The tool also provides guidance by offering assistance with next steps for ways to expand capacity (Learning Lab, 2016). The tool goes above and beyond to assess various aspects in greater detail that will offer a true reflection of my organization\u2019s readiness.\u00a0Currently, my organization is in the planning phase of a merger therefore a thorough assessment, such as Organizational Capacity Assessment, of my organization is vital to the overall process. In fact, the tool is so comprehensive I\u2019m a little intimidated to use such a well-thought-out guide.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Resource Centre. (2018).\u00a0Discussion-Oriented Organizational Self-Assessment (DOSA).\u00a0<\/em>https:\/\/resourcecentre.savethechildren.net\/library\/discussion-oriented-organizational-self-assessment-dosa<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Learning Lab. (2016).\u00a0Organizational Capacity Assessment.<\/em>\u00a0https:\/\/usaidlearninglab.org\/library\/organizational-capacity-assessmen<\/a>t<\/p>\n Organizational readiness is a concept that many managers and practitioners omit while planning about organizational motivation and empowerment. Readiness is defined as the extent to which an organization is ready, both behaviorally and psychologically, to adopt and implement change or take a particular course of action (Dearing, 2018). The success or failure of an organization to implement a change process depends on how ready the organization is to do so. Therefore, readiness assessment is a critical element of public health as it measures the organizational capacity to utilize the new change (Dearing, 2018). There are many readiness assessment tools that organizations have adopted to measure their capacity to implement change. This discussion post will discuss the Organizational Capacity Assessment (OCA) Tool and Management and Organizational Stability Tool (MOST). On the one hand, OCA is a structured tool that allows organizations to self-assess their capacity and action plan intended to be utilized for improvement. On the other hand, MOST is a structured tool that enables organizations to assess their management performance in developing an action plan for improvement and monitoring progress (Management Sciences for Health, n.d.).<\/p>\n Comparing the two, I would select MOST for my organization because of the two fundamental advantages explained here. Firstly, MOST are easy to use, require little training, and can \u201cidentify changes in status over time\u201d (Management Sciences for Health, n.d.). This tool would be applicable in a health organization where change is significantly rapid and little time is needed to adopt and implement these changes. Secondly, MOST allows organizations to diagnose and identify management priorities met for improvement within the shortest time possible (Management Sciences for Health, n.d.). This would help my organization adjust to changes swiftly as priorities are organized according to urgency, especially during a pandemic like a coronavirus, which keeps mutating from one<\/p>\n variant to another.<\/p>\n Dearing J. W. (2018). : A Review. Organizational Readiness Tools for Global Health<\/p>\n Intervention.\u00a0Frontiers in Public Health<\/em>,\u00a06<\/em>, 56. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fpubh.2018.00056<\/p>\n Management Sciences for Health. n.d. Management And Organizational Sustainability Tool<\/p>\nNUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1<\/strong><\/h2>\n
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Title: NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/strong><\/h2>\n
References NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/h3>\n
References NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/h3>\n
References: NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/h3>\n
References NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/strong><\/h3>\n
References NUR 590 Topic 2 DQ 1 Compare two organizational readiness tools<\/h3>\n
![\"NUR](\"https:\/\/nursingassignmentcrackers.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/NUR-590-Topic-2-DQ-1-Compare-two-organizational-readiness-tools-300x138.png\")