I attached the two previous assignments

The collection of evidence is an activity that occurs with an endgame in mind. For example, law enforcement professionals collect evidence to support a decision to charge those accused of criminal activity. Similarly, evidence-based healthcare practitioners collect evidence to support decisions in pursuit of specific healthcare outcomes.

In this Assignment, you will identify an issue or opportunity for change within your healthcare organization and propose an idea for a change in practice supported by an EBP approach.

To Prepare:

• Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you critically appraised in Module 4, related to your clinical topic of interest and PICOT.
• Reflect on your current healthcare organization and think about potential opportunities for evidence-based change, using your topic of interest and PICOT as the basis for your reflection.

The Assignment: (Evidence-Based Project)

Part 5: Recommending an Evidence-Based Practice Change

Create an 8- to 9-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:

• Briefly describe your healthcare organization, including its culture and readiness for change. (You may opt to keep various elements of this anonymous, such as your company name.)
• Describe the current problem or opportunity for change. Include in this description the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with change implementation in general.
• Propose an evidence-based idea for a change in practice using an EBP approach to decision making. Note that you may find further research needs to be conducted if sufficient evidence is not discovered.
• Describe your plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation.
• Describe the measurable outcomes you hope to achieve with the implementation of this evidence-based change.
• Be sure to provide APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer reviewed articles you selected to support your thinking.
• Add a lessons learned section that includes the following:
  • A summary of the critical appraisal of the peer-reviewed articles you previously submitted
  • An explanation about what you learned from completing the Evaluation Table within the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template (1-3 slides)

  Module05_Week09_Assignment_Rubric

• Part 5: Recommending an Evidence-Based Practice Change

  Create an 8- to 9-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:

  · Briefly describe your healthcare organization, including its culture and readiness for change.

  · Describe the current problem or opportunity for change. Include in this description the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with change implementation in general.—

  Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

  The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail a healthcare organization, including a detailed explanation of its culture and readiness for change.

  The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail a current problem or opportunity for change.

  An accurate, specific, and detailed description of the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with change implementation in general is provided.

  Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

  The presentation accurately describes a healthcare organization, including an accurate explanation of its culture and readiness for change.

  The presentation accurately describes a current problem or opportunity for change.

  An accurate description of the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with the change implementation in general is provided.

  Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes a healthcare organization, including an inaccurate or vague explanation of its culture and readiness for change.

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes a current problem or opportunity for change.

  An inaccurate or vague description of the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with the change implementation in general is provided.

  Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes a healthcare organization, including an inaccurate and vague explanation of its culture and readiness for change, or is missing.

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes a current problem or opportunity for change or is missing.

  An inaccurate and vague description of the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with the change implementation in general is provided or is missing.

  · Propose an evidence-based idea for a change in practice using an evidence-based practice approach to decision making. Note that you may find further research needs to be conducted if sufficient evidence is not discovered.

  · Describe your plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation.

  · Describe the measurable outcomes you hope to achieve with the implementation of this evidence-based change.

  · Be sure to provide APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles you selected to support your thinking.—

  Excellent 32 (32%) – 35 (35%)

  The presentation clearly and accurately proposes in detail an evidence-based idea for a change in practice that is fully aligned to an evidence-based practice approach for decision making.

  The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail a plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including a detailed plan for knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation that is specific.

  The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail the measurable outcomes desired for the implementation of the evidence-based change.

  The presentation includes accurate, complete, and full APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles selected.

  Good 28 (28%) – 31 (31%)

  The presentation accurately proposes an evidence-based idea for a change in practice that is adequately aligned to an evidence-based practice approach for decision making.

  The presentation accurately describes a plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including a plan for knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation that is adequate.

  The presentation accurately describes the measurable outcomes desired for the implementation of the evidence-based changes.

  The presentation includes accurate APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles selected.

  Fair 25 (25%) – 27 (27%)

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely proposes an evidence-based idea for a change in practice that may be aligned to an evidence-based practice approach for decision making.

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes a plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including a plan for knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation that may be relevant.

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes the measurable outcomes desired for the implementation of the evidence-based change.

  Inaccurate and incomplete APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles selected are provided.

  Poor 0 (0%) – 24 (24%)

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely proposes an evidence-based idea for a change in practice that is not aligned to an evidence-based practice approach for decision making or is missing.

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes a plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including a plan for knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption that implementation that is incomplete, or is missing.

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes the measurable outcomes desired for the implementation of the evidence-based change or is missing.

  Inaccurate and incomplete APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles selected are provided or are missing.

  Add a lessons learned section that includes:

  · A summary of the critical appraisal of the peer-reviewed articles you previously submitted.

  · What did you learn from completing the evaluation table?—

  Excellent 27 (27%) – 30 (30%)

  The presentation clearly and accurately summarizes in detail the critical appraisal process of the peer-reviewed articles previously submitted.

  The presentation thoroughly describes in detail at least one lesson learned from completing the evaluation table that is specific.

  The presentation thoroughly describes in detail at least one lesson learned from completing the levels of evidence table that is specific.

  The presentation thoroughly describes in detail at least one lesson learned from completing the outcomes synthesis table that is specific.

  The presentation provides a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources reviewed on the lessons learned explained. The presentation fully integrates at least two outside resources and two or three course-specific resources that fully support the presentation.

  Good 24 (24%) – 26 (26%)

  The presentation accurately summarizes the critical appraisal process of the peer-reviewed articles previously submitted.

  The presentation accurately describes at least one lesson learned from completing the evaluation table that may include some specificity.

  The presentation accurately describes at least one lesson learned from completing the levels of evidence table that may include some specificity.

  The presentation accurately describes at least one lesson learned from completing the outcomes synthesis table that may include some specificity.

  The presentation provides an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource reviewed related to the lessons learned explained. The presentation integrates at least one outside resource and two or three course-specific resources that may support the presentation.

  Fair 21 (21%) – 23 (23%)

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the critical appraisal process of the peer-reviewed articles previously submitted.

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the evaluation table and may lack some specificity.

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the levels of evidence table and may lack some specificity.

  The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the outcomes synthesis table and may lack some specificity.

  The presentation provides a vague or inaccurate synthesis of outside resources reviewed related to the lessons learned explained. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the presentation.

  Poor 0 (0%) – 20 (20%)

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the critical appraisal process of the peer-reviewed articles previously submitted or is missing.

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the evaluation table and lacks specificity or is missing.

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the levels of evidence table that lacks specificity or is missing.

  The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the outcomes synthesis table that lacks specificity or is missing.

  The presentation provides a vague and inaccurate synthesis of no outside resources related to the lessons learned explained or is missing. The presentation fails to incorporate any resources to support the responses provided.

  Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization:

  Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.—

  Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

  A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.

  Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

  Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated yet is brief and not descriptive.

  Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time.

  Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.

  Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.

  No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

  Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.—

  Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

  Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

  Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

  Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

  Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

  Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

  Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

  Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

  Written Expression and Formatting—The paper follows correct format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.—

  Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

  Uses correct paper formatting with no errors.

  Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

  Contains a few (one or two) paper formatting errors.

  Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

  Contains several (three or four) paper formatting errors.

  Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

  Contains many (five or more) paper formatting errors.