Solved Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation

Running head: DASHBOARD BENCHMARK EVALUATION

Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation of ABC Hospital

Danielle Ferrante

Capella University

Health Care Law and Policy

November 2019

Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation of ABC Hospital

In terms of size, ABC Hospital (not its real name) is set on 300,300 square feet of land. It has 685 employees and a total bed capacity of 271. This hospital is specifically focused on diagnosing and treating cancer disease. The hospital serves up to a total of 500, 000 patients every year. Of the total number of patients served, 42% are African Americans while 22% are Whites. Other ethnicities served to include Hispanics (16%), Mexican (10%) and Irish 10% (Portela, 2016). Most of the population served are employed individuals with an annual income average of $6000.

Some of the metrics that are below the mandated benchmarks in ABC Hospital include the nurse to patient ration and bed capacity. The hospital has failed to meet the 1:2 nurse to patient ratio rule as stipulated by the existing federal laws set by the U.S Department Of health and human services. Additionally, the hospital has failed to meet the 400-bed capacity that hospitals of its size are required to have according to the federal regulations that have been set by the same health department (Gabel, 2017). One of the factors that have prevented the hospital from meeting regulations is having inadequate finances.

The disadvantage of having a lower nurse to patient ratio is that it has contributed to poor healthcare services in the hospital. The too much workload that nurses in the hospital experience have contributed to a lower employee retention rate in the health care facility. The too much workload in the hospital has influenced potential staff members to avoid applying for vacancies in the hospital (Dowding, 2015). The potential healthcare providers fear that they will be overworked just as the current staff members are being overworked. The poor services delivered in the hospital has contributed to a negative image.

The disadvantage of having a lower bed capacity is that it has contributed to congestion in most of the rooms that patients are admitted. Moreover, this has contributed to poor hygienic conditions since there is poor circulation of air. Nurses and physicians attending to the patients also find it difficult to move when they are attending to the patients (Portela, 2016). The negative impact of this is that it demoralizes them from their activity of delivering medical services to the patients. This further contributes to the poor quality of healthcare services in the hospital.

Some of the challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for the hospital include strained financial resources and the inability to purchase new equipment required in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. The negative effect of this is that it makes the hospital to rely on old equipment to diagnose and treat cancer. Some of the treatment options such as radiations are ineffective in eradicating the cancer cells due to their inefficiencies brought about by the process of wearing out (Gabel, 2017). This contribute to the negative image of the hospital which also makes potential staff members avoid it.

A few of the opportunities that ABC organization has that can enable it to meet the above two benchmarks include outsourcing for more capital financing from nongovernmental organizations and increasing the number of its staff. Continuing to experience the challenge of enough capital will prevent the hospital from building more patient wards that can help it expand its bed capacity. In any case, the hospital will continue to experience the challenge of having a low nurse to patient ration, its rate of retaining its employees will decrease (Dowding, 2015). Furthermore, this will contribute to a continued decline in the quality of healthcare services delivered in the hospital.

A benchmark underperformance in the hospital that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality and performance is understaffing. Having a low number of nurses to patient ratio is the most underperforming benchmark by degree. It is also the most widespread throughout the hospital that affects the greatest number of patients and staff. The staff get affected in the sense that they have to perform too much workload while the patients get affected in the sense that they receive poor health care services (Portela, 2016). Many of the patients who visit the hospital for the first time end up not visiting it again due to the experience that they normally have in the hospital.

The underperformance of the organization of the nurse to patient ratio affects the community in the sense that locals are forced to wait for too long when they go to seek medical services in the hospital. Some locals are forced to go to distant hospitals that offer similar services. The negative impact of this is that it increases their medical expenses due to the transportation expenses involved. Having a low number of healthcare providers affects the services delivered by the hospital in the sense that their quality is compromised (Gabel, 2017). This is due to the fatigue problem that the few healthcare providers experience due to too much workload.

The greatest opportunity in the overall quality for performance lies in outsourcing for more financial donations from non-governmental organizations. The significance of seeking more capital is that it will enable the hospital to build more patient wards to expand its bed capacity. Additionally, getting enough capital will enable the hospital to hire additional staff members that will be working in the new patient wards that will be built (Dowding, 2015). The benefit of having more healthcare providers is that it will help solve the problem where patients are forced to wait for too long. This is because there will be enough professionals to attend to the patients.

The best ethical action that can help the hospital overcome its benchmark underperformances is offering scholarship opportunities to local students that want to pursue healthcare-related courses. The stakeholder group that this advocacy needs to be directed is the government. One of the issues that have been identified to be contributing to the shortage of staff workers in the hospital is the low number of locals that have trained as healthcare providers (Portela, 2016). The hospital avoids hiring healthcare professionals from other areas since it is very expensive to do so.

Some of the ethical actions that the government can take as a stakeholder group to enable ABC hospital to improve on the benchmarks that it is performing poorly on include offering scholarship opportunities to local students to train on health-related courses and also participating in the fundraising activities to enable the hospital raise the capital that it is requiring to employ enough staff and also build more patient ward facilities to expand its bed capacity (Gabel, 2017). The stakeholder group needs to take action to reduce the workload burden on the hospital’s management.

To conclude, ABC hospital has a better opportunity to improve on it’s the benchmarks that it is currently underperforming. The greatest opportunity in the overall quality for performance lies in outsourcing for more financial donations from non-governmental organizations. Some of the challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for the hospital include strained financial resources and the inability to purchase new equipment required in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. The best ethical action that can help the hospital overcome its benchmark underperformances is offering scholarship opportunities to local students that want to pursue healthcare-related courses. Continuing to experience the challenge of enough capital will prevent the hospital from building more patient wards that can help it expand its bed capacity.

References

Dowding, D., Randell, R., Gardner, P., Fitzpatrick, G., Dykes, P., Favela, J., … & Currie, L. (2015). Dashboards for improving patient care: review of the literature. International journal of medical informatics, 84(2), 87-100.

Gabel, F., O’hanlon, K., Brankin, P., Bryce, R., Trescher, A. L., Haux, C., … & Listl, S. (2017). Linkage of health care claims data and apps data: The ADVOCATE oral health care dashboard. International Journal of Population Data Science, 1(1).

Portela, M. C. A. S., Camanho, A. S., Almeida, D. Q., Lopes, L., Silva, S. N., & Castro, R. (2016). Benchmarking hospitals through a web-based platform. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 23(3), 722-739.

Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation

Review the performance dashboard for a health care organization, as well as relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Then, write a report for senior leaders in the organization that communicates your analysis and evaluation of the current state of organizational performance, including a recommended metric to target for improvement.

Introduction

Note: Each assessment in this course builds on the work you completed in the previous assessment. Therefore, you must complete the assessments in this course in the order in which they are presented.

In the era of health care reform, many of the laws and policies set by government at the local, state, and federal levels have specific performance benchmarks related to care delivery outcomes that organizations must achieve. It is critical for organizational success that the interprofessional care team is able to understand reports and dashboards that display the metrics related to performance and compliance benchmarks.

Maintaining standards and promoting quality in modern health care are crucial, not only for the care of patients, but also for the continuing success and financial viability of health care organizations. In the era of health care reform, health care leaders must understand what quality care entails and how quality in health care connects to the standards set by relevant federal, state, and local laws and policies. An understanding of relevant benchmarks that result from these laws and policies, and how they relate to quality care and regulatory standards, is also vitally important.

Health care is a dynamic, complex, and heavily regulated industry. For this reason, you will be expected to constantly scan the external environment for emerging laws, new regulations, and changing industry standards. You may discover that as new policies are enacted into law, ambiguity in interpretation of various facets of the law may occur. Sometimes, new laws conflict with preexisting laws and regulations, or unexpected implementation issues arise, which may warrant further clarification from lawmakers. Adding partisan politics and social media to the mix can further complicate understanding of the process and buy in from stakeholders.

How many health care laws can you name that affect your practice in your current or future workplace? How do they impact your daily work? How many regulatory agencies oversee the types of services your health care organization provides? Which regulatory agencies apply to your workplace setting? Are you familiar with the process of complying with those agencies in order to maintain certification? You might be overwhelmed as you consider these broad questions.

Demonstration of Proficiency

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and assessment criteria:

• Competency 1: Analyze the effects of health care policies, laws, and regulations on organizations, interprofessional teams, and personal practice.
  • Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team.
• Competency 3: Lead the development and implementation of ethical and culturally sensitive policies that improve health outcomes for individuals, organizations, and populations.
  • Advocate for ethical action in addressing a benchmark underperformance, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders.
• Competency 4: Evaluate relevant indicators of performance, such as benchmarks, research, and best practices, for health care policies and law for patients, organizations, and populations.
  • Evaluate dashboard metrics with regard to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws.
  • Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
• Competency 6: Apply various methods of communicating with policy makers, stakeholders, colleagues, and patients to ensure that communication in a given situation is professional, clear, efficient, and effective.
  • Communicate evaluation and analysis in a professional and effective manner, writing content clearly and logically, with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
  • Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style.

Preparation

For this assessment, you may choose one of the following three options for a performance dashboard to use as the basis for your benchmark evaluation.

Option 1: Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation Simulation

You may use the data presented in the Dashboard and Health Care Benchmark Evaluation media piece as the basis for your assessment submission.

If you decide to use the simulation dashboard for your evaluation, review the dashboard, as well as  relevant local, state, and federal laws and policies. Consider the metrics within the dashboard that are falling short of the prescribed benchmarks.

Option 2: Actual Dashboard From a Professional Practice Setting

If you choose an actual dashboard from a professional practice setting for your evaluation, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

• The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
• The specific type of care delivery.
• The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
• The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.

Note: Ensure that your data is Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

Option 3: Hypothetical Dashboard Based on a Professional Practice Setting

If you have a sophisticated understanding of dashboards that are relevant to your own practice, you may also construct a hypothetical dashboard for your evaluation, based on that setting. Your hypothetical dashboard must present at least four different metrics, at least two of which must be underperforming the relevant benchmark set forth by a federal, state, or local laws or policies. In addition, be sure to add a brief description of the organization and setting that includes:

• The size of the facility that the dashboard is reporting on.
• The specific type of care delivery.
• The population diversity and ethnicity demographics.
• The socioeconomic level of the population served by the organization.

Note: Ensure that your data is HIPAA compliant. Do not use any easily identifiable organization or patient information.

Instructions

Structure your report in such a way that it would be easy for a colleague or supervisor to locate the information they need. Be sure to cite relevant local, state, or federal health care laws or policies when evaluating metric performance against prescribed benchmarks. Cite an additional 2–4 credible sources to support your analysis and evaluation of the challenges in meeting the benchmarks, the potential for performance improvement, and your advocacy for ethical action.

You may wish to review the Dashboard Benchmark Evaluation Example [DOC] for additional support in planning and developing your submission for this assessment.

Note: The tasks outlined below correspond to grading criteria in the scoring guide.

In your report, be sure to:

• Evaluate dashboard metrics against the benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care laws or policies.
  • Which metrics are below the mandated benchmarks in the organization? Evaluate weaknesses within the entire set of benchmarks.
  • What are the local, state, or federal health care laws or policies that set these benchmarks?
• Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for the organization or for an interprofessional team.
  • What are the specific challenges or opportunities that the organization or interprofessional team might have in meeting the benchmarks? For example, consider:
    • The strategic direction of the organization.
    • The organization’s mission.
    • Available resources:
      • Staffing.
      • Operational and capital funding.
      • Physical space.
      • Support services (any ancillary department that supports a specific care unit in the organization, such as a pharmacy, cleaning services, and dietary services).
    • Cultural diversity in the organization.
    • Cultural diversity in the community.
    • Organizational processes and procedures.
  • How might these challenges be contributing to benchmark underperformance?
• Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in the organization or interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
  • Which metric is underperforming its benchmark by the greatest degree?
  • Which benchmark underperformance is the most widespread throughout the organization or interprofessional team?
  • Which benchmark affects the greatest number of patients?
  • Which benchmark affects the greatest number of staff?
  • How does this underperformance affect the community the organization serves?
  • Where is the greatest opportunity for improvement in the overall quality or performance of the organization or interpersonal team—and ultimately in patient outcomes?
• Advocate for ethical action in addressing the benchmark underperformance that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.
  • At which group of stakeholders should your advocacy be directed? Which group could be expected to take the appropriate action to improve the benchmark metric?
  • What are some ethical actions that the stakeholder group could take that support improved benchmark performance?
  • Why should the stakeholder group take action?
• Communicate your findings and recommendations in a professional and effective manner.
  • Ensure that your report is well organized and easy to read.
  • Write clearly and logically, using correct grammar, punctuation, and mechanics.
• Integrate relevant sources to support your arguments, correctly formatting source citations and references using current APA style.
  • Did you cite relevant local, state, or federal health care laws or policies when discussing the mandated benchmarks?
  • Did you cite an additional 2–4 credible sources to support your analysis, evaluation, and advocacy?

Additional Requirements

• Structure: Include a reference page.
• Length: 2–5 pages should be sufficient for presenting a thorough and concise evaluation, not including any pages for presenting your data and your reference page.
• References: Cite 2-4 current scholarly or professional resources.
• Format: Use APA style for references and citations.
  • You may wish to refer to the following APA resources to help with your structure, formatting, and style:
    • APA Style and Format.
    • APA Paper Tutorial.
    • APA Paper Template.
• Font: Times New Roman font, 12 point, double-spaced for narrative portions only.

Grading Rubric:

1)  Evaluate dashboard metrics with regard to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws.

Passing Grade:  Evaluates dashboard metrics with regard to benchmarks set by local, state, or federal health care policies or laws, and identifies knowledge gaps, unknowns, missing information, unanswered questions, or areas of uncertainty (where further information could improve the evaluation).

2)  Analyze challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team.

Passing Grade:  Analyzes challenges that meeting prescribed benchmarks can pose for a heath care organization or an interprofessional team, and identifies assumptions on which the analysis is based.

3)  Evaluate a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance.

Passing Grade:  Evaluates a benchmark underperformance in a heath care organization or an interprofessional team that has the potential for greatly improving overall quality or performance; defends reasoning for selecting this benchmark over another with similar potential for improvement.

4)  Advocate for ethical action in addressing a benchmark underperformance, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders.

Passing Grade:  Advocates for ethical action in addressing a benchmark underperformance, directed toward an appropriate group of stakeholders, and recommends criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of the recommended action.

5)  Communicate evaluation and analysis in a professional and effective manner, writing content clearly and logically with correct use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling.

Passing Grade:  The evaluation and analysis are professional, effective, and insightful; the content is clear, logical, and persuasive; grammar, punctuation, and spelling are without errors.

6)  Integrate relevant sources to support arguments, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style.

Passing Grade:  Integrates relevant sources to support arguments, correctly formatting citations and references using current APA style. Citations are free from all errors.