Prospectus Checklist

Please carefully read all the instructions below and use the attached Prospectus Checklist and Template to complete this assignment in APA format with a minimum of 15 to 20 scholarly references less than five years old.

The facility recently transitioned to a new and better electronic health record system and also purchased standardized care plans which are supposed to be more efficient, unfortunately, the compliance with using the standardized care plans by the inpatient nurses is only 40%. Also, the facility recently had a visit of the Joint Commission and received a negative mark for the nurses not adding care plans based on the patients’ primary problem (s) or diagnosis in the patients’ charts upon admission.

Title: Educating Inpatient Nurses to use Standardized Care Plans (Based on this title, please formulate a PICO question which gear on educating the nurses to use the hospital standardized care plans)

Main Problem with the nurses in the Hospital.

(1)   There’s poor compliance with the nurses not adding the standardized care plans to the patient’s chart based on the patients’ diagnosis or primary problem(s) upon admission to the facility.

(2)    Nurses are not using the already built in standardized care plans in the electronic health record system of the hospital to include individualized standardized care plans to the patients’ chart based on the patients’ diagnosis or primary problem(s) upon the patients’ admission to the hospital.

(3)   The hospital recently had a visit of the Joint Commission and got penalized for the nurses not adding care plans to the patients’ chart based on the patient’s diagnosis or primary problem(s) to the already built-in individualized patient care plans in the hospital electronic health record system.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

What are the benefits of adding and documenting on individualized standardize care plan in patient’s chart? 

___ Set of care plans are available and nurses do not have to develop a care plan

___ If nurse selects and adds care plan, it will automatically populate into patient’s chart

___ Patient’s educational tablet is dependent on nurses’ completion of adding care plan to the

patient’s chart.

___ Decreases nurses’ workflow time because preset care plan

___Nurses do not have to do any follow up teaching on care plan

Revised PICO Question: Will an educational tool increase the inpatient nurses’ knowledge about the use of the hospital newly built-in standardized care plans system as compared to not using the standardized care plans?   (based on all the above, I came up with this question, but you can correct it or formulate a better one which gears towards educating the inpatient nurses to use the standardized care plans)

Problem:

1) Poor compliance, just 40% of the hospital inpatient nurses are using the hospital newly built-in standardized care plans.

2) The Joint Commission (JHACO) penalized the hospital during a recent visit to the hospital because only a small percentage of the admitted patient had a care plan upon admission based on their diagnosis or primary problem(s).

3) The hospital recently transitioned to a new and better electronic health record system (EHRs) and some nurses are stating that they haven’t received enough education on how to use the standardized care plans on the hospital new EHRs.

 

Below is the Joint Commission Standard for Care Plans

Joint Commission Standard

• The      medical record contains the following clinical information:

– The reason(s) for admission for care, treatment, and services

– The patient’s initial diagnosis, diagnostic impression(s), or condition(s)

– Any findings of assessments and reassessments

– Any allergies to food

– Any allergies to medications

– Any conclusions or impressions drawn from the patient’s medical history

and physical examination

– Any diagnoses or conditions established during the patient’s course of

care, treatment, and services (including complications and hospital acquired

infections).

– Any consultation reports

– Any observations relevant to care, treatment, and services

– The patient’s response to care, treatment, and services

– Any emergency care, treatment, and services provided to the patient

before his or her arrival

– Any progress notes

– All orders

– Any medications ordered or prescribed

– Any medications administered, including the strength, dose, route, date

and time of administration

– Any access site for medication, administration devices used, and rate of

administration

– Any adverse drug reactions

– Treatment goals, plan of care, and revisions to the plan of care

– Results of diagnostic and therapeutic tests and procedures

– Any medications dispensed or prescribed on discharge

– Discharge diagnosis

– Discharge plan and discharge planning

• The hospital plans the patient’s care      based on needs identified by the patient assessment, reassessment, and      results. The written plan of care is based on patient goals and time      frames required to meet goals. Patient care plan is based on established goals where      staff evaluate the patient progress Patient’s care plan is revised with      goals based on patient’s needs

POPULATION: Inpatient Nurses

INTERVENTION: (Will an educational tool?) Best method on educating inpatient nurses on identifying appropriate patient’s diagnosis or primary problem upon admission to select individualized care plan and document on the interventions / progress toward patient goals each shift in Epic EHRs.

COMPARISON: Regular Care plan

OUTCOMEs:

• Patient      Outcome:
  • Reduced       variability in patient care delivery. Accurate monitoring of progression       toward evidence-based care plan interventions and goals.
  • Accurate       monitoring of patient education progression driven from correct diagnosis-based       care plan added on admission to       the patient’s chart.
    • Metrics: nursing documentation on education,        interventions, and care plan goals
• Process      Outcome:
  • Nurse       will increase correct application of evidence-based care plan based on       identification of correct diagnosis or primary problem upon admission       Increase documentation of evidence-based interventions and patient       progress toward care plan goals in EPIC each shift. .
  • Increase       completion of education/learning assessment upon admission and each shift.
    • Metrics’        compliance: correct application of care plan based on admitting        diagnosis, shift documentation of evidence-based interventions and care        plan goals, patient education/learning assessment documentationThe following checklist provides a tool to develop the DNP Doctoral Prospectus. The doctoral prospectus involves multiple steps. Included in this prospectus checklist are the basic expectations for completing the prospectus following the annotated prospectus guide. For further detail on the content of each section of the prospectus, please refer to the Prospectus Guide. To understand how the prospectus is evaluated by the committee and the Program Director of designee, use the Prospectus Rubric as a guide.

      · Instructions for students:

      · Indicate on the checklist the page numbers (use the actual document page number, not the MS Word pagination) where the appropriate content is located.

      · Respond to comments from the committee in the comment history box. Do not delete previous commentsjust add your response in the appropriate space.

      · Instructions for the DNP Doctoral Project committee chair, second member, and PhD Program Director/Designee.

      · Provide specific feedback in the comment history column. Do not delete previous commentsjust add your response and use some means to clearly identify your remarks (e.g., colored, bolded, or italicized text).

      · If you made detailed comments on the draft (using track changes and comments), you can make reference to such comments in the draft rather than copy the text into the checklist comment history section.

      Student’s Name:      

      Student ID:      

      Date:      

      Committee Members

      Chairperson:      

      Member:      

      Prospectus Checklist
      The Prospectus Document includes a title page (page 1) followed by pages containing the required elements. Title must be 12 words or less, double-space if it is more than one line of type, and center it at the top of the page. Capitalize each major word. Include your name, your program (Doctor of Nursing Practice) and your Banner ID number – double spaced and centered under the title. Please use the Prospectus template on the DNP Resources page. Note: Your doctoral project title will likely change as the project evolves so allow yourself the flexibility to adapt your title as necessary.		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      Title
      Start with “Prospectus” and a colon, and then include the title as it appears on the title page. Double space if it is more than one line and center at the top of the page		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      Problem Statement
      a) State the practice focused problem that your project will address. Provide a 2-paragraphs statement that establishes the relevance of this problem.		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      b) Summarize preliminary, supporting evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful and relevant to the local setting as well as the broader field of nursing practice, citing key scholarly sources.
      c) Explicitly state the gap in nursing practice or problem that will be the focus of this doctoral project
      d) Describe the problem as it relates to the target population for this project.
      Practice-Focused Question(s)
      a) Describe the meaningful gap-in-practice that this doctoral project addresses.		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      b) State the guiding practice-focused question(s) for this doctoral project.
      c) Briefly explain the practice focused question as it is relevant to the identified gap in practice.
      Note: PICO format is not required.
      Social Change
      a) Describe how this project will impact social change for healthcare consumers, organizations and the profession		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      b) State how this project supports the mission of Walden University to promote positive social change.
      c) Specify who might benefit from the project and in what ways the information from the project might result in positive social change.
      Context for the Doctoral Project
      a) Briefly describe the intended setting for the doctoral project.		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      b) Explain how this project can be accomplished in the identified setting or context.
      Sources of Evidence
      a) Include relevant evidence that supports the need to address the identified problem at the local and broader context (Examples: Current EBP guidelines, literature preferably from the past 5 years, deidentified anecdotal data, (refer to DNP manuals for IRB approved data sources for specific project types).		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      b) Describe how the evidence justifies that this practice problem is important to the nursing profession.
      Approach or Procedural Steps
      a) Identify your possible approach/procedural steps, summarize possible strategies to obtain the data and resources needed to complete the doctoral project. Examples may include anonymous participant questionnaires (see DNP IRB approved data types for each of the four DNP manuals for more information)		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      b) Is this project from among the acceptable types listed on the DNP Resources page? Note: Evidence or data cannot be collected prior to approval of the full committee and the IRB.
      Ethical
      a) Describe how this project will provide protection for human subjects.		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      b) Describe the region of the data source(s) without stating the specific location. Withhold descriptors of participants such as titles, demographics, etc. to ensure that participants are not identifiable. (Check with the IRB if unsure.)
      c) State any potential ethical issues that may present problems for the completion of this project. If none, clarify. Note: See IRB section of the DNP manual to determine ethical requirements.
      Alignment
      a) Do the various aspects of the prospectus align overall?		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.
      b) State what credible sources support the practice problem.
      c) Describe how the practice-focused question/s and the approach or procedural steps will address the practice problem you describe in the problem statement.
      References
      Use APA format for this prospectus. Include a minimum of 15 – 20 APA-formatted peer-reviewed references to support intext citations in the Doctoral Project Prospectus. Note: References should be within most recent 5 years.		Chair comments: (click here)      Second Member comments: (click here)      Student comments: (click here)      ☐Chair accepts items as complete.

      APA Form and Style Check

      Walden University

      Manual for STAFF EDUCATION Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) Scholarly Project

      May 2019

      Prior to beginning the work of any DNP scholarly project, Walden students will complete the steps of prospectus development and approval. Once the prospectus is approved the committee will be formed, proposal developed and oral proposal defense completed per the DNP Project Process Guide. The ethics approval process begins during proposal development but can only be finalized after the proposal defense is entered into MyDR/Taskstream. Principles of Staff Education There is no single model for development and delivery of Staff Education, as clinical needs, organizational structures and budget will guide the concepts and processes.

       The program must include a well-developed framework for effective programming and evaluation for the adult learners within the context of the setting.

       Evaluation must be planned and should be formative or iterative in nature, with ongoing evaluation occurring throughout the planning stages.

       Key stakeholders should be included in the process.  A process for summative or impact evaluation must be included that demonstrates

      outcomes related to the identified Staff Education program objectives.  The evaluation should identify the programs impact on social change as an

      outcome.

      Definition of Staff Education Projects Staff education may include nurse residencies, orientation, in-service education, and continuing education of professional staff. Walden requires that a partner organization oversee the staff education activities. Walden is able to oversee the evaluation data collection, if the site wishes (see IRB steps below). Programs may be multi-disciplinary in nature, meaning that other professional healthcare clinicians may attend and benefit from the content. Staff education is usually developed to meet a need identified by an organization or clinical practice setting to improve patient care, achieve standards of practice or to meet regulatory guidelines. DNP students may not develop Scholarly Projects that involve patients, families, or pre- professional students as their target population.. It is important to understand the expectations for accomplishing a Staff Education Project in the context of the DNP Scholarly Project. Scholarly Projects related to Staff Education are aligned with the DNP Essentials. Doctor of Nursing Program Capstone Resources https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/researchcenter/osra/dnp Purpose of Staff Education

      May 2019

      For the DNP Nurse, Staff Education is often used to help inform and improve knowledge and skills using current evidence-based practices. Steps for Developing a Staff Education Project There are numerous instructional design models available for developing education programs. One of the most common is the ADDIE model (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation). The ADDIE model is discussed in chapter 2 of the Jeffery, Longo, & Nienaber required staff education textbook under required resources in this document. Planning

      • Meet with committee chair to explore topic and narrow down focus to select a project that meets the requirements of a DNP staff education module

      • Analyze need and establish the criteria for the Staff Education program using available existing data from site, literature, or theoretical support.

      • Discuss needs and staff education program goals with organizational leadership (via informal conversation rather than survey/interview)

      • Obtain a commitment of support from organizational leadership • Identify (and confirm) content expert(s) to review educational materials. • Research the literature for relevant teaching materials or content that address the

      program goals. Unless literature has historical relevance, all literature should be within fives years of date of completion.

      • Formulate specific learning objectives that are measurable and reasonable for the project selected • Develop the Staff Education program, including the content and the delivery

      strategy using appropriate instructional methods and theoretical framework (teaching/learning, adult education, and nursing theories) Currently adopted educational materials may be adapted for use in this project with the permission of the author/s.

      • Seek appropriate ethics approval at the site and through Walden IRB (see below). Implementation

      • Verify the Staff Education program plan with organizational leadership and end- users via formative or iterative review

      • Revise the Staff Education program plan based on formative or iterative review • Present the revised Staff Education Program to organizational leadership and

      end-users/key stakeholders and discuss to validate content and ensure usability • Secure evidence-based resources to implement the Staff Education program • Finalize development of the Staff Education program including a second

      anonymous questionnaire review with organizational leadership and end-users • Support the organization in the recruitment of staff for the education program,

      unless the program is required by the organization. Note that the site, not Walden, will be overseeing the education program so all recruitment materials must reflect that.

      Evaluation

      May 2019

      • Review chapters 5 and 6 of the Jeffery, Longo, & Nienaber required staff education textbook to develop evaluation methods and materials

      • Have the participants complete a summative or impact evaluation (pre and post-test) of their learning based on an anonymous paper-based or online questionnaire that is directly related to the identified learning objectives. If a validated questionnaire is available, that should be used, as opposed to the student creating a new questionnaire.

      • When possible, it is recommended that the student apply for, and receive approval for continuing education credits from an approved provider.

      • If providing continuing education credits utilize evaluation methods provided by the provider.

      • Determine the effectiveness of the Staff Education program through analysis of the summative or impact evaluation (pre and post-test).

      • Analysis procedures used should be aligned with practice-focused question(s) (e.g., descriptive statistics or inferential statistics to determine the difference between the two means ).If inferential statistics are utilized limitations must be noted.

      • Communicate the results and recommendations to organizational leadership and program stakeholders

      • Present findings through DNP final project following DNP template and Checklist which are submitted with the paper in MyDR/Taskstream.

      The doctoral project is grounded in a focused application of related concepts, models, and/or theories consistent with the DNP Checklist.

      Obtaining ethics approval in compliance with Institutional Review Board (IRB) requirements All doctoral projects are required to have ethics approval from the university’s IRB, even those that might not be considered “research.” The DNP program has set up a blanket ethics pre-approval for Staff Education Doctoral Projects falling within the parameters described in the blue table below, as per the pre-approved Site Approval Form (Appendix A) and the Consent Form for Anonymous Questionnaires (Appendix B). Only Staff Education projects involving public data, the literature, anonymous questionnaires from site staff, and archival data from the organization(s) are eligible for the blanket pre- approval. Edits to Appendices A and B are not permitted. If a student needs to customize anything about either of the two appendices or add more data points (such as observations, or interviews), then the blanket approval cannot be utilized (and the student should follow the standard IRB approval steps in the DNP Project Process Guide. Steps for ethics approval: These steps can be completed any time after (a) the chair has uploaded the proposal into MyDR for URR review, and (b) the student has identified a site.

      May 2019

      Step 1: To quality for pre-approved status, each doctoral student completing a Staff Education project is responsible for completing the web-based Form A (the same form that all DNP students use to start the ethics approval process). In the first page of Form A, the student needs to indicate that s/he will be conducting a project that falls within the pre-approved parameters for a Staff Education project and this will cause the form to skip the questions that are not applicable. The student will also need to enter the details for the partner site(s). The final page in Form A will provide instructions for next steps, based on the responses the student enters into Form A. Step 2: For Staff Education projects on the pre-approved track, the instructions on the final page of Form A will indicate that the student can either upload the signed Site Approval Form (Appendix A) into the form or email it to IRB@waldenu.edu at a later date. Note that the Consent Form (Appendix B) doesn’t need to be sent to IRB because it has already been pre-approved and doesn’t need to be signed.

      Step 3: Once Form A is received by the IRB, an IRB staff member will respond within 10 business days to the student and chair with either (a) an email confirmation that the ethical standards have been met (i.e., the data collection procedures fall within the pre-approved parameters), or (b) a request for more information. For certain sites (within Department of Defense, international contexts, universities, or research hospital systems), additional documentation and compliance steps may be required by the site, so the IRB staff will work with the student to meet all of the site’s requirements. The IRB would continue to correspond with the student until all ethical issues are addressed. Once (a) occurs, the student can focus on working toward proposal approval. Doctoral students with project data falling outside the pre-approved parameters will be directed to obtain IRB approval in the standard manner, which is likely to take a minimum of 4 weeks longer.

      Step 4: At this point, to finalize ethics approval, a student just needs to have the project design approved via the proposal defense. Thus, once the student successfully defends the proposal, the MyDR system will automatically copy the IRB on the proposal approval notice and that will trigger the IRB to reach out to the student via email to confirm whether/how the data collection plan might have changed as a result of the proposal defense. If changes to the data collection plan were made, then the IRB will need updated versions of the ethics application materials. If the student confirms no changes were made, then the IRB will email the student and chair a formal ethics approval notification which signifies that the student may begin collecting data.

      The doctoral student must be actively enrolled in the doctoral project course to receive final IRB approval notification and must remain enrolled while completing

      May 2019

      the project, including data collection. IRB approval is not valid if a student is on a leave of absence or otherwise not enrolled.

      A Staff Education project is also required to adhere to the following ethical requirements:

       In the doctoral project documents, the doctoral student must change the name of any partner organizations and generalize the location(s) so that the organizations are not identifiable. It is important that the doctoral student redact any information that could lead a reader to identify an organization’s identity. If the organization itself wishes to publicize the project, that will be the organization’s judgment call. However, it is not appropriate for a doctoral student to make the partner site’s name known in the doctoral project document that will be published in ProQuest. The doctoral student is required to change the name of the organization in all materials (including drafts shared with peers and faculty members) to protect the organization’s identity. In some cases, it might be appropriate for the doctoral student to maintain confidentiality by removing key pieces of evidence/data that might give away the organization’s identity. The doctoral student should direct questions to IRB@waldenu.edu when these situations arise.

       The doctoral student is responsible for complying with all of the organization’s

      policies. This includes, but is not limited to, site IRB policies and site resource use policies (pertaining to copying/ printing materials, etc.).

       The doctoral student may not collect any type of data from patients or patients’

      family members for this type of project. If at some point the doctoral student wishes to pursue that type of data collection, s/he will need to follow the standard university procedures to obtain prior approval from the Walden University IRB.

       Collecting data from human subjects without appropriate IRB approval can result in invalidation of the data and dismissal from the program.

       The doctoral student is responsible for ensuring that no proprietary, sensitive, or

      confidential information is disclosed in the doctoral project document. The doctoral student is responsible for learning about the organization’s policies on use of the organization’s resources (including email addresses, printing materials, etc.) for individual projects. Many organizations have restrictions on use of company resources for educational projects.

      Other student obligations will be outlined in the final page of Form A. Faculty supervision requirements for Staff Education projects include the following:

       The supervising faculty member will ensure that the student properly requests any project design changes by emailing ethicsDNP@waldenu.edu.

      May 2019

       The supervising faculty member will ensure that the student promptly reports any unexpected or otherwise significant adverse events and general problems within 1 week by emailing ethicsDNP@waldenu.edu.

       The supervising faculty member will report any possible noncompliance on the part of the student by emailing ethicsDNP@waldenu.edu.

       The supervising faculty member’s supervision role continues as long as the student remains enrolled in the present course with the faculty member.

      Data Sources that have been Pre-approved by IRB for Staff Education Doctoral Projects

      Public data: Reports, websites

      Media coverage, publicly disseminated reports, public websites, any information that is available to the public

      Literature as Data Books, peer-reviewed articles, and other bodies of written knowledge that communicate theories and findings about practices that are relevant to the student’s doctoral project

      Anonymous Questionnaires from Staff

      Using the pre-approved Consent Form for Anonymous Questionnaires in Appendix B, students may conduct paper or online surveys of staff members as long as they are anonymous. If pre and post testing is used, then a coding system may be used (instead of names) to link a person’s pretest and posttest score.

      May 2019

      Partner organization’s internal data*: operational records and other artifacts

      Partner organization’s de-identified records* including: aggregate** patient records, operational records pertaining to staff training and delivery of care, meeting minutes, digital/audio/video recordings created by site, training materials, protocols, manuals, reports, agreements, questionnaires that were administered under auspices of site as part of quality improvement (QI) operations, and other internal documents that the site has released to the student for use in the doctoral project

      *as the partner organization’s leadership deems fit to share with student (as per confidentiality terms in this guide) **Students are only pre-approved to analyze patient records that have been aggregated via asking a site contact for high level summary data (without the student actually looking at patient records). Examples:

       Citing rates of certain diagnoses: “Before the new protocol was implemented, 20% of asthma cases were readmitted within 30 days. After the protocol was implemented, re-admissions went down to 10%.”

       Citing patterns among patients: “At this facility, males are twice as likely to be admitted for [X diagnosis] than females.”

       Press Ganey scores can be analyzed.  Patient satisfaction reports can be analyzed.

      The table below includes those data tools that do NOT fall under the IRB’s pre- approval. Any student wishing to analyze one of the data sources below must go through the standard IRB process to gain formal IRB approval independently.

      Data Sources that are NOT Pre-approved by IRB for Staff Education Doctoral Projects

      (These all require the student to obtain IRB review/approval independently via the standard process.)

      Patient Records with identifiers

      While students may in some cases access patient records during the practicum in support of patient care, the IRB pre-approval does not cover students accessing patient records for the purpose of the doctoral project analysis.

      May 2019

      Interviews or Focus Groups

      The pre-approval does not cover interviews or focus groups.

      Data Collection from Patients

      The pre-approval does not cover posing questions to patients via any method (questionnaires, interviews, focus groups).

      Video as Data

      The pre-approval does not cover filming of events to observe behaviors, study environments and processes, or capture products and/or outcomes.

      Observations of specific individuals

      The pre-approval does not include collection of observational data.

      References

      Required Jeffery, A.D., Longo, M.A, & Nienaber, A. (2015). Staff educator’s guide to professional development: Assessing and enhancing nursing competency. Indianapolis: IN: Sigma Theta Tau International.

      Recommended

      Abruzzese, R. S. (1992). Nursing staff development: Strategies for success. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book.

      American Nurses Association. (1976). Guidelines for staff development: continuing

      education in nursing. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 7(2), 37- 46. doi: 10.3928/0022-0124-19760301-09

      Boone, E. J., Safrit, R. D., & Jones, J. (2002). Developing programs in adult education: A

      conceptual programming model. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. New York: Springer. Dirksen, J. (2016). Design for how people learn. Berkeley, CA: New Riders. Donato, E., Lightfoot, N., Carter, L., & Macewan, L. (2016). Interprofessional education

      in Canadian nursing programs and implications for continuing education. Journal of Professional, Continuing, and Online Education, 1. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18741/P9MW20

      Duteau, J. (2012). Making a difference: The value of preceptorship programs in nursing

      education. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing 43(1), 37-43. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20110615-01

      May 2019

      Fisher, C. A., Rietschel, M. J., & O’Neil, C. A. (2014). Developing Online Learning Environments in Nursing Education. Springer.

      Gormley, D. (2013). Considerations when developing online continuing education programs in nursing. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 29(3), 149- 151. doi: 10.1097/NND.0b013e318291c47d

      Iwasiw, C., Goldenberg, D., & Andrusyszyn, M. (2008). Curriculum development in nursing education. Jones & Bartlett.

      Jones-Schenk J. (2016). Think competencies, not hours, when planning your next education initiative. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 47(8), 350- 352. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20160715-04

      Keating, S. B. (2015). Curriculum development and evaluation in nursing.

      Kemp, J. E., Smellie, D. C., & Kemp, J. E. (1989). Planning, producing, and using instructional media. New York: Harper & Row.

      Knowles, M., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. San Diego: Elsevier.

      Merriam, S. B. (2008). Third update on adult learning theory. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

      Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

      Schindler J. (2016). Meeting education needs of flexible staffing: Begin with the end in

      mind. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 47(9), 390-392. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20160817-03

      Scope and standards of practice for nursing professional development. (2000).

      Washington, D.C.: American Nurses Association. Sweeney, N. M., Saarmann, L., Flagg, J. & Seidman, R. (2008). The keys to successful

      online continuing education programs for nurses. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 39(1), 34-41. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20080101-09

      May 2019

      Appendix A: Site Approval Form for Staff Education Doctoral Project Name of Doctoral Student: _________________________________________________

      Name of Doctoral Student’s Partner Organization: ______________________________

      Date: ________

      The doctoral student named above is involved in Staff Education that will be conducted under the auspices of the organization named above. This form is the student’s formal request to evaluate the staff education by administering anonymous staff questionnaires and analyzing internal, de-identified site records that this form’s signer deems appropriate to release for the student’s doctoral project. This permission to use the organization’s data pertains only to this doctoral project and not to the student’s future scholarly projects or research (which would need a separate request for approval). As per DNP program requirements, the student will publish a scholarly report of this Staff Education project in ProQuest as a doctoral capstone (with site and individual identifiers withheld), as per the following ethical standards:

      a. In all reports (including drafts shared with peers and faculty members), the student is required to maintain confidentiality by removing names and key pieces of evidence/data that might disclose the organization’s identity or an individual’s identity or inappropriately divulge proprietary details. If the organization itself wishes to publicize the findings of this project, that will be the organization’s judgment call. b. The student will be responsible for complying with the above-named organization’s policies and requirements regarding data collection (including the need for the organization’s IRB review/approval, if applicable). c. Via a Consent Form for Anonymous Questionnaires, the student will describe to staff members how the data will be used in the doctoral project and how the stakeholders’ autonomy and privacy will be protected.

      Approval signature from site representative: ____________________________________

      Name of signer (print legibly): ______________________________________________

      Position of signer within organization (must be authorized by the organization to approve

      the questionnaires/data release described above): _______________________________

      Signer’s contact information: _______________________________________________

      May 2019

      Appendix B: Consent Form for Anonymous Questionnaires

      To be given to the staff member prior to collecting questionnaire responses—obtaining a “consent signature” is not appropriate for this type of questionnaire and providing respondents with anonymity is required. You are invited to take part in an evaluation for the staff education doctoral project that I am conducting. Questionnaire Procedures: If you agree to take part, I will be asking you to provide your responses anonymously, to help reduce bias and any sort of pressure to respond a certain way. Staff members’ questionnaire responses will be analyzed as part of my doctoral project, along with any archival data, reports, and documents that the organization’s leadership deems fit to share. Voluntary Nature of the Project: This project is voluntary. If you decide to join the project now, you can still change your mind later. Risks and Benefits of Being in the Project: Being in this project would not pose any risks beyond those of typical daily professional activities. This project’s aim is to provide data and insights to support the organization’s success. Privacy: I might know that you completed a questionnaire but I will not know who provided which responses. Any reports, presentations, or publications related to this study will share general patterns from the data, without sharing the identities of individual respondents or partner organization(s). The questionnaire data will be kept for a period of at least 5 years, as required by my university. Contacts and Questions: If you want to talk privately about your rights in relation to this project, you can call my university’s Advocate via the phone number 612-312-1210. Walden University’s ethics approval number for this study is (Student will need to complete Form A in order to obtain an ethics approval number). Before you start the questionnaire, please share any questions or concerns you might have.

 

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.