JLP1 — JLP TASK 1: LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE

LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE — C493

PRFA — JLP1

COMPETENCIES

726.10.2 : Manager of the Healing Environment The graduate responds to unpredictable situations and events common in the healthcare environment with appropriate flexibility and creativity.

726.10.3 : The Nurse as Scientist The graduate correctly interprets and applies scientific evidence when planning and providing safe, quality, and culturally sensitive care for patients and families.

726.10.4 : The Nurse as Detective The graduate detects subtle changes and deviations from expected health patterns while managing the care of patients.

740.2.8 : Interprofessional Practices The graduate analyzes the impact of new and diverse advanced nursing and care provider roles on interprofessional practice.

INTRODUCTION

Nursing is a practice discipline that includes direct and indirect care activities that affect health outcomes. As a baccalaureate nursing student, you are developing new competencies in leadership, and in order to achieve mastery, you must apply those competencies to live practice experiences and situations. This Leadership Learning Experience (LLE) is designed to allow you to choose a clinical focus (e.g., practice, policy, education, population) in which you apply your leadership problem–solving skills. The LLE requires engagement with other people within the setting to complete.    You will develop a project within a practice setting that allows you to develop these leadership skills. You will identify a problem area in a practice setting that you specifically want to address (e.g., practice, policy, population, education) that aligns with organizational priorities. Example sources for the problem area may include the following:              •  Practice: joint commission standards, core measures as quality indicators, other data              •  Policy: legislation, staffing ratio, regulations from state boards              •  Population: children with diabetes, adult obesity              •  Education: future of nursing, Benner’s recommendations about nursing education

You will focus on a real-life solution for the problem. You should choose a topic that is timely, manageable, and realistic to the current healthcare environment. An external resource person (i.e., manager, clinical leader, clinical educator, policy expert, or population expert) must confirm the relevance of the selected project and your engagement in the setting as part of project completion. As with all projects, you should

TASK OVERVIEW SUBMISSIONS EVALUATION REPORT

think how you, as a nurse, function in the following roles: detective, scientist, and manager of the healing environment.

REQUIREMENTS

Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. An originality report is provided when you submit your task that can be used as a guide.

You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.

Note: Any information that would be considered confidential, proprietary, or personal in nature should not be included. Do not include the actual names of people, stakeholders, or other personally identifiable information. Fictional names should be used. Also, agency-specific data, including financial information, should not be included but should be addressed in a general fashion as appropriate.

Note: Your submission may be in a variety of formats (e.g., report, multimedia presentation).

A.    Develop a written proposal by doing the following: 1.    Identify a problem or issue related to practice, policy, population, or education that aligns with the organizational priorities you seek to solve.

Note: You may need to meet with your organization or practice setting, your manager, or your supervisor to help choose a current problem or issue.

a.    Explain the problem or issue, including why it is applicable to the area of practice you chose and the healthcare environment.

2.    Discuss your investigation of the problem or issue. a.    Provide evidence to substantiate the problem or issue (e.g., organizational assessment, national source documents, evidence from a stakeholder).

3.    Analyze the state of the situation using current data. a.    Analyze areas that might be contributing to the problem or issue.

4.    Propose a solution or innovation for the problem or issue. a.    Justify your proposed solution or innovation based on the results of your investigation and analysis.

5.    Recommend resources to implement your proposed solution or innovation. Include a cost-benefit analysis of your proposed solution or innovation. 6.    Provide a timeline for implementation based on your proposal. 7.    Discuss why each key stakeholder or partner is important for the implementation of the solution or innovation.

a.    Summarize your engagement with the key stakeholders or partners, including the input and feedback you received. b.    Discuss how you intend to work with those key stakeholders or partners in order to achieve success.

8.    Discuss how your proposed solution or innovation could be implemented, including how the implementation could be evaluated for success.

B.    Explain how you fulfilled the following roles during your process of investigation and proposal development: 1.    scientist 2.    detective 3.    manager of the healing environment

C.    Submit the completed attached “Professional Verification Form” from the organizational leader advising you in your leadership experience.

D.    Acknowledge sources, using APA-formatted in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.

E.    Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.

File Restrictions

File name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! – _ . * ‘ ( ) File size limit: 200 MB File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z

RUBRIC

A1:PROBLEM OR ISSUE

A1A:EXPLANATION OF PROBLEM OR ISSUE

A2:INVESTIGATION

NOT EVIDENT

An identification of the problem

or issue is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The identified problem or issue

is not related to practice, policy,

population, or education, or it

does not align with

organizational priorities that are

in need of solving.

COMPETENT

The identified problem or issue is

related to practice, policy,

population, or education, and it

aligns with organizational

priorities that are in need of

solving.

NOT EVIDENT

An explanation of the problem

or issue is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The explanation addresses the

problem or issue, but it does not

include an appropriate, logical

rationale for why the problem or

issue applies to the chosen area

of practice and the healthcare

environment.

COMPETENT

The explanation of the problem

or issue includes an appropriate,

logical rationale for why the

problem or issue applies to the

chosen area of practice and the

healthcare environment.

A2A:EVIDENCE OF PROBLEM OR ISSUE

A3:ANALYSIS

A3A:CONTRIBUTORS TO PROBLEM OR ISSUE

NOT EVIDENT

A discussion of the investigation

of the problem or issue is not

provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The discussion of the

investigation of the problem or

issue is illogical or vague, or the

discussion is trivial or missing

key details. Or the discussion of

the investigation is irrelevant to

the problem or issue.

COMPETENT

The discussion of the

investigation of the problem or

issue is logical and sufficiently

detailed. The discussion of the

investigation is thorough and

relates to the problem or issue.

NOT EVIDENT

Evidence to substantiate the

problem or issue is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The provided evidence fails to

substantiate the problem or

issue because it is not an

appropriate form of evidence, or

the evidence does not logically

support the problem or issue.

COMPETENT

The provided evidence

substantiates the problem or

issue because it is an appropriate

form of evidence (e.g.,

organizational assessment,

national source documents, or

evidence from a stakeholder),

and it logically supports the

problem or issue.

NOT EVIDENT

An analysis is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The analysis addresses the state

of the situation, but current data

is not used to support the

analysis. Or the analysis is

implausible or is not supported

by specific examples.

COMPETENT

The analysis addresses the state

of the situation using current

data, and it is plausible and well

supported with specific

examples.

NOT EVIDENT

An analysis is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The analysis is limited to

addressing minor areas that

contribute to the problem or

issue, or the analysis is

implausible or is not supported

with specific examples.

COMPETENT

The analysis addresses all the

areas that potentially contribute

to the problem or issue. The

analysis is plausible and well

supported with specific

examples.

A4:PROPOSED SOLUTION OR INNOVATION

A4A:JUSTIFICATION OF PROPOSED SOLUTION OR INNOVATION

A5:RESOURCES AND COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS

A6:TIMELINE

NOT EVIDENT

A proposal for a solution or

innovation for the problem or

issue is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The proposal of a solution or

innovation to the problem or

issue is illogical, inappropriate,

or missing significant

components.

COMPETENT

An appropriate solution or

innovation is proposed for the

problem or issue. The solution or

innovation is logical, well

reasoned, and includes all

significant components.

NOT EVIDENT

A justification of the proposed

solution or innovation is not

provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The justification of the proposed

solution or innovation does not

make logical connections

between the problem and the

solution, or it is not based on the

results of the investigation or

analysis.

COMPETENT

The justification of the proposed

solution or innovation makes

logical connections between the

problem and the solution, and it

is based on the results of the

investigation and analysis.

NOT EVIDENT

A recommendation or a cost-

benefit analysis is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The resources recommended

for implementation of the

proposed solution or innovation

are inappropriate for the needs

of the solution or innovation, or

the recommendation is missing

key resources. Or a cost-benefit

analysis is not included, or the

analysis is illogical or not an

accurate representation of the

needs of the proposed solution

or innovation.

COMPETENT

The resources recommended for

implementation of the proposed

solution or innovation are

appropriate for the needs of the

solution or innovation. The

recommendation includes all

essential resources. A cost-

benefit analysis is included, and it

is a logical and accurate

representation of the needs of

the proposed solution or

innovation.

NOT EVIDENT

A timeline for implementation is

not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The timeline is not accurate or

not achievable given the needs

COMPETENT

The timeline is accurate and

achievable for the needs of the

proposed solution or innovation.

A7:IMPORTANCE OF KEY STAKEHOLDERS OR PARTNERS

A7A:ENGAGEMENT WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERS OR PARTNERS

A7B:SUCCESS

A8:IMPLEMENTATION

of the proposed solution or

innovation.

NOT EVIDENT

A discussion is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

At least 1 of the stakeholders or

partners that are identified in

the discussion are inappropriate

for the implementation of the

solution or innovation, or

essential stakeholders or

partners are missing in the

discussion, or the discussion

does not address why each

identified stakeholder or

partner is important for the

implementation of the solution

or innovation.

COMPETENT

All of the key stakeholders or

partners that are identified are

appropriate for the

implementation of the solution

or innovation, and there are no

missing essential stakeholders or

partners. The discussion also

addresses why each identified

stakeholder or partner is

important for the

implementation of the solution

or innovation.

NOT EVIDENT

A summary is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The summary of the

engagement with the key

stakeholders or partners is

vague or trivial, or the summary

does not include the input and

feedback received from them.

COMPETENT

The summary of the engagement

with the key stakeholders or

partners is sufficiently detailed

and meaningful, and it includes

the input and feedback received

from them.

NOT EVIDENT

A discussion is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The discussion ineffectively

addresses how to work with the

key stakeholders or partners

discussed in part A7 in order to

achieve success. The discussion

is illogical or is missing

supportive details.

COMPETENT

The discussion effectively

addresses how to work with the

key stakeholders or partners

discussed in part A7 in order to

achieve success. The discussion is

logical and includes supportive

details.

B1:ROLE OF SCIENTIST

B2:ROLE OF DETECTIVE

B3:ROLE OF MANAGER OF THE HEALING ENVIRONMENT

NOT EVIDENT

A discussion is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The discussion ineffectively

addresses how the proposed

solution or innovation could be

implemented, or the plan for

implementation is illogical or

missing key details, or the

discussion does not include an

appropriate, well-supported, or

well-reasoned plan for how the

implementation could be

evaluated for success.

COMPETENT

The discussion effectively

addresses how the proposed

solution or innovation could be

implemented. The plan for

implementation is logical and

thorough. The discussion

includes an appropriate, well-

supported, and well-reasoned

plan for how the implementation

could be evaluated for success.

NOT EVIDENT

An explanation is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The explanation ineffectively

addresses how the role of the

scientist was fulfilled during the

investigation process and

proposal development, or the

explanation is vague or lacks

specific, relevant examples.

COMPETENT

The explanation effectively

addresses how the role of the

scientist was fulfilled during the

investigation process and

proposal development. The

explanation is detailed and

includes specific, relevant

examples.

NOT EVIDENT

An explanation is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The explanation ineffectively

addresses how the role of the

detective was fulfilled during

the investigation process and

proposal development. The

explanation is vague or lacks

specific, relevant examples.

COMPETENT

The explanation effectively

addresses how the role of the

detective was fulfilled during the

investigation process and

proposal development. The

explanation is detailed and

includes specific, relevant

examples.

NOT EVIDENT

An explanation is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The explanation ineffectively

addresses how the role of the

manager of the healing

COMPETENT

The explanation effectively

addresses how the role of the

manager of the healing

environment was fulfilled during

C:VERIFICATION FORM

D:APA SOURCES

E:PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

environment was fulfilled during

the investigation process and

proposal development. The

explanation is vague or lacks

specific, relevant examples.

the investigation process and

proposal development. The

explanation is detailed and

includes specific, relevant

examples.

NOT EVIDENT

A submission is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The “Professional Verification

Form” from the organizational

leader advising leadership

experience is submitted, but the

submission is incomplete.

COMPETENT

The submission of the

“Professional Verification Form”

from the organizational leader

advising leadership experience is

complete.

NOT EVIDENT

The submission does not include

in-text citations and references

according to APA style for

content that is quoted,

paraphrased, or summarized.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The submission includes in-text

citations and references for

content that is quoted,

paraphrased, or summarized but

does not demonstrate a

consistent application of APA

style.

COMPETENT

The submission includes in-text

citations and references for

content that is quoted,

paraphrased, or summarized and

demonstrates a consistent

application of APA style.

NOT EVIDENT

Content is unstructured, is

disjointed, or contains pervasive

errors in mechanics, usage, or

grammar. Vocabulary or tone is

unprofessional or distracts from

the topic.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

Content is poorly organized, is

difficult to follow, or contains

errors in mechanics, usage, or

grammar that cause confusion.

Terminology is misused or

ineffective.

COMPETENT

Content reflects attention to

detail, is organized, and focuses

on the main ideas as prescribed

in the task or chosen by the

candidate. Terminology is

pertinent, is used correctly, and

effectively conveys the intended

meaning. Mechanics, usage, and

grammar promote accurate

interpretation and

understanding.https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/71484321https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/27641407

Professional Verification Form.docx