Evaluation Plan Paper
Evaluation Plan Paper
Managing diabetes has been a great challenge in the US despite the country using close to $190 million in the past to reduce the 8.3% prevalence of the issue among its population. For the past years, healthcare centers have been facing problems related to the effective management of diabetes. While some of the poor management of the disease comes from the administrative point of view, other problems are related to the clinical approach to the disease (Hanrahan et al., 2020). Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to explore an evaluation plan supporting the PICOT question that deals with the EBP proposed for Diabetes among Hispanics. The PICOT question that guides this research is: In Hispanic adults with Type II diabetes mellitus (P), does a culturally tailored diabetes education program (I) compared to a traditional diabetes education program (C) increase self-management of DM (O) in 6 months (T)?
Expected Outcome
The setting for this project will be aiming to develop self-management of DM through culturally tailored diabetes education programs. The self-management strategies aim to prevent and minimize the exposure of patients and health care providers to poor diabetes management measures. The potential subjects included patients undergoing culturally-tailored self-management strategies and healthcare providers. Healthcare providers and patients provided data needed to determine the project’s effectiveness. Since the project does not focus on acquiring identifiable data, informed consent was obtained from the potential subjects. However, approval was sought from the hospital before implementing the project. These measures were in place to meet the expected outcome of adopting effective management of diabetes among the patients.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE-PAPER HERE
Data Collection Tools
The evaluation phase will use a quantitative design to collect data and evaluate the effectiveness of the evidence-based practice project proposal. The quantitative design will be appropriate as it will determine the project’s effectiveness using numbers rather than narrations in a qualitative design. The quantitative design will also enable easy and fast data collection using methods such as questionnaires (Jolley, 2020). Analyzing data in quantitative design is also easy since the obtained data can be ordered and analyzed numerically. The costs incurred in collecting data for project evaluation through quantitative design will also be lower when compared to the use of qualitative methods. Therefore, the quantitative design is the most desirable than the project’s qualitative design.
Struggling to meet your deadline ?
Get assistance on
Evaluation Plan Paper
done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
Statistical Test
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) decides whether three or more populations are statistically different. The evaluation of the two groups would adopt this test because of its ability to compare the difference between culturally tailored diabetes self-management strategies education programs and traditional diabetes education self-management strategies. This test will form a significant part of statistical analysis as it aids the researcher in understanding the variation between variables used in the study (Connelly, 2021). For instance, one-way ANOVA has information on the variables between selected variables. The choice of this test stems from its ability to compare two different populations in the study.
Methods of Data Collection
Questionnaires will be used in collecting information from the patients and nurses who administered the self-management strategies for DM of the proposed project. Questionnaires will be administered to Diabetes patients registered in one of the two education programs in the last six months (Grund et al., 2021). Besides, nurses administering the programs would also receive a separate questionnaire concerning the EBP implementation to obtain data about their experiences with the proposed project. Questionnaires are appropriate due to the ease of administration to the potential subjects. They also enable data acquisition that can be organized easily for data analysis. The questionnaires will also facilitate an objective assessment of the project’s effectiveness (Hopp & Rittenmeyer, 2021).
ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE-PAPER HERE
This method will be important in collecting quantitative data that will show the percentage of patients that registered an improvement from the EBP approach. This outcome will be important in evaluating the effectiveness of the EBP proposed plan in managing Diabetes (Grund et al., 2021). An increase in the number of patients discharged from various facilities would be a sign of a positive outcome from the self-management strategies applied to the Diabetic patients in these institutions.
Strategies to be taken if the Outcomes are not Positive
Failing to meet the objectives of the EBP project is a common issue that comes from poor project planning. However, failure will not stop the project from rectifying its problems. The successful solution to the project’s failures will require more emphasis on human and financial resources (Storey et al., 2019). The human resources will include healthcare providers, trainers of trainees, and management that will oversee the implementation process. Financial resources will be needed for training healthcare providers, hiring trainers, purchasing and project monitoring and evaluation, data collection, and managing unforeseen events in the project. Several stakeholders will be involved to minimize the risk of resistance. Nurse Managers in the hospital will coordinate the implementation process more keenly than before. These measures would be important in correcting problems that affected the initial implementation of the EBP project.
Plans to Maintain, Extend, Revise, and Discontinue a Proposed Solution after Implementation
The stakeholders would have a big role to play after implementing the EBP project. For instance, they will be expected to be on the site for six months t ensure that the plan for the implementation is followed effectively (Drisko & Grady, 2019). The administration team would also be expected to offer their full support to the project to provide all the necessary resources that would allow the EBP project to give the desired positive outcome. The unity of professionals through the implementation process would be expected to meet the patient outcome that the EBP project intended to meet.
Conclusion
Diabetes is one of the most common conditions that negatively impact the patients’ health; therefore, there is a need to control and manage the condition. The proposed evaluation plan aims to collect the most effective data that would support the application of the EBP project. Therefore, this paper has explored the evaluation plan related to the project and the proposed PICOT question.
References
Connelly, L. M. (2021). Introduction to analysis of variance (ANOVA). Medsurg Nursing, 30(3), 218-158. https://www.proquest.com/openview/f36618bf567ad1c0108cea9ffbebc18d/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=30764
Drisko, J. W., & Grady, M. D. (2019). Steps 5 and 6 of EBP: Finalizing the Treatment Plan and Practice Evaluation. In Evidence-Based Practice in Clinical Social Work (pp. 187-199). Springer, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-15224-6_10
Grund, S., Lüdtke, O., & Robitzsch, A. (2021). On the treatment of missing data in background questionnaires in educational large-scale assessments: An evaluation of different procedures. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 46(4), 430-465. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F1076998620959058
Hanrahan, K., Utech, J., Cullen, L., Tucker, S. J., & Gallagher-Ford, L. (2020). EBP 2.0: Implementing and Sustaining Change: Implementing Improved Central Line Flushing Practices. AJN The American Journal of Nursing, 120(8), 66-70. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000694600.82867.24
Hopp, L., & Rittenmeyer, L. (2021). Introduction to Evidence-Based Practice: A Practical Guide for Nursing. F.A. Davis.
Storey, S., Wagnes, L., LaMothe, J., Pittman, J., Cohee, A., & Newhouse, R. (2019). Building evidence-based nursing practice capacity in a large statewide health system: A multimodal approach. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 49(4), 208-214. doi: 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000739
ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE-PAPER HERE
My EBP project is: In Hispanic adults with Type II diabetes mellitus (P), does a culturally tailored diabetes education program (I compared to a traditional diabetes education program (C) increase self-management of DM (O) in 6 months (T)?
In 750-1,000 words, develop an evaluation plan to be included in your final evidence-based practice project proposal. You will use the evaluation plan in the Topic 8 assignment, during which you will synthesize the various aspects of your project into a final paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.
Provide the following criteria in the evaluation, making sure it is comprehensive and concise:
Discuss the expected outcomes for your evidence-based practice project proposal.
Review the various data collection tools associated with your selected research design and select one data collection tool that would be effective for your research design. Explain how this tool is valid, reliable, and applicable.
Select a statistical test for your project and explain why it is best suited for the tool you choose.
Describe what methods you will apply to your data collection tool and how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool you selected.
Propose strategies that will be taken if outcomes do not provide positive or expected results.
Describe the plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation.
Refer to the “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal – Assignment Overview” document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.
You are required to cite a minimum of five peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
Complete the “APA Writing Checklist” to ensure that your paper adheres to APA style and formatting criteria and general guidelines for academic writing. Include the completed checklist as an appendix at the end of your paper.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE-PAPER HERE
Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Evaluation Plan – Rubric
Collapse All Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Evaluation Plan – Rubric
Collapse All
Expected Outcomes for Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal
14.4 points
Criteria Description
Expected Outcomes for Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal
5. 5: Excellent
14.4 points
Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are discussed. Thorough explanations and strong supporting research are provided.
4. 4: Good
13.25 points
Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are discussed. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
12.67 points
Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are summarized. More information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
11.52 points
Some expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are only partially outlined.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are not discussed.
Data Collection Tools
12 points
Criteria Description
Data Collection Tools
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
A data collection tool is selected and a well-supported explanation for why the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable and would be effective for the research design is presented.
4. 4: Good
11.04 points
A data collection tool is selected, and an explanation for why the tool would be effective for the research design is presented. An explanation for the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
10.56 points
A data collection tool is selected, and a summary for why the tool would be effective for the research design is presented. A general explanation for the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable, but more information and support are needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9.6 points
A data collection tool is selected, but it is unclear why the tool would be effective for the research design. A valid, reliable, and applicable explanation for the tool is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A data collection tool is not discussed.
Statistical Test for Project
12 points
Criteria Description
Statistical Test for Project
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
A statistical test is selected, and a well-supported explanation for why the test is best suited for the tool is clearly presented.
4. 4: Good
11.04 points
A statistical test is selected, and an explanation for why the test is best suited for the tool is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
10.56 points
A statistical test is selected, and a summary for why the test is best suited for the tool is presented. More information or support is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9.6 points
A statistical test is selected, but it is unclear why the test is best suited for the tool.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A statistical test is omitted.
Methods Applied to Data Collection Tool
12 points
Criteria Description
Methods Applied to Data Collection Tool
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection are thoroughly discussed. A discussion of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected are presented.
4. 4: Good
11.04 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection are discussed. A discussion of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
10.56 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection are outlined. A summary of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected is presented. More information or support is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9.6 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection tool partially discussed. It is unclear how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection tool are not discussed.
Strategies for Outcomes That Are Nonpositive
14.4 points
Criteria Description
Strategies for Outcomes That Are Nonpositive
5. 5: Excellent
14.4 points
Clear and well-supported strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented.
4. 4: Good
13.25 points
Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
12.67 points
General strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented. More information and support are needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
11.52 points
Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are not discussed.
Plans to Maintain, Extend, Revise, and Discontinue Proposed Solution
13.2 points
Criteria Description
Plans to Maintain, Extend, Revise, and Discontinue Proposed Solution
5. 5: Excellent
13.2 points
Detailed and well-supported plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented.
4. 4: Good
12.14 points
Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
11.62 points
General plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented. More information and support are needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
10.56 points
Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are not discussed.
Required Sources
6 points
Criteria Description
Required Sources
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
4. 4: Good
5.52 points
Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
3. 3: Satisfactory
5.28 points
Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.8 points
Number of required sources is only partially met.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not included.
Thesis Development and Purpose
8.4 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE-PAPER HERE
5. 5: Excellent
8.4 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. 4: Good
7.73 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.39 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
6.72 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
9.6 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. 5: Excellent
9.6 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. 4: Good
8.83 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. 3: Satisfactory
8.45 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.68 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
6 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
5.52 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. 3: Satisfactory
5.28 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.8 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
6 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
All format elements are correct.
4. 4: Good
5.52 points
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. 3: Satisfactory
5.28 points
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.8 points
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
6 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. 4: Good
5.52 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
5.28 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.8 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 120 points