Assignment Prompt & Instructions
**Quality Measures and National Standards**
**files (2)**
– ## Module6_AssignmentCultureEthicsinPublicHealth.docx
– ## Module6RUBRIC_Assignment.docx
**## Module6_AssignmentCultureEthicsinPublicHealth.docx**
**Assignment Description:**
**Quality Measures and National Standards Essay**
Write a 1500 word essay addressing each of the following points/questions. Be sure to completely answer all the questions for each bullet point. Separate each section in your paper with a clear heading that allows your professor to know which bullet you are addressing in that section of your paper.
**Support your ideas with at least FOUR (4) sources** in your essay. Make sure to reference the citations using the APA writing style for the essay. The cover page and reference page do not count toward the minimum word amount. Review the rubric criteria for this assignment.
As discussed in this module, the public and private sections have developed guidelines, policies, and programs to facilitate the implementation and evaluation of culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate healthcare services. According to the research literature, healthcare providers are well-positioned to improve health outcomes, decrease inequities, and enhance health equity by understanding and acknowledging the patient’s cultural traditions, beliefs, customs, and values. While becoming an expert in all cultures is not feasible, becoming committed to employing a culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate perspective may enhance communication and build trust.
For this week’s assignment, please use the following instructions:
1. Review the quality measures developed by the Joint Commission’s National Quality Forum and National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health care published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Minority Health.
1. Provide a brief overview of the quality measures and national standards published by the Joint Commission and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
1. Describe the purpose of the quality measures and national standards.
2. Depict the intended audience for the quality measures and national standards.
2. Describe the differences between a quality measure and national standard versus a board of nursing rule/regulation and/or administrative code.
3. Identify one quality measure or national standard from the Joint Commission or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and create a nursing rule/regulation or administrative code at the state level. For example, Joint Commission CLAS 02 regulation states, “Advance and sustain organizational governance and leadership that promotes CLAS and health equity through policy, practices, and allocated resources”. You may propose the following rule (which includes key aspects of this quality measure such as “The healthcare facility and administration shall provide for the resources, policies, and procedures needed to maintain safe, quality care, treatment, or services in the nursing unit.” Please note that rules need to be objective, measurable, and enforceable. Please note the use of the word “shall” rather than “may” when writing a proposed rule. Please refer to the resource on how to write rules in the Additional Resources section.
4. Devise a plan on how the ‘proposed rules’ will be shared with the Board of Nursing staff and leadership. For example, the proposed rules will be shared during a Board of Nursing meeting via a PowerPoint Presentation.
1. Describe the intended Board of Nursing audience.
2. Provide a rationale for the Board to consider the enactment and implementation of the ‘proposed rules’ in your state.
3. Create key points addressing potential opposition to the enactment of the ‘proposed rules.’
1. Study the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any additional recommended resources.
2.
**Review the rubric and the specifications** to ensure that your response aligns with all assignment expectations.
**The following specifications are required for this assignment:**
·
**Length:** 1500 words; answers must thoroughly address the questions in a clear, concise manner
·
**Structure:** Include a title page and reference page in APA style. These do not count toward the minimum word amount for this assignment.
·
**References:** Use the appropriate APA style in-text citations and references for all resources utilized to answer the questions.
**Include at least four (4) scholarly citations.**
**Use scholarly sources to support your claims. PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES ONLY.** Scholarly articles
**from 2021**
**to 2026 only. (Within the last five years) Please review your spelling and the rubric.** **Please use North American peer-reviewed journals ONLY.DO NOT use any European Journal.**
**Learning Materials**
Required Material
Nash, D. B., Skoufalos, A., Fabius, R. J., & Oglesby, W. H. (2021).
_Population health:_ _Creating A culture of wellness_ (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett. ISBN: 9781284166606. Review chapter 3 & read chapter 7. (20 pages)
**Additional Resources**
University of Kansas. (n.d.) Community toolbox.
[https://ctb.ku.edu/en](https://ctb.ku.edu/en)
Iowa Legislature. (2022).
_Rule Writer Handbook: Part B Rule Writing Guide_.
[https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/ACOD/1231030.pdf](https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/ACOD/1231030.pdf)
[https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/](https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/)
Joint Commission (2014).
_A crosswalk of the National Standards for_
_Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health Care to the Joint Commission Ambulatory Health Care Accreditation Standards_.
[https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/](https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2022).
_Healthy People_
_2030._ [www.health.gov/healthypeople](https://www.health.gov/healthypeople)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.).
_National Standards_
_for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health Care._ [https://thinkculturalhealth.hhs.gov/assets/pdfs/EnhancedNationalCLASStandards.pdf](https://thinkculturalhealth.hhs.gov/assets/pdfs/EnhancedNationalCLASStandards.pdf)
**## Module6RUBRIC_Assignment.docx**
10/12/26, 4:29 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Formal Research Paper Rubric v1 – DNP875 Sect1 Population Health and Person-Centered Care – Aspen University Classroom
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Graduate Formal Research Paper R Assignment RUBRICubric v1
Course: DNP875 Sect1 Population Health and Person-Centered Care
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Introduction/Th
esis Weight:
10
%
/ 10
0
points
Weak or no intro
–
duction of topic.
Purpose is
unclear/thesis is
weak or missing.
7
points
Basic introduction
that states topic but
lacks interest. Thesis
is somewhat clear
and arguable.
8
points
Proficient introduc
–
tion that is interest
–
ing and states topic.
Thesis is clear and
arguable statement
of position.
10
points
Exceptional intro
–
duction that grabs
interest of reader
and states topic;
Thesis is exception
–
ally clear, arguable,
well-developed, and
a definitive
statement.
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Quality of<br>Information or<br>Evidence<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Information has little or nothing to do with the thesis. Information has weak or no connection to the thesis. | 17.5 points<br>Information relates to the main topic, but few details and/or examples are given. Indicates a limited variety of sources. | 20 points<br>Information relates to the main topic. Paper is researched in sufficient detail and from a variety of sources. All necessary content is included. | 25 points<br>Paper is exceptionally researched, extremely detailed, and accurate. Information clearly relates to the thesis. Appropriate content is covered in depth without being redundant. | / 25 |
| Support of<br>Thesis/Analysis<br>Weight: 20% | 0 points<br>Limited or no connections made between evidence and thesis. Lacks analysis. | 14 points<br>Some connections have been made between evidence and thesis, though they may be tenuous. Minimal analysis is evident, but may not provide needed support for thesis. | 16 points<br>Consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Analysis sufficiently supports thesis. | 20 points<br>Exceptionally critical, relevant, and consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Excellent analysis is evident. | / 20 |
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Organization/<br>Development of Thesis Weight:<br>15% | 0 points<br>Lacks development of ideas with weak or no transitions between and within paragraphs. | 10.5 points<br>Somewhat clear development, though perhaps illogical, with basic transitions between and within paragraphs. | 12 points<br>Clear and logical order that supports thesis with appropriate transitions between and within paragraphs. | 15 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough development of thesis with excellent transitions between and within paragraphs. | / 15 |
| Conclusion<br>Weight: 5% | 0 points<br>Lacks a summary of topic. Conclusions missing or irrelevant. | 3.5 points<br>Basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas. Inappropriately introduces new information. | 4 points<br>Good summary of<br>topic with credible concluding ideas. Introduces no new information. | 5 points<br>Excellent summary of topic with succinct and precise concluding ideas that impact reader. | / 5 |
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Quality of<br>Written<br>Communication<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Style and voice inappropriate or do not address given audience, purpose, etc. Word choice is excessively redundant, clichéd, and unspecific. Inconsistent grammar, spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. | 10.5 points<br>Style and voice are somewhat appropriate to given audience and purpose. Word choice is often unspecific, generic, redundant, and clichéd.<br>Repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | 12 points<br>Style and voice are appropriate to the given audience and purpose. Word<br>choice is specific and purposeful, and somewhat varied throughout. Minimal mechanical or typographical errors are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | 15 points<br>Style and voice are not only appropriate to the given audience and purpose, but also show originality and creativity. Word choice is specific, purposeful, dynamic and varied. Free of mechanical and typographical errors. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | / 15 |
Total
/ 100
APA Format
Weight: 10%
/ 10
0
points
APA format and
style are not
evident.
7
points
Missing APA ele
–
ments; in-text cita
–
tions, where neces
–
sary, are used but
formatted inaccu
–
rately and not
referenced.
8
points
All key elements of
an APA title page
are present; In-text
citations and a ref
–
erence page are
present with few
format errors.
Mechanics of writ
–
ing are reflective of
APA style.
points
10
A broad understand
–
ing of APA format
and style is evident.
Accurate citations
and references are
presented. No APA
errors are evident.
**Overall Score**
**Level 1**
0
points minimum
**Level 2**
70
points minimum
**Level 3**
80
points minimum
**Level 4**
100
points minimum
https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/121488/viewContent/6459330/View 1/5
**## Module6RUBRIC_Assignment.docx**
10/12/26, 4:29 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Formal Research Paper Rubric v1 – DNP875 Sect1 Population Health and Person-Centered Care – Aspen University Classroom
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Graduate Formal Research Paper R Assignment RUBRICubric v1
Course: DNP875 Sect1 Population Health and Person-Centered Care
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Introduction/Th
esis Weight:
10
%
/ 10
0
points
Weak or no intro
–
duction of topic.
Purpose is
unclear/thesis is
weak or missing.
7
points
Basic introduction
that states topic but
lacks interest. Thesis
is somewhat clear
and arguable.
8
points
Proficient introduc
–
tion that is interest
–
ing and states topic.
Thesis is clear and
arguable statement
of position.
10
points
Exceptional intro
–
duction that grabs
interest of reader
and states topic;
Thesis is exception
–
ally clear, arguable,
well-developed, and
a definitive
statement.
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Quality of<br>Information or<br>Evidence<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Information has little or nothing to do with the thesis. Information has weak or no connection to the thesis. | 17.5 points<br>Information relates to the main topic, but few details and/or examples are given. Indicates a limited variety of sources. | 20 points<br>Information relates to the main topic. Paper is researched in sufficient detail and from a variety of sources. All necessary content is included. | 25 points<br>Paper is exceptionally researched, extremely detailed, and accurate. Information clearly relates to the thesis. Appropriate content is covered in depth without being redundant. | / 25 |
| Support of<br>Thesis/Analysis<br>Weight: 20% | 0 points<br>Limited or no connections made between evidence and thesis. Lacks analysis. | 14 points<br>Some connections have been made between evidence and thesis, though they may be tenuous. Minimal analysis is evident, but may not provide needed support for thesis. | 16 points<br>Consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Analysis sufficiently supports thesis. | 20 points<br>Exceptionally critical, relevant, and consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Excellent analysis is evident. | / 20 |
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Organization/<br>Development of Thesis Weight:<br>15% | 0 points<br>Lacks development of ideas with weak or no transitions between and within paragraphs. | 10.5 points<br>Somewhat clear development, though perhaps illogical, with basic transitions between and within paragraphs. | 12 points<br>Clear and logical order that supports thesis with appropriate transitions between and within paragraphs. | 15 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough development of thesis with excellent transitions between and within paragraphs. | / 15 |
| Conclusion<br>Weight: 5% | 0 points<br>Lacks a summary of topic. Conclusions missing or irrelevant. | 3.5 points<br>Basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas. Inappropriately introduces new information. | 4 points<br>Good summary of<br>topic with credible concluding ideas. Introduces no new information. | 5 points<br>Excellent summary of topic with succinct and precise concluding ideas that impact reader. | / 5 |
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Quality of<br>Written<br>Communication<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Style and voice inappropriate or do not address given audience, purpose, etc. Word choice is excessively redundant, clichéd, and unspecific. Inconsistent grammar, spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. | 10.5 points<br>Style and voice are somewhat appropriate to given audience and purpose. Word choice is often unspecific, generic, redundant, and clichéd.<br>Repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | 12 points<br>Style and voice are appropriate to the given audience and purpose. Word<br>choice is specific and purposeful, and somewhat varied throughout. Minimal mechanical or typographical errors are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | 15 points<br>Style and voice are not only appropriate to the given audience and purpose, but also show originality and creativity. Word choice is specific, purposeful, dynamic and varied. Free of mechanical and typographical errors. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | / 15 |
Total
/ 100
APA Format
Weight: 10%
/ 10
0
points
APA format and
style are not
evident.
7
points
Missing APA ele
–
ments; in-text cita
–
tions, where neces
–
sary, are used but
formatted inaccu
–
rately and not
referenced.
8
points
All key elements of
an APA title page
are present; In-text
citations and a ref
–
erence page are
present with few
format errors.
Mechanics of writ
–
ing are reflective of
APA style.
points
10
A broad understand
–
ing of APA format
and style is evident.
Accurate citations
and references are
presented. No APA
errors are evident.
**Overall Score**
**Level 1**
0
points minimum
**Level 2**
70
points minimum
**Level 3**
80
points minimum
**Level 4**
100
points minimum
https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/121488/viewContent/6459330/View 1/5
**## Module6_AssignmentCultureEthicsinPublicHealth.docx**
**Assignment Description:**
**Quality Measures and National Standards Essay**
Write a 1500 word essay addressing each of the following points/questions. Be sure to completely answer all the questions for each bullet point. Separate each section in your paper with a clear heading that allows your professor to know which bullet you are addressing in that section of your paper.
**Support your ideas with at least FOUR (4) sources** in your essay. Make sure to reference the citations using the APA writing style for the essay. The cover page and reference page do not count toward the minimum word amount. Review the rubric criteria for this assignment.
As discussed in this module, the public and private sections have developed guidelines, policies, and programs to facilitate the implementation and evaluation of culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate healthcare services. According to the research literature, healthcare providers are well-positioned to improve health outcomes, decrease inequities, and enhance health equity by understanding and acknowledging the patient’s cultural traditions, beliefs, customs, and values. While becoming an expert in all cultures is not feasible, becoming committed to employing a culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate perspective may enhance communication and build trust.
For this week’s assignment, please use the following instructions:
1. Review the quality measures developed by the Joint Commission’s National Quality Forum and National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health care published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Minority Health.
1. Provide a brief overview of the quality measures and national standards published by the Joint Commission and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
1. Describe the purpose of the quality measures and national standards.
2. Depict the intended audience for the quality measures and national standards.
2. Describe the differences between a quality measure and national standard versus a board of nursing rule/regulation and/or administrative code.
3. Identify one quality measure or national standard from the Joint Commission or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and create a nursing rule/regulation or administrative code at the state level. For example, Joint Commission CLAS 02 regulation states, “Advance and sustain organizational governance and leadership that promotes CLAS and health equity through policy, practices, and allocated resources”. You may propose the following rule (which includes key aspects of this quality measure such as “The healthcare facility and administration shall provide for the resources, policies, and procedures needed to maintain safe, quality care, treatment, or services in the nursing unit.” Please note that rules need to be objective, measurable, and enforceable. Please note the use of the word “shall” rather than “may” when writing a proposed rule. Please refer to the resource on how to write rules in the Additional Resources section.
4. Devise a plan on how the ‘proposed rules’ will be shared with the Board of Nursing staff and leadership. For example, the proposed rules will be shared during a Board of Nursing meeting via a PowerPoint Presentation.
1. Describe the intended Board of Nursing audience.
2. Provide a rationale for the Board to consider the enactment and implementation of the ‘proposed rules’ in your state.
3. Create key points addressing potential opposition to the enactment of the ‘proposed rules.’
1. Study the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any additional recommended resources.
2.
**Review the rubric and the specifications** to ensure that your response aligns with all assignment expectations.
**The following specifications are required for this assignment:**
·
**Length:** 1500 words; answers must thoroughly address the questions in a clear, concise manner
·
**Structure:** Include a title page and reference page in APA style. These do not count toward the minimum word amount for this assignment.
·
**References:** Use the appropriate APA style in-text citations and references for all resources utilized to answer the questions.
**Include at least four (4) scholarly citations.**
**Use scholarly sources to support your claims. PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES ONLY.** Scholarly articles
**from 2021**
**to 2026 only. (Within the last five years) Please review your spelling and the rubric.** **Please use North American peer-reviewed journals ONLY.DO NOT use any European Journal.**
**Learning Materials**
Required Material
Nash, D. B., Skoufalos, A., Fabius, R. J., & Oglesby, W. H. (2021).
_Population health:_ _Creating A culture of wellness_ (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett. ISBN: 9781284166606. Review chapter 3 & read chapter 7. (20 pages)
**Additional Resources**
University of Kansas. (n.d.) Community toolbox.
[https://ctb.ku.edu/en](https://ctb.ku.edu/en)
Iowa Legislature. (2022).
_Rule Writer Handbook: Part B Rule Writing Guide_.
[https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/ACOD/1231030.pdf](https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/ACOD/1231030.pdf)
[https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/](https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/)
Joint Commission (2014).
_A crosswalk of the National Standards for_
_Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health Care to the Joint Commission Ambulatory Health Care Accreditation Standards_.
[https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/](https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2022).
_Healthy People_
_2030._ [www.health.gov/healthypeople](https://www.health.gov/healthypeople)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.).
_National Standards_
_for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health Care._ [https://thinkculturalhealth.hhs.gov/assets/pdfs/EnhancedNationalCLASStandards.pdf](https://thinkculturalhealth.hhs.gov/assets/pdfs/EnhancedNationalCLASStandards.pdf)
**## Module6RUBRIC_Assignment.docx**
10/12/26, 4:29 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Formal Research Paper Rubric v1 – DNP875 Sect1 Population Health and Person-Centered Care – Aspen University Classroom
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Graduate Formal Research Paper R Assignment RUBRICubric v1
Course: DNP875 Sect1 Population Health and Person-Centered Care
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Introduction/Th
esis Weight:
10
%
/ 10
0
points
Weak or no intro
–
duction of topic.
Purpose is
unclear/thesis is
weak or missing.
7
points
Basic introduction
that states topic but
lacks interest. Thesis
is somewhat clear
and arguable.
8
points
Proficient introduc
–
tion that is interest
–
ing and states topic.
Thesis is clear and
arguable statement
of position.
10
points
Exceptional intro
–
duction that grabs
interest of reader
and states topic;
Thesis is exception
–
ally clear, arguable,
well-developed, and
a definitive
statement.
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Quality of<br>Information or<br>Evidence<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Information has little or nothing to do with the thesis. Information has weak or no connection to the thesis. | 17.5 points<br>Information relates to the main topic, but few details and/or examples are given. Indicates a limited variety of sources. | 20 points<br>Information relates to the main topic. Paper is researched in sufficient detail and from a variety of sources. All necessary content is included. | 25 points<br>Paper is exceptionally researched, extremely detailed, and accurate. Information clearly relates to the thesis. Appropriate content is covered in depth without being redundant. | / 25 |
| Support of<br>Thesis/Analysis<br>Weight: 20% | 0 points<br>Limited or no connections made between evidence and thesis. Lacks analysis. | 14 points<br>Some connections have been made between evidence and thesis, though they may be tenuous. Minimal analysis is evident, but may not provide needed support for thesis. | 16 points<br>Consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Analysis sufficiently supports thesis. | 20 points<br>Exceptionally critical, relevant, and consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Excellent analysis is evident. | / 20 |
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Organization/<br>Development of Thesis Weight:<br>15% | 0 points<br>Lacks development of ideas with weak or no transitions between and within paragraphs. | 10.5 points<br>Somewhat clear development, though perhaps illogical, with basic transitions between and within paragraphs. | 12 points<br>Clear and logical order that supports thesis with appropriate transitions between and within paragraphs. | 15 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough development of thesis with excellent transitions between and within paragraphs. | / 15 |
| Conclusion<br>Weight: 5% | 0 points<br>Lacks a summary of topic. Conclusions missing or irrelevant. | 3.5 points<br>Basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas. Inappropriately introduces new information. | 4 points<br>Good summary of<br>topic with credible concluding ideas. Introduces no new information. | 5 points<br>Excellent summary of topic with succinct and precise concluding ideas that impact reader. | / 5 |
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Quality of<br>Written<br>Communication<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Style and voice inappropriate or do not address given audience, purpose, etc. Word choice is excessively redundant, clichéd, and unspecific. Inconsistent grammar, spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. | 10.5 points<br>Style and voice are somewhat appropriate to given audience and purpose. Word choice is often unspecific, generic, redundant, and clichéd.<br>Repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | 12 points<br>Style and voice are appropriate to the given audience and purpose. Word<br>choice is specific and purposeful, and somewhat varied throughout. Minimal mechanical or typographical errors are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | 15 points<br>Style and voice are not only appropriate to the given audience and purpose, but also show originality and creativity. Word choice is specific, purposeful, dynamic and varied. Free of mechanical and typographical errors. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | / 15 |
Total
/ 100
APA Format
Weight: 10%
/ 10
0
points
APA format and
style are not
evident.
7
points
Missing APA ele
–
ments; in-text cita
–
tions, where neces
–
sary, are used but
formatted inaccu
–
rately and not
referenced.
8
points
All key elements of
an APA title page
are present; In-text
citations and a ref
–
erence page are
present with few
format errors.
Mechanics of writ
–
ing are reflective of
APA style.
points
10
A broad understand
–
ing of APA format
and style is evident.
Accurate citations
and references are
presented. No APA
errors are evident.
**Overall Score**
**Level 1**
0
points minimum
**Level 2**
70
points minimum
**Level 3**
80
points minimum
**Level 4**
100
points minimum
https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/121488/viewContent/6459330/View 1/5
**## Module6_AssignmentCultureEthicsinPublicHealth.docx**
**Assignment Description:**
**Quality Measures and National Standards Essay**
Write a 1500 word essay addressing each of the following points/questions. Be sure to completely answer all the questions for each bullet point. Separate each section in your paper with a clear heading that allows your professor to know which bullet you are addressing in that section of your paper.
**Support your ideas with at least FOUR (4) sources** in your essay. Make sure to reference the citations using the APA writing style for the essay. The cover page and reference page do not count toward the minimum word amount. Review the rubric criteria for this assignment.
As discussed in this module, the public and private sections have developed guidelines, policies, and programs to facilitate the implementation and evaluation of culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate healthcare services. According to the research literature, healthcare providers are well-positioned to improve health outcomes, decrease inequities, and enhance health equity by understanding and acknowledging the patient’s cultural traditions, beliefs, customs, and values. While becoming an expert in all cultures is not feasible, becoming committed to employing a culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate perspective may enhance communication and build trust.
For this week’s assignment, please use the following instructions:
1. Review the quality measures developed by the Joint Commission’s National Quality Forum and National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health care published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Minority Health.
1. Provide a brief overview of the quality measures and national standards published by the Joint Commission and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
1. Describe the purpose of the quality measures and national standards.
2. Depict the intended audience for the quality measures and national standards.
2. Describe the differences between a quality measure and national standard versus a board of nursing rule/regulation and/or administrative code.
3. Identify one quality measure or national standard from the Joint Commission or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and create a nursing rule/regulation or administrative code at the state level. For example, Joint Commission CLAS 02 regulation states, “Advance and sustain organizational governance and leadership that promotes CLAS and health equity through policy, practices, and allocated resources”. You may propose the following rule (which includes key aspects of this quality measure such as “The healthcare facility and administration shall provide for the resources, policies, and procedures needed to maintain safe, quality care, treatment, or services in the nursing unit.” Please note that rules need to be objective, measurable, and enforceable. Please note the use of the word “shall” rather than “may” when writing a proposed rule. Please refer to the resource on how to write rules in the Additional Resources section.
4. Devise a plan on how the ‘proposed rules’ will be shared with the Board of Nursing staff and leadership. For example, the proposed rules will be shared during a Board of Nursing meeting via a PowerPoint Presentation.
1. Describe the intended Board of Nursing audience.
2. Provide a rationale for the Board to consider the enactment and implementation of the ‘proposed rules’ in your state.
3. Create key points addressing potential opposition to the enactment of the ‘proposed rules.’
1. Study the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any additional recommended resources.
2.
**Review the rubric and the specifications** to ensure that your response aligns with all assignment expectations.
**The following specifications are required for this assignment:**
·
**Length:** 1500 words; answers must thoroughly address the questions in a clear, concise manner
·
**Structure:** Include a title page and reference page in APA style. These do not count toward the minimum word amount for this assignment.
·
**References:** Use the appropriate APA style in-text citations and references for all resources utilized to answer the questions.
**Include at least four (4) scholarly citations.**
**Use scholarly sources to support your claims. PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES ONLY.** Scholarly articles
**from 2021**
**to 2026 only. (Within the last five years) Please review your spelling and the rubric.** **Please use North American peer-reviewed journals ONLY.DO NOT use any European Journal.**
**Learning Materials**
Required Material
Nash, D. B., Skoufalos, A., Fabius, R. J., & Oglesby, W. H. (2021).
_Population health:_ _Creating A culture of wellness_ (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett. ISBN: 9781284166606. Review chapter 3 & read chapter 7. (20 pages)
**Additional Resources**
University of Kansas. (n.d.) Community toolbox.
[https://ctb.ku.edu/en](https://ctb.ku.edu/en)
Iowa Legislature. (2022).
_Rule Writer Handbook: Part B Rule Writing Guide_.
[https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/ACOD/1231030.pdf](https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/ACOD/1231030.pdf)
[https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/](https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/)
Joint Commission (2014).
_A crosswalk of the National Standards for_
_Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health Care to the Joint Commission Ambulatory Health Care Accreditation Standards_.
[https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/](https://lsa.inc/7-steps-to-equitable-insurance-access-for-non-native-english-speakers/)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2022).
_Healthy People_
_2030._ [www.health.gov/healthypeople](https://www.health.gov/healthypeople)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.).
_National Standards_
_for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health Care._ [https://thinkculturalhealth.hhs.gov/assets/pdfs/EnhancedNationalCLASStandards.pdf](https://thinkculturalhealth.hhs.gov/assets/pdfs/EnhancedNationalCLASStandards.pdf)
**## Module6RUBRIC_Assignment.docx**
10/12/26, 4:29 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Formal Research Paper Rubric v1 – DNP875 Sect1 Population Health and Person-Centered Care – Aspen University Classroom
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Graduate Formal Research Paper R Assignment RUBRICubric v1
Course: DNP875 Sect1 Population Health and Person-Centered Care
Criteria
**Does Not Meet 0%**
**Approaches 70%**
**Meets 80%**
**Exceeds 100%**
**Criterion Score**
Introduction/Th
esis Weight:
10
%
/ 10
0
points
Weak or no intro
–
duction of topic.
Purpose is
unclear/thesis is
weak or missing.
7
points
Basic introduction
that states topic but
lacks interest. Thesis
is somewhat clear
and arguable.
8
points
Proficient introduc
–
tion that is interest
–
ing and states topic.
Thesis is clear and
arguable statement
of position.
10
points
Exceptional intro
–
duction that grabs
interest of reader
and states topic;
Thesis is exception
–
ally clear, arguable,
well-developed, and
a definitive
statement.
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Quality of<br>Information or<br>Evidence<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Information has little or nothing to do with the thesis. Information has weak or no connection to the thesis. | 17.5 points<br>Information relates to the main topic, but few details and/or examples are given. Indicates a limited variety of sources. | 20 points<br>Information relates to the main topic. Paper is researched in sufficient detail and from a variety of sources. All necessary content is included. | 25 points<br>Paper is exceptionally researched, extremely detailed, and accurate. Information clearly relates to the thesis. Appropriate content is covered in depth without being redundant. | / 25 |
| Support of<br>Thesis/Analysis<br>Weight: 20% | 0 points<br>Limited or no connections made between evidence and thesis. Lacks analysis. | 14 points<br>Some connections have been made between evidence and thesis, though they may be tenuous. Minimal analysis is evident, but may not provide needed support for thesis. | 16 points<br>Consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Analysis sufficiently supports thesis. | 20 points<br>Exceptionally critical, relevant, and consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Excellent analysis is evident. | / 20 |
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Organization/<br>Development of Thesis Weight:<br>15% | 0 points<br>Lacks development of ideas with weak or no transitions between and within paragraphs. | 10.5 points<br>Somewhat clear development, though perhaps illogical, with basic transitions between and within paragraphs. | 12 points<br>Clear and logical order that supports thesis with appropriate transitions between and within paragraphs. | 15 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough development of thesis with excellent transitions between and within paragraphs. | / 15 |
| Conclusion<br>Weight: 5% | 0 points<br>Lacks a summary of topic. Conclusions missing or irrelevant. | 3.5 points<br>Basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas. Inappropriately introduces new information. | 4 points<br>Good summary of<br>topic with credible concluding ideas. Introduces no new information. | 5 points<br>Excellent summary of topic with succinct and precise concluding ideas that impact reader. | / 5 |
| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Quality of<br>Written<br>Communication<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Style and voice inappropriate or do not address given audience, purpose, etc. Word choice is excessively redundant, clichéd, and unspecific. Inconsistent grammar, spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. | 10.5 points<br>Style and voice are somewhat appropriate to given audience and purpose. Word choice is often unspecific, generic, redundant, and clichéd.<br>Repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | 12 points<br>Style and voice are appropriate to the given audience and purpose. Word<br>choice is specific and purposeful, and somewhat varied throughout. Minimal mechanical or typographical errors are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | 15 points<br>Style and voice are not only appropriate to the given audience and purpose, but also show originality and creativity. Word choice is specific, purposeful, dynamic and varied. Free of mechanical and typographical errors. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | / 15 |
Total
/ 100
APA Format
Weight: 10%
/ 10
0
points
APA format and
style are not
evident.
7
points
Missing APA ele
–
ments; in-text cita
–
tions, where neces
–
sary, are used but
formatted inaccu
–
rately and not
referenced.
8
points
All key elements of
an APA title page
are present; In-text
citations and a ref
–
erence page are
present with few
format errors.
Mechanics of writ
–
ing are reflective of
APA style.
points
10
A broad understand
–
ing of APA format
and style is evident.
Accurate citations
and references are
presented. No APA
errors are evident.
**Overall Score**
**Level 1**
0
points minimum
**Level 2**
70
points minimum
**Level 3**
80
points minimum
**Level 4**
100
points minimum
https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/121488/viewContent/6459330/View 1/5