NUR 590 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper – Online Nursing Essays

For this assignment, you will synthesize the independent evidence-based practice project proposal assignments from NUR-550 and NUR-590 into a 4,500-5,000-word professional paper.
Final Paper
The final paper should:

Main Body of the Paper
The main body of your paper should include the following sections:
Problem Statement
Organizational Culture and Readiness
Literature Review
Change Model, or Framework
Implementation Plan
Evaluation Plan

Appendices
The appendices at the end of your paper should include the following:

All final changes or revisions for the drafts that will be included in the appendices of your paper.
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 the final appendix at the end of your paper. In each preceding course you have been directed to the Student Success Center for assistance with APA style, and have submitted the APA Writing Checklist to help illustrate your adherence to APA style. This final paper should demonstrate a clear ability to communicate your project in a professional and accurately formatted paper using APA style. NUR 590 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper

General Requirements
You are required to cite 10-12 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.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. NUR 590 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. NUR 590 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper Essays
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.

Translating Evidence Into Practice Through Knowledge Implementation

Read “Translating Evidence Into Practice Through Knowledge Implementation,” by Campione, Wampler-Kuhn, and Fisher, from Rehab
… Read More

Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice

Read “Making Connections: An EBP Exemplar” in Unit 6 in Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare: A Guide t
… Read More

Translating Evidence Into Practice: How Advanced Practice RNs Can Guide Nurses in Challenging Established Practice to Arrive at Best Practice

Read “Translating Evidence Into Practice: How Advanced Practice RNs Can Guide Nurses in Challenging Established Practice to Arrive at
… Read More

Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice

Read Chapter 25 in Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice.

Benchmark Information
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:
MBA-MSN; MSN-Nursing Education; MSN Acute Care Nurse Practitioner-Adult-Gerontology; MSN Family Nurse Practitioner; MSN-Health Informatics; MSN-Health Care Quality and Patient Safety; MSN-Leadership in Health Care Systems; MSN-Public Health Nursing
1.1: Translate research and knowledge gained from practice, while adhering to ethical research standards, to improve patient outcomes and clinical practice.
5.1: Design ethically sound, evidence-based solutions to complex health care issues related to individuals, populations, and systems of care.
Criteria DescriptionSynthesis Paragraphs are logically sequenced, connect ideas or overreaching concepts, and are rewritten to present a fluid and cohesive paper. NUR 590 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper
5. 5: Excellent12 pointsSynthesis is excellent. The paper organizes paragraphs in a logical sequence and connects ideas or overreaching concepts. The paper is well-developed, fluid, and cohesive.
4. 4: Good11.04 pointsSynthesis is evident. The paper organizes paragraphs in a logical sequence and connects ideas or overreaching concepts. Overall, the paper applies transitions and the paper is fluid and cohesive.
3. 3: Satisfactory10.56 pointsSynthesis is generally evident. The paper organizes most paragraphs in a logical sequence and generally connects ideas or overreaching concepts. Some paragraphs require better transitions to create a fluid and cohesive paper. NUR 590 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory9.6 pointsSynthesis is sporadic. Overall, the paper fails to organize paragraphs in a logical sequence and connect ideas or overreaching concepts in a fluid and cohesive paper.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsSynthesis is not evident. The paper consists of a cut-and-paste of the previous assignments. Revision based on instructor feedback is not included.
Organizational Culture and Readiness10.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionOrganizational Culture and Readiness Culture, degree of readiness, challenges to implementation, strategies for implementation, stakeholder involvement, communication strategies.
5. 5: Excellent10.5 pointsThe organizational culture and readiness are thoroughly discussed and insight into the organization challenges is presented. Clear strategies for communication, stakeholder involvement, and the implementation of the evidence-based practice project proposal are presented. Thorough explanations and strong supporting evidence are provided.
4. 4: Good9.66 pointsThe organizational culture and readiness are discussed and information on the organizational challenges is presented. Strategies for communication, stakeholder involvement, and the implementation of the evidence-based practice project proposal are presented. Adequate explanations and supporting evidence are provided.
3. 3: Satisfactory9.24 pointsAn incomplete description of the organizational culture, readiness, and some organizational challenges is presented. Strategies for the overall implementation of the evidence-based practice project proposal are incomplete.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory8.4 pointsThe organizational culture, readiness, and some organizational challenges, are summarized. General strategies for the overall implementation of the evidence-based practice project proposal is presented, but there are inaccuracies. Some additional information is needed.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsA description of the organizational culture and readiness is not included.
Problem Statement (B)12 pointsCriteria DescriptionProblem Statement (C5.1a)
5. 5: Excellent12 pointsThe problem statement is consistent throughout the paper and concisely describes the issue using strong evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem. NUR 590 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper Essays
4. 4: Good11.04 pointsThe problem statement is consistent throughout the paper and describes the issue using evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem.
3. 3: Satisfactory10.56 pointsThe problem statement is mostly consistent throughout the paper and, in most instances, uses evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory9.6 pointsThe problem statement is inconsistently presented throughout the paper. Evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem is missing in many aspects.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe problem statement is not used throughout the paper. In general, evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem is not provided.
Literature Review10.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionLiterature Review
5. 5: Excellent10.5 pointsThe supporting literature from the literature review is organized and synthesized strategically throughout the paper to provide convincing evidence. The main components of the articles are used to provide substantial rationale for how the research supports the PICOT.
4. 4: Good9.66 pointsThe supporting literature from the literature review is used throughout most of the paper to provide evidence. The articles are used to provide general rationale for how the research supports the PICOT.
3. 3: Satisfactory9.24 pointsThe supporting literature from the literature review is synthesized and used throughout the paper to provide evidence. The main components of the articles are used to provide rationale for how the research supports the PICOT.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory8.4 pointsThe supporting literature from the literature review is inconsistently used in the paper to provide evidence. The articles do not provide clear rationale for how the research supports the PICOT.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsSupporting literature from the literature review is not evident. Clear rationale for how the research supports the PICOT is not presented.
Change Model or Framework10.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionChange Model or Framework
5. 5: Excellent10.5 pointsThe selected model or framework and its application for the proposed implementation are thoroughly described.
4. 4: Good9.66 pointsThe selected model or framework and its application for the key aspects of the proposed implementation are described.
3. 3: Satisfactory9.24 pointsThe selected model or framework and its general application for implementation are outlined.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory8.4 pointsThe selected model or framework and its application for implementation are incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe selected model or framework and its application for implementation are not described.
Implementation Plan (B)10.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionPlan includes setting/access to subjects; timeline; budget and resources; research design; methods instruments; process for delivering intervention; stakeholders; barriers and challenges. (C5.1b)
5. 5: Excellent10.5 pointsThe implementation plan is thoroughly described and provides the details for the various aspects. Thorough explanations and strong supporting evidence are provided.
4. 4: Good9.66 pointsThe implementation plan is described and provides key information for the various aspects. Adequate explanations and supporting evidence are provided.
3. 3: Satisfactory9.24 pointsThe implementation plan is generally described. Information for some key aspects is presented, but there are inaccuracies. Some additional information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory8.4 pointsThe implementation plan is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe implementation plan is not described.
Evaluation Plan10.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionEvaluation Plan Plan includes expected outcomes, data collection tools, statistical test, methods applied to data collection tool, strategies for nonpositive outcomes, plans for maintaining, extending, revising and discontinuing proposed solution.
5. 5: Excellent10.5 pointsThe evaluation plan is thoroughly described and provides the details for the various aspects. Thorough explanations and strong supporting evidence are provided.
4. 4: Good9.66 pointsThe evaluation plan is described and provides key information for the various aspects. Adequate explanations and supporting evidence are provided.
3. 3: Satisfactory9.24 pointsThe evaluation plan is generally described. Information for some key aspects is presented, but there are inaccuracies. Some additional information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory8.4 pointsThe evaluation plan is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe evaluation plan is not described.
Associated Documents and Appendix9 pointsCriteria DescriptionAssociated Documents and Appendix Appendix includes consent or approval form; timeline; budget and resource list; method or instrument; APA Writing Checklist.
5. 5: Excellent9 pointsThe resources are accurate and attached in the appendix. It is clearly evident by the quality of the paper that the APA Writing Checklist was effectively used in development of the paper.
4. 4: Good8.28 pointsThe resources are revised accordingly and attached in the appendix. It is apparent that the APA Writing Checklist was used in development of the paper.
3. 3: Satisfactory7.92 pointsThe resources have been revised, but there are one or two minor errors. The resources are attached in the appendix. It is apparent that the APA Writing Checklist was generally used in development of the paper, but some aspects are inconsistent with the paper format or quality.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory7.2 pointsThe required resources are attached, but an appendix has not been created. Some resources contain errors and have not been revised. The paper does not reflect the use of the APA Writing Checklist during development.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe appendix and required resources are omitted.
Ability to Translate Research and Knowledge to Improve Patient Outcomes and Practice (B)12 pointsCriteria DescriptionAbility to translate research and knowledge to improve patient outcomes and practice (C1.1)
5. 5: Excellent12 pointsThe final paper clearly adheres to ethical research standards and demonstrates a strong ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice.
4. 4: Good11.04 pointsThe final paper observes ethical research standards and demonstrates an ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice.
3. 3: Satisfactory10.56 pointsThe final paper observes ethical research standards, but there are some aspects of the paper that need more detail or information. A general ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice is demonstrated.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory9.6 pointsThe final paper is inconsistent in its adherence to ethical research standards. The ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice is not consistently demonstrated.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe final paper does not adhere to ethical research standards. The ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice is not demonstrated.
Required Sources7.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionRequired Sources
5. 5: Excellent7.5 pointsNumber of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
4. 4: Good6.9 pointsNumber of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
3. 3: Satisfactory6.6 pointsNumber of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory6 pointsNumber of required sources is only partially met.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsSources are not included.
Thesis Development and Purpose10.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionThesis Development and Purpose
5. 5: Excellent10.5 pointsThesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. 4: Good9.66 pointsThesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
3. 3: Satisfactory9.24 pointsThesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory8.4 pointsThesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsPaper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction12 pointsCriteria DescriptionArgument Logic and Construction
5. 5: Excellent12 pointsClear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. 4: Good11.04 pointsArgument 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: Satisfactory10.56 pointsArgument 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 Satisfactory9.6 pointsSufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsStatement 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 Writing7.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionMechanics of Writing Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use.
5. 5: Excellent7.5 pointsWriter is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good6.9 pointsProse 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: Satisfactory6.6 pointsSome 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 Satisfactory6 pointsSurface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsFrequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
Paper Format7.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionPaper Format Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment.
5. 5: Excellent7.5 pointsTemplate is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
4. 4: Good6.9 pointsAll format elements are correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory6.6 pointsTemplate is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. The organizational culture and the degree to which it supports change is thoroughly discussed. The various aspects of the culture are included. Thorough explanations and strong supporting research are provided.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory6 pointsTemplate is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsTemplate is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources7.5 pointsCriteria DescriptionDocumentation of Sources Citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style.
5. 5: Excellent7.5 pointsSources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. 4: Good6.9 pointsSources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory6.6 pointsSources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory6 pointsDocumentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory0 pointsSources are not documented.