Strategic Planning and Organizational Development for Health Care
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages
HS450 Health Care Quality Improvement Programs Essay
HS450: Strategic Planning and Organizational Development for Health Care
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has had a tumultuous time throughout its history with the processing of claims and treatment of veterans. In 2009 President Barrack Obama put an emphasis on fixing the issue. Current Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki was selected by President Obama as the Secretary of the VA.
General Shinseki’s primary role was to implement 16 initiatives that would help alleviate the issues within the VA. However under his leadership the VA had different results than what was expected. In 2013 many major news stations reported that veterans were experiencing delayed care at the Williams Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Medical Center in Columbia, SC. As a result of the delayed care six veterans died.
After an investigation many issues for found including; low staff census, leadership turnover, lack of understanding of roles, responsibilities and system processes, and ineffective program coordination. In 2014, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) launched an investigation into these allegations addressing two primary questions.
Did the facility’s electronic wait list (EWL) purposely omit the names of veterans waiting for care and, if so, at whose direction? And 2. Were the deaths of any of these veterans related to delays in care? The conclusion of the investigation resulted in the OIG determining that there was evidence of improper scheduling in the VA and the healthcare system. As a result of the investigation General Shinseki resigned from office on May 30, 2014.
Ethical Decision Making Process
The ethical decision making process helps healthcare professionals in making a sound judgment in regard to making a proper ethical decision. Step one is to ask “What is the ethical question?” In regard to issue at the VA the primary ethical issue was the patients that were not listed on the Electronic Wait List (EWL) but were still awaiting care.
These individuals would be waiting forever since their names were never on the actual list. Step two is for you to ask yourself “What is your gut reaction?” As an active duty U.S. Army Enlisted Soldiers my gut reaction is pure disgust. There is no explanation for anyone not only veterans but no one period to be waiting for care that they would never receive.
Step three is a research step and a point where the facts are identified. The facts of the underlining issues should have been identified at this point. The issues should have been laid out and a plan to identify these issues should begin at this moment. The fourth step is to ask “What are the values at stake in the scenario?”
This step should’ve been one of the easiest in the VA case. Everyone has different values but we all know what is right and what is wrong. In the VA case it seems that everything was done wrong and to benefit themselves and not the patients. Step five is to ask “What are the options in this case?”
The options were clear and that was to find a solution that can provide veterans care in a timely manner. In the sixth step you ask “What should I do?” This is where an ethical decision should have been made by all personnel who had a negative impact in the VA case. Many of the people made the wrong choice for personal or professional gain.
Step seven is to ask “What justifies this choice?” Evidence to support our choice is the proper way to support it. Without the correct evidence an unethical decision is likely going to be made. Finally step eight you ask “How could the ethical problem have been prevented?” This is easier to ask after the fact since we know the outcome.
All healthcare professionals should not have to decipher if something is right or wrong each and every one of these individuals should be aware of what to do and when to do it.
Upon researching about the issues in the VA more specifically during the time that General Shinseki was the Secretary of the VA many policies and procedure changes could have helped to alleviate the issues. One of the policies I would have implemented would have been to have one provider for a specific number of patients.
This would ensure there were enough provider to care for the patients. When providers see to many patients the providers begin to rush and that is when mistakes begin to happen. This may not seem very cost effective at first but the results of the policy would have outweighed the cost associated with the policy.
Additionally the second policy I would have out in place would allow for the veterans to receive care at another facility once they have been waiting for care for an egregious amount of time. This would ensure that all patients are receiving the appropriate amount of care in the appropriate amount of time.
Two Alternative Solutions
At the time of his resignation General Shinseki made a quick decision that may have seemed right in his mind but from the outside looking in it seems as if he no longer wanted to be part of the problem. He without a doubt could have done things differently. I personally feel that he should have accepted responsibility for the issues in the VA and then immediately made changes within the VA. This would have been at the healthcare administrator level.
New administrator and leaders at this pivotal positions could have without a doubt made a major impact on the over success of the VA during his tenure. One of the primary problems with the VA case is the focus on quantity and not on quality. Healthcare quality cannot become collateral damage when we are dealing with a large number of patients.
Another avenue that he could have approached is utilizing a centralized Electronic Healthcare Records (EHR) this would have provided everyone with oversight on how many patients were being seen and how many needed to be seen going forward.
ACHE Code of Ethics
The American College of Healthcare Executives (ACHE) Code of Ethics can be applied to all healthcare systems including the healthcare system of the VA Health System. Utilizing the ACHE Code of Ethics will ensure that a centralized ethics system is being shared across all of the healthcare professionals.
The ACHE Code of Ethics details the standards of all ethical behavior for executives and administrators in the healthcare industry. A clear cut code of ethics will undoubtedly lead to a minimal number of unethical decisions made by healthcare professionals.
Ethics should be learned at the college level but should also be refined as we progress into our professional lives. Healthcare organization should be mandated to provide ethical training on an annual basis in order to ensure the mitigation of situation like that of the VA cases.
Overall the VA situation was a disaster for veterans, employees of the VA, the VA, General Shinseki, President Obama and the entire country. The whole situation could have been avoided if the ethical decision making process was used. There were many different tactics and techniques that could have been used by General Shinseki in order to ensure these unethical decision were avoided.
Instead of putting in new policies and procedures he decided to resign his position which I feel was the worst thing he could have done. Many people quit or give up when they are down, but a secretary of a major department within the government should not do so. The ACHE is a great resource for educating our current and future healthcare administrators on ethics in healthcare.
We should ensure we are utilizing all of the resources to provide the patients not only of the VA but of all healthcare with a good quality and ethical product. All of us as future healthcare administrators should strive to learn from the mistakes of the past and ensure we will be the best ethical healthcare leaders of the future.
ACHE. 2017. ACHE Code of Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.ache.org/abt_ache/code.cfm
Essentials of Strategic Planning in Healthcare, Harrison, Jefferey P. retrieved from https://email@example.com:24.4
Ethical Decision-Making Guidelines and Tools, Jacqueline J. Glover PhD retrieved from http://samples.jbpub.com/9781284053708/Chapter2.pdf
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
Strategic Planning and Organizational Development for Health Care
Tired of getting an average grade in all your school assignments, projects, essays, and homework? Try us today for all your academic schoolwork needs. We are among the most trusted and recognized professional writing services in the market.
We provide unique, original and plagiarism-free high quality academic, homework, assignments and essay submissions for all our clients. At our company, we capitalize on producing A+ Grades for all our clients and also ensure that you have smooth academic progress in all your school term and semesters.
High-quality academic submissions, A 100% plagiarism-free submission, Meet even the most urgent deadlines, Provide our services to you at the most competitive rates in the market, Give you free revisions until you meet your desired grades and Provide you with 24/7 customer support service via calls or live chats.