3
Steps to Get a Perfectly Written Assignment
One
Click “order this assignment now”
Two
Choose your deadline & pay for it
Three
Get custom-written work ready for submission

Custom-Written, AI & Plagiarism-Free with Passing "Guaranteed"

money back guarantee
Units Only 03-01-2024

Judge how regulatory bodies work to ensure quality in Health and Social Care practice.

Assessment pack for Evaluating and Managing Quality in Health and Social Care

Module 3

Word length: 3,000 words

Weighting: 100%

Due date:

Task: Written assignment

Students will write a critical appraisal of a chosen regulatory process – analysing how this process informs standards of care and responds to the needs of the service user.  

Learning outcomes:

  1. Judge how regulatory bodies work to ensure quality in Health and Social Care practice.
  2. Appraise how service managers can support staff to deliver quality care.
  3. Evaluate ‘service user voice’ as a vehicle to enhance quality of care. 

Specific Guidance on the Outcomes of the Assignment:

  • Use one of the given scenarios or identify an area from your practice where you believe the standards of care are poor/could be improved;
  • Identify and analyse those factors that affect the area of practice using an audit tool, identify stakeholder involvement and the impact on quality;
  • Develop strategies for improvement. Make specific recommendations that ensure quality of care of your patients and inform the role of the service manager to support staff;
  • Relate and where appropriate, justify both your situational analysis and recommendations to current theory and policy on quality and clinical governance

Core:

Aveyard H., Sharp, P. (2017) A Beginner’s Guide to Evidence Based Practice in Health and Social Care, 3rd Edition (UK (United Kingdom) Higher Education OUP Humanities & Social Sciences Health & Social Welfare) UK. Open University Press.

Websites:

Care Quality Commission (2021) The central role of adult social care. Available at The central role of adult social care | Care Quality Commission (cqc.org.uk) (Accessed June 2022)

Care Quality Commission (2021) The state of our care. Available at State of Care | Care Quality Commission (cqc.org.uk) (accessed June 2022).

Recommended:

CQC 2023 – regulations for service providers and managers (find this link )

Suggested Framework to present 3000 words:

Either, choose one area of practice from your own experience or choose from one of these scenarios:

In a care home, a carer administers the wrong medication to a service user

In a hospice, the nurses are delivering end of life care to a service user

In a hospital, a patient falls out of bed

In a children’s home, there is a threat of violence towards a carer

Introduction

  • Discuss the importance of clinical governance and audits
  • Briefly detail your case scenario and identify the quality issues. Suggest the types of evidence that could be available to detail the case e.g. witness statements, number of complaints. Make a comparison between the chosen scenario and National figures on the same type of case.
  • Identify the structure of the essay i.e. state which theories will be used in your essay for the analysis and the audit tool.
  • Please note that the introduction is not a lengthy discussion and should be no more than one side of A4.

Analysis

This is where you analyse the situational factors, combine the theory and literature and apply one quality tool to analyse the causes of your quality issue.

  • Use 1 tool e.g. Ishikawas fishbone, SWOT, PESTLE, 3 organisational dimensions, Maxwell 6. Explain the theory of your chosen tool and support your discussion with references and apply it to your quality issue.

If you choose the fishbone, you can draw by hand, but you can download a ‘fish’ from google.

If you choose SWOT of PESTLE, use a table to present your analysis and use bullet points

  • You need to summarise the key causes from the chosen tool at the end of the analysis section (i.e one short paragraph)

After the analysis:

  • Briefly discuss total quality management and structures in place to support staff.
  • Briefly discuss change management and use Lewin to prioritise your issues from the analysis

Audit and Recommendations

  • Explain the theory behind carrying out an audit and explain how it could be used in practice to identify and resolve the quality issues in your case scenario.
  • Detail stakeholder involvement in an audit
  • For you chosen scenario, make recommendations that would ensure safe practices and inspire improvements to the quality of care for service users and staff.
  • Identify the value of using standards and propose standards to measure the effectiveness of the recommendations for change you make.

Conclusion

  • Do not bring any new ideas/literature into the conclusion.
  • Summarise the key points discussed e.g. the quality issue, key causes, key drivers and resistors, key strategies and recommendations that could be used to resolve the quality issue.

Reference List

Please check that you have used the Harvard system and make sure that all references in the main body of your work are in the list at the end of your essay and vice versa. 

 

 

Assignment Sections

A+/A (70-100%)

B+/B (60-69%)

C+/C (50-59%)

D/D+ (40-49%)

Fail (0-39%)

 

 

Introduction

5/100

Audit has been clearly introduced and linked to the importance of clinical governance. The quality issues are identified with use of relevant data or evidence. The assignment structure is outlined concisely. 

Audit has been introduced and linked to the importance of clinical governance. The quality issues are identified with use of some relevant data or evidence.   The assignment structure is outlined and matches the contents of the assignment

Audit has been introduced and there are some links to the importance of clinical governance. The quality issues are identified although more evidence may be required to support claims. The assignment structure is outlined.

There has been a brief introduction to audits but not clearly linked to the importance of clinical governance. The quality issues are described and more evidence may be required to support claims. The assignment structure is outlined but this may not match the contents. 

The introduction of the essay does not discuss audits or the importance of clinical governance. The quality issues are not identified. The assignment structure is unclear. 

Analysis

20/100

An appropriate analytical tool is chosen for the topic and the choice was fully justified with high-quality references.  The analysis is communicated using appropriate tools such as tables and figures.  These are presented in academic style and explained fully in the text.  Situational, social, and clinical factors have been fully explored and the discussion justifies the analysis.  Writing is formal and concise with correct referencing.  

An appropriate analytical tool is chosen and there is some attempt to justify the choice.  Evidence of reading from sources is demonstrated.  The presentation should communicate the tool clearly but there may be omissions in the detail of the analysis.  Most factors that impact the topic are identified.  Writing is formal but there may be small errors of writing or referencing.  However, the meaning is very clear throughout. 

An appropriate tool is chosen and applied fully to the topic but critical statements about the choice of tool may be limited.  Most claims are supported from reading.  The presentation of the analysis should be clear but there may be errors of presentation.  The analysis is discussed in the text, but this may miss some critical statements or references to support claims.  Writing is clear but there may be informal statements or errors. 

A tool from the module has been applied but it may not be the best selection for the topic.  The choice may not be justified, or the justification may not be specific to the chosen topic.  The analysis should fit the tool and refer to the topic, but it may not be detailed or clear in places.  The analysis may not be fully discussed.  Referencing may be incorrect or missing and the writing will convey meaning but will have errors of expression. 

The analysis may not use a tool from the module. Or no tool is applied at all.  The analysis may not be able to identify situational factors that are relevant to the topic. Little or no justification of statements are given.  Referencing may be missing and the writing my have so many errors that the meaning is unclear. 

20/100

Quality improvement/ change management

TQM was briefly discussed with a clear link to supporting staff.  A model is applied to identify the factors that will encourage or discourage change.  All claims are supported with high-quality sources and writing is concise and formal. 

TQM is briefly described with some links to supporting staff. There is application of a model from the module although some areas may not fully link to the analysis.  Claims are supported with high-quality sources although there may be one or two errors or omissions.  Writing is formal and generally concise. 

TQM is described but there may be limited application to supporting staff.  A model is applied to explore change management, but this may be described and not always linked to the topic.  There are references to support claims, but these may be lower-quality or there may be some omissions.  There may be errors of referencing, but the meaning is clear, and writing is still formal. 

TQM is mentioned but evidence of learning from the module is limited.  There is some discussion of challenges in implementing change, but this may not apply a model from the module.  Referencing is attempted but there may be errors or missing citations.  There are multiple errors in the writing which makes the tone informal, but the meaning is generally clear. 

The sections is missing or there is limited application of learning from the module to evaluate how change management may be difficult.  There may be no reference to the topic.  Referencing may be missing or not using conventional style.  Writing is informal or the errors may impair the communication of meaning. 

30/100

Audit and recommendations

Audit is presented with clear reference to theory and the theory is applied precisely to the quality issues. Stakeholder involvement is detailed accurately with clear connection to the case scenario. The recommendations and standards set demonstrate exceptional appreciation of the needs of staff and service users

Audit is presented with reference to theory and the theory is applied to the quality issues. Stakeholder involvement is detailed with connection to the case scenario. The recommendations and standards set demonstrate an appreciation of the needs of staff and service users

Audit is presented with some reference to theory and some of the theory is applied to the quality issues although there be some errors. Stakeholder involvement is detailed with some accuracy and connection to the case scenario. The recommendations and standards set demonstrate some appreciation of the needs of staff and service users

Audit is presented with brief reference to theory and limited theory is applied with to the quality issues. Stakeholder involvement is detailed with limited accuracy and connection to the case scenario. The recommendations and standards set demonstrate a limited appreciation of the needs of staff and service users

The section is missing or there is limited application of learning from the module to demonstrate knowledge of audit. Stakeholder involvement is not detailed and there is no connection to the case scenario. The recommendations and standards set do not demonstrate an appreciation of the needs of staff and service users.

Use of information to analyse and evaluate

15/100

There is an exceptional fluent writing style and organisation and coherence that clearly enhances the argument.  All claims are supported with high-quality sources. The relevance of the information is clearly analysed and evaluations are made.  References are correctly formatted using the OBU Harvard style as per the guidance.

There is a fluent writing style and strong logical organisation that enhances the argument. Claims are supported with high-quality sources although there may be one or two errors or omissions. The relevance of the information is analysed and evaluations are made.  The reference list uses a different referencing style or has a small number of errors. But all references should be included.  

In some parts, there is a fluent writing style and some logic to the organisation. There are references to support claims, but these may be lower-quality or there may be some omissions. There is some analysis of the relevance of the information and limited evaluations are made.  The reference list may have multiple errors, but it will be complete, and it should be possible to identify the sources used.     

Writing has limited fluency and organisation to support arguments. There are minimal references to support claims and they are of a low-quality with omissions. There is limited analysis of the relevance of the information and minimal/no evaluations are made.     The reference list may be incomplete or have errors which misses information needed to find sources.

Writing is incoherent and disorganized. There is no analysis of the relevance of the information and no evaluations are made.   Referencing may be missing or may not match sources used. The errors are found in nearly all references.

Conclusion

10/100

The key points are summarised concisely. No new information is introduced, and the reader is left with a clear message which addresses the task of the assignment.

Key points are summarised. Information should be nearly all drawn from the earlier sections. The reader is left with a message which addresses the task of the assignment although this section may not be always concise.

Key points are summarised although the writing may introduce new information or messages. The reader is left with a message that is relevant to the tasks in the assignment but there may not be a concise ending to the work.

The conclusion summarises some points from the assignment, but it may also introduce new information. The conclusion does not leave the reader with a clear message which addresses the task of the assignment

There is no conclusion, or it does not summarise the assignment. The final section may not give the reader a message that relates to the task of the assignment.

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions
paypal checkout

Our Giveaways

Plagiarism Report

for £20 Free

Formatting

for £12 Free

Title page

for £10 Free

Bibliography

for £18 Free

Outline

for £9 Free

Limitless Amendments

for £14 Free

Get all these features for
£83.00 FREE

STILL NOT CONVINCED?

Have a look at our samples which are written by our professional writers to give you an insight into how your work is going to look like. We have added some essays, coursework, assignments as well as dissertations.

View Our Samples

Apr Sun 2024

Produce an Information Security Risk Ass

CASE STUDY Tasks a) Produce an Information Security Risk Assessment for the...

Apr Sun 2024

LO1: Effectively communicate a structure

 Integrated Health and Social Care Leadership and Entrepreneurship in Heal...

Apr Sat 2024

LO1 Conduct the preliminary stages invol

Higher National Assessment Designed in accordance with HEA guidelines ...