Homeless adults in Cumberland County, Tennessee

Workshop Four – 4.5 Activity

Community Assessment Part Four
Introduction and Alignment

During Workshop Four, the fourth phase of the community assessment will be addressed through this PowerPoint lecture. Part Four of the community assessment will involve analysis of all data gathered in order to establish priority community nursing diagnoses.

You will independently analyze your findings and determine priority community nursing diagnoses. Your findings will be shared during Workshop Five.

Upon completion of this assignment, you should be able to:

Conduct the fourth phase of a local community assessment, including the analysis of data and determination of priority community nursing diagnoses.

Resources

Textbook: Community as Partner: Theory and Practice in Nursing
File: Community Assessment Part Four Lecture.pptx
File: Community Assessment Part Four Data Collection Tool.docx

Instructions

To better prepare for the PowerPoint content, review Chapter 12 in the textbook Community as Partner: Theory and Practice in Nursing.
Watch the PowerPoint lecture, Community Assessment Part Four Lecture.pptx.
Begin the careful analysis of all community assessment data gathered to this point.
Download the Community Assessment Part Four Data Collection Tool.docx file, and use it to analyze your assessment findings and establish three priority community nursing diagnoses.
Utilize a minimum of five current scholarly sources to support your information. Be sure to properly cite and reference your sources according to APA format.
This assignment (Community Assessment Part Four) is not due until the fourth day of Workshop Five in 5.2 Dropbox.

Assessment Criteria

Criteria

30 Points

26-29 Points

23-25 Points

19-22 Points

0-18 Points

Analysis of Community Assessment Needs

Exemplary, succinct analysis of community assessment findings is provided through synopsis of data gathered.

Key community health strengths and needs are distilled through the critical analysis of community assessment findings.

Notable gaps in population health are evidenced through the comparison of aggregate health data with national benchmarking.

Strong inferences are made, drawing comprehensive, logical conclusions from the findings presented.

Satisfactory succinct analysis of community assessment findings is provided through synopsis of data gathered.

Key community health strengths and needs are distilled through the critical analysis of community assessment findings.

Notable gaps in population health are evidenced through the comparison of aggregate health data with national benchmarking.

Strong inferences are made drawing comprehensive, logical conclusions from the findings presented.

Basic analysis of community assessment findings is provided through synopsis of data gathered.

Upon assessment findings.

Notable gaps in population health are evidenced through the comparison of aggregate health data with national benchmarking.

Inferences are made drawing comprehensive, logical conclusions from findings presented.

Vague and limited analysis of community assessment findings is provided.

Community health strengths and needs are marginally identified.

Gaps in population health status are noted with limited support from national benchmarking.

Upon findings presented.

Analysis of community assessment findings is scant or omitted.

Identification of community health strengths and needs is lacking.

No comparison of population health status is made.

Weak inferences, if any, are drawn from findings presented.

Criteria

30 Points

26-29 Points

23-25 Points

19-22 Points

0-18 Points

Priority Community Nursing Diagnoses

Exemplary and accurate establishment of at least three priority community nursing diagnoses addressing population-focused health problems and/or risks.

Diagnostic statements are congruent with the format for community nursing diagnoses, with an etiology that is clearly differentiated from the problem or risk component of the diagnostic statement.

Congruence between the data analysis and community nursing diagnoses is clearly evident.

Satisfactory establishment of at least three priority community nursing diagnoses addressing population-focused health problems and/or risks.

Diagnostic statements are congruent with the format for community nursing diagnoses, with an etiology that is clearly differentiated from the problem or risk component of the diagnostic statement.

Congruence between the data analysis and community nursing diagnoses is clearly evident.

Basic establishment of at least three priority community nursing diagnoses addressing population-focused health problems and/or risks.

Diagnostic statements are generally congruent with the format for community nursing diagnoses, with an etiology that is clearly differentiated from the problem or risk component of the diagnostic statement.

Congruence between the data analysis and community nursing diagnoses is present.

Vague establishment of three or fewer nursing diagnoses which do not address population-focused health problems and/or risks.

Diagnostic statement(s) are not congruent with the format for community nursing diagnoses; etiology is not clearly differentiated from the problem or risk component of the diagnostic statement.

Lack of congruence between the data analysis and community nursing diagnoses is noted.

Identification of three or fewer nursing diagnoses which do not address population-focused health problems and/or risks is scant or omitted.

Diagnostic statement(s) are not congruent with the format for community nursing diagnoses; etiology is not clearly differentiated from the problem or risk component of the diagnostic statement.

Incongruence between the data analysis and community nursing diagnoses is evident.

Criteria

5 Points

4 Points

3 Points

1-2 Points

0 Points

Key Informant Interview

Exemplary, in-depth interview is conducted with a person working with the public (e.g., city treasurer, police officer, teacher, etc.).

Interview reported from appropriate source with adequate depth.

Interview reported from appropriate source with weak information.

Interview reported from inappropriate source.

No interview reported.

Criteria

15 Points

13-14 Points

11-12 Points

9-10 Points

0-8 Points

APA and College-level Writing Style

Meets but does not exceed three-page limit.

No errors found in spelling, grammar, punctuation, or sentence and paragraph structure.

Citation and referencing of sources are congruent with APA format.

Minimum of at least five professional, published sources, current within the past five years.

One to two errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation, or sentence and paragraph structure. One point deduction per error.

Citation and referencing of sources are congruent with APA format.

Minimum of at least five professional, published sources, current within the past five years (separate from the class textbook).

Three to four errors in APA and/or college-level writing style. One point deduction per error

Five to six errors in APA and/or college-level writing style. One point deduction per error.

Seven or more errors in APA and/or college-level writing style. One point deduction per error.

p(2)

Place your order now to enjoy great discounts on this or a similar topic.

People choose us because we provide:

Essays written from scratch, 100% original,

Delivery within deadlines,

Competitive prices and excellent quality,

24/7 customer support,

Priority on their privacy,

Unlimited free revisions upon request, and

Plagiarism free work,

 

Order Similar Assignment Now!

  • Our Support Staff are online 24/7
  • Our Writers are available 24/7
  • Most Urgent order is delivered within 4 Hrs
  • 100% Original Assignment Plagiarism report can be sent to you upon request.

GET 15 % DISCOUNT TODAY use the discount code PAPER15 at the order form.

Type of paper Academic level Subject area
Number of pages Paper urgency Cost per page:
 Total: