The Risk Management Program Analysis Part One assignment you completed in Topic 1 of this course.

Assume that the example risk management program you analyzed in Topic 1 was developed by and is now currently implemented by your health care employer/organization. Further assume that your supervisor has asked you to present a high-level summary brief of this new risk management program to a group of administrative personnel from a newly created community health organization in your state who has enlisted your organization's assistance in developing their own risk management policies and procedures. Compose a 1,250-1,500 word summary brief that expands upon the elements you addressed in the Risk Management Program Analysis Part One assignment. In addition, analyze the following: 1. Explain the Joint Commission's role in the evaluation of an organization's quality management processes. 2. Describe the roles that different levels of administrative personnel play in establishing or sustaining operational policies that are focused on employer-employee organizational risk management policies. 3. Explain the relationship of risk management programs and compliance with ethical standards. In addition to your textbook, you are required to support your analysis with a minimum of three peer-reviewed references.(Textbook - : Risk Management in Health Care Institutions: Limiting Liability and Enhancing Care. Authors: Florence Kavaler and Raymond S. Alexander. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. RUBRIC Unsatisfactory 0.00% 2 Less than Satisfactory 65.00% 3 Satisfactory 75.00% 4 Good 85.00% 5 Excellent 100.00% 70.0 %Content 25.0 %Explanation of the Role of The Joint Commission in the Evaluation of the Quality Management Processes of an Organization Not included. An explanation of the role of The Joint Commission in the evaluation of the quality management processes an organization is somewhat incorporated, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient. An explanation of the role of The Joint Commission in the evaluation of the quality management processes an organization is incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components. An explanation of the role of The Joint Commission in the evaluation of the quality management processes an organization is present and incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support. An explanation of the role of The Joint Commission in the evaluation of the quality management processes an organization is present and comprehensive. The submission further incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate. 25.0 %Description of Administrative Personnel Roles Relevant to Operational Policies Focused on Employer-Employee Organizational Risk Management Policies Not included. A description of administrative personnel roles relevant to operational policies focused on employer-employee organizational risk management policies is somewhat incorporated, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient. A description of administrative personnel roles relevant to operational policies focused on employer-employee organizational risk management policies incorporated, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components. A description of administrative personnel roles relevant to operational policies focused on employer-employee organizational risk management policies is present and incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support. A description of administrative personnel roles relevant to operational policies focused on employer-employee organizational risk management policies is present and comprehensive. The submission further incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate. 20.0 %Discussion Expands Upon Elements Profiled in the Topic 1 Risk Management Program Analysis Part One Assignment. Discussion expanding upon the Topic 1 Risk Management Program Analysis Part One assignment elements is not provided. Expansion discussion of elements from the Topic 1 Risk Management Program Analysis Part One assignment is somewhat present, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient. Expansion discussion of elements from the Topic 1 Risk Management Program Analysis Part One assignment is present, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components. Expansion discussion of elements from the Topic 1 Risk Management Program Analysis Part One assignment is present and incorporated in full. The submission encompasses essential details and provides appropriate support. Expansion discussion of elements from the Topic 1 Risk Management Program Analysis Part One assignment is present and comprehensive. The submission further incorporates analysis of supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate. 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness 7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. 8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument 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. Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some 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. Prose 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. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. 10.0 %Format 5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct. 5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. 100 %Total Weightage