Performance Reports/Dashboards

 

Performance reports are a valuable tool for gauging the financial well-being and progress of a health care organization. When properly designed, these reports can provide data on key measures, quality indicators, performance of operations, patient satisfaction, personnel, and facility capacity.

 

Have you ever seen the cockpit of an airplane? The dashboard is covered with a variety of knobs and gauges. Having a pilot who understands the meaning of the data contained on the dashboard is essential for passenger safety and for reaching the correct destination in a timely fashion. Similarly, a dashboard for your organization can supply a wide variety of performance information to assist in the financial decision making process.

In this Discussion, you will describe a dashboard that would be useful for you in your current position and organization (or one with which you are familiar).

 

To prepare:

 

Review this week’s Media program, Dashboards.

Consider your own organization (or one with which you are familiar) and the key information that would be useful for decision making.

Develop a list of key performance indicators in the following categories that would be useful for your situation. Include:

2–3 financial indicators

2–3 operational indicators

2–3 satisfaction indicators

2–3 quality indicators

 

Post describe the specific indicators you selected for each category and explain why you chose those particular ones. Describe whether each indicator is a leading or trailing indicator and how this particular combination would provide the best overall view of the state of your organization. Assess how having a dashboard such as this would assist in decision making.

 

AND

 

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days using one or more of the following approaches:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence or research.

Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

(I will send the responses soon)

 

Required Readings

Baker, J., & Baker, R. W. (2014). Health care finance: Basic tools for nonfinancial managers. Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.

Chapter 11, “Financial and Operating Ratios as Performance Measures” (pp. 121–128)

 

This chapter introduces a number of different tools that can be used to measure the performance of an organization. These include liquidity ratios, solvency ratios, and profitability ratios.

 Kleinpell, R. M. (2009). Analyzing economic outcomes in advanced practice learning. In Outcome assessment in advanced practice nursing (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

Outcome Assessment in Advanced Practice Nursing, 1st Edition by Kleinpell, R. M. Copyright 2009 by Springer Publishing Company. Reprinted by permission of Springer Publishing Company via the Copyright Clearance Center.

 

This chapter outlines five different types of economic outcomes that can be used by advanced practice nurses for assessing costs and determining performance benefits within a health care organization.

 Serb, C. (2011). Effective dashboards: What to measure and how to show it. Hospitals & Health Networks, 85(6), 40. 

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

 

In this article, the authors discuss automated systems known as executive dashboards, which are designed to highlight key data. Additionally, the article describes the components most experts agree should be included on an executive dashboard.

Nash, M., Pestrue, J., Geier, P., Sharp, K., Helder, A., & McAlearney, A. (2010). Leveraging information technology to drive improvement in patient satisfaction. Journal for Healthcare Quality: Promoting Excellence in Health care, 32(5), 30–40.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

 

This article explores how senior leaders can facilitate improvement in patient experience and satisfaction by strategic improvement and setting goals. This article presents a case detailing how the Ohio State University Medical Center (OSUMC) used information technology to formulate a strategy to improve patient experience.

Barta, A. (2010). Dashboards: A required business management tool. Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology, 44(3), 228–30.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

 

This article describes how dashboards became an integral financial and management tool for Trinity Health Clinical Engineering when it centralized the clinical engineering functions of five hospitals.

 National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators. (2014). National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators. Retrieved from NDNQI :http://www.nursingworld.org/MainMenuCategories/ANAMarketplace/ANAPeriodicals/OJIN/TableofContents/Volume122007/No3Sept07/NursingQualityIndicators.html

This website is a repository for nursing quality indicators.

 Wadsworth, T., Graves, B., Glass, S., Harrison, A., Donovan, C., & Proctor, A. (2009). Using business intelligence to improve performance. Healthcare Financial Management, 63(10), 68–72.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

 

In this article, the authors describe a case study involving the Cleveland Clinic Foundation’s management supervision and how they kept track of its key performance indicators (KPIs) to aid in reducing operational costs and improving quality of care.

 

Required Media (VIDEO ATTACHED IN ZIP FILE)

 

Laureate Education (Producer). (2012). Dashboards. Baltimore, MD: Author.

 

Note:  The approximate length of this media piece is 6 minutes.

 

In this video, William Ward discusses the use of dashboards as a tool for tracking organizational performance. He compares different types of dashboards and describes how to select the most relevant data to include on a dashboard.

WAL_NURS6211_07_A_EN-CC.mp4

MSN Discussion Rubric

Criteria

Levels of Achievement

Outstanding Performance

Excellent Performance

Competent Performance

Room for Improvement

Poor Performance

Content-Main Posting

30 to 30 points

-Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references.

27 to 29 points

-Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references.

24 to 26 points

Main posting meets expectations. All criteria are addressed with 50% containing good breadth and depth.

21 to 23 points

Main posting addresses most of the criteria. One to two criterion are not addressed or superficially addressed.

0 to 20 points

Main posting does not address all of criteria, superficially addresses criteria. Two or more criteria are not addressed.

Course Requirements and Attendance

20 to 20 points

-Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the Discussion.

18 to 19 points

-Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the Discussion.

16 to 17 points

Responds to a minimum of two colleagues’ posts, are reflective, and ask questions that extend the Discussion. One post is justified by a credible source.

14 to 15 points

Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts are on topic, may have some depth, or questions. May extend the Discussion. No credible sources are cited.

0 to 13 points

Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts may not be on topic, lack depth, do not pose questions that extend the Discussion.

Scholarly Writing Quality

30 to 30 points

-The main posting clearly addresses the Discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. ***The use of scholarly sources or real life experiences needs to be included to deepen the Discussion and earn points in reply to fellow students.

27 to 29 points

-The main posting clearly addresses the Discussion crit