Need Help with Qualitative Study
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →Need Help with Qualitative Study
You are the Public Relations Director for a professional team of your choice. The life of a PR Director is always an interesting one full of situations that cannot be controlled. A PR Director must simply deal with the situations as they arise. Throughout the term, you will be given different scenar…
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →You are the Public Relations Director for a professional team of your choice. The life of a PR
Director is always an interesting one full of situations that cannot be controlled. A PR Director
must simply deal with the situations as they arise. Throughout the term, you will be given
different scenarios that you must address.
For press releases and all other types of produced materials, you are expected to follow the AP
standard of media writing.
1. Fantasy Sports Public Relations: DUI Arrest Assignment
You will craft an AP-compliant public relations release regarding a team member who had a
recent DUI Arrest and a second release about a team member being placed on the injured reserve
list.
2. Fantasy Sports Public Relations: Test Positive for COVID-19 Assignment
You will craft an AP-compliant public relations release regarding a team member who had a
recent positive result on a COVID-19 test and a second release about a team member who had a
recent domestic violence arrest.
3.Fantasy Sports Public Relations: Paternity Lawsuit Assignment
You will craft an AP-compliant public relations release regarding a team member who had a
recent paternity lawsuit and a second team member who had to undergo extra physical therapy.
4.Fantasy Sports Public Relations: Player Performance Doesn’t Meet Pre-Season
Expectations Assignment
You will craft an AP-compliant public relations release regarding a team member whose recent
performance has not met pre-season expectations and a second release about a team member
whose x-rays came back inconclusive.
5.Fantasy Sports Public Relations: Oblique Strain Assignment
You will craft an AP-compliant public relations release regarding an infrequently used team
member who had a recent oblique strain and a second release about a team significant line-up
change due to a number of critical injuries.
6.Fantasy Sports Public Relations: Multi-MVP Star/Coach Disagreement Assignment
You will craft an AP-compliant public relations release regarding a multi-MVP star team
member who had a significant disagreement on game plan and strengths chart and a second
release about a team member who had a season-ending knee injury.
7.Fantasy Sports Public Relations: Rookie Takes Over for Veteran Assignment
You will craft an AP-compliant public relations release regarding a team member (rookie) who
recently took over for a veteran player due to the veteran player’s off-field/negative behavior and
a second release about a team member (a franchise player) who requires minor surgery
In-depth study guidance and analytical solution covering FA 11/ MB 13/ FN5.
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →Full assignment prompt and step-by-step guidance are included in the downloadable solution file.
Looking for a faithful person to help with assignment
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →Looking for a faithful person to help with assignment
see attached **files (2)** – ## repliesinstruction.docx – ## Replies.docx **## repliesinstruction.docx** **Discussion Ethics in Public Administration reply Assignment Instructions** you will post replies of 200–250 words each to 2 classmates’ threads. Each reply must be unique and must integrate ide…
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →see attached
**files (2)**
– ## repliesinstruction.docx
– ## Replies.docx
**## repliesinstruction.docx**
**Discussion Ethics in Public Administration reply Assignment Instructions**
you will post replies of 200–250 words each to 2 classmates’ threads. Each reply must be unique and must integrate ideas (and citations) from the required reading. Merely posting the same reply in 2 places is not sufficient. The original thread must incorporate ideas and citations from all of the required readings and presentations for that Module: Week. It must also address statecraft as part of a meaningful discussion of effective statesmanship and it must include citations from at least two additional scholarly sources. The reply posts must also integrate ideas and citations from the required readings and presentations for the Module: Week, as appropriate, and at least two scholarly sources.
**Replies:**
· 2 replies
· 200-250 words per reply
· Ideas and citations from required reading and presentations from the Module: Week, as appropriate
· Ideas and citations from two scholarly sources per reply
Remember that the art of communication is in many ways the lifeblood of effective political leadership. Everything you write—every paper, post, and email—creates or reinforces an impression of you. Begin to cultivate the communication skills of the statesman and stateswoman—the ability to logically and persuasively speak the truth with compassion and respect. Each response post must include new research and analysis, and must build upon the ideas communicated in the original post. Thus, they must go beyond merely restating and affirming what a classmate has said and instead bring in more depth, research and analysis. Accordingly, each response post must include citations from the required reading and presentations.
Responding to a classmate’s thread requires both the addition of new ideas and analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order
**to move the conversation forward**. Thus, the reply is a rigorous assignment that requires you to build upon the thread to develop deeper and more thorough discussion of the ideas introduced. As such, replies that merely affirm, restate or unprofessionally quarrel with the previous thread(s) and fail to make a valuable, substantive contribution to the discussion will receive appropriate point deductions.
**## Replies.docx**
**LEWIS Paper**
The Amman Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) case presents a clear example of how governance failure—not just technical or managerial shortcomings—can derail a major public infrastructure project. At first glance, the delays, cost overruns, and public frustration surrounding the BRT appear consistent with common project management failures seen globally. However, a closer analysis shows that the core issue is rooted in fragmented governance, weak political stewardship, and misalignment between imported policy models and local institutional realities.
Evidence from the article demonstrates that decision-making within Jordan’s governance structure was inconsistent and often reactive rather than strategic. Multiple actors—parliament, municipal authorities, and central government—operated without coordinated alignment, leading to repeated project halts despite audits confirming the project’s feasibility. This pattern reflects a system where authority is diffused but not effectively integrated, producing paralysis at critical decision points. The Amman BRT case illustrates not just fragmented governance, but a failure of structural design—specifically, the absence of cross-functional integration across key policy actors. The project was effectively departmentalized across governing bodies, each operating within its own silo without a unifying decision-making structure. This produced conflicting actions, duplicated oversight, and ultimately policy paralysis at critical junctures. A cross-functional governance model could have aligned stakeholders around a shared operational picture, reducing political interference and improving continuity of execution (Fischer, 2010).
At a deeper level, the case reflects a breakdown in rational decision-making itself. Classical public administration theory frames decision-making as a means–end relationship, where administrators select appropriate means based on clearly defined and stable policy goals (Shafritz & Hyde, 2016). In the BRT case, this relationship was inverted and destabilized. Ends were neither fixed nor collectively agreed upon, as political actors redefined priorities in response to pressure, public perception, and institutional rivalry. As a result, means were repeatedly disrupted, abandoned, or reconfigured, preventing coherent policy execution. The 2011 suspension of the project, driven by unsubstantiated corruption concerns during political unrest, illustrates how political pressure displaced rational, evidence-based decision-making.
The interpretation that emerges is that governance culture played a decisive role in shaping outcomes. The article highlights a risk-averse administrative environment where officials prioritized avoiding blame over advancing public interest. This aligns with broader public administration theory suggesting that excessive anti-corruption pressures, when not balanced with procedural clarity, can create institutional hesitation and decision avoidance. In this case, the fear of political and legal repercussions contributed to delayed action, inconsistent leadership decisions, and erosion of institutional credibility. Governance, therefore, was not just a background condition—it actively produced failure conditions.
Strategically, the case also exposes the limitations of policy transfer. The BRT model, influenced by Western planning frameworks and external financing, assumed a level of institutional coordination and collaborative governance that did not exist within Jordan’s centralized and politically fragmented system. This mismatch between model and context created structural friction. Instead of adapting the policy to fit the governance environment, actors attempted to implement it as designed, resulting in repeated breakdowns. The reliance on external consultants and funding further weakened domestic ownership and accountability, compounding implementation challenges.
The broader implication for public administration is that effective infrastructure delivery depends less on technical design and more on governance capacity. Collaborative governance requires not only formal structures but also political alignment, institutional trust, and clear authority boundaries. Without these elements, even well-designed projects become vulnerable to disruption. The Amman BRT case reinforces that governance is the determining variable in complex policy implementation, particularly in developing contexts where institutional fragmentation and political interference are more pronounced.
Amsler, L.B. (2016), Collaborative Governance: Integrating Management, Politics, and Law. Public Admin Rev, 76: 700-711.
[https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12605Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12605)
Fischer, K. (2010).
_A Biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership_. Liberty University Digital Commons.
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2016).
_Classics of public administration_ (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
**ALEXIS paper**
Hello,
In examining governance in public administration, the Palm Beach County Sober Homes Task Force provides a strong case of how collaborative governance can be used to address a complex public problem. Rather than relying on one agency alone, Palm Beach County responded to fraud, patient brokering, and abuse in the addiction recovery housing system by developing a cross-sector task force that brought together public officials, law enforcement, and other stakeholders to confront a policy area marked by fragmented authority and competing interests (Witkowski et al., 2024). This makes the case especially useful because it shows governance not simply as command-and-control administration, but as the difficult work of coordination, accountability, and public protection.
This case reflects Vigoda’s (2002) argument that public administration must move beyond simple responsiveness and toward collaboration with citizens and stakeholders. The problem in Palm Beach County was not one that government could solve through bureaucracy alone. The issue required coordination across legal, administrative, and community boundaries. In that sense, the case also aligns with Amsler’s (2016) explanation that collaborative governance requires the integration of management, politics, and law. The task force existed in a setting where legal constraints, administrative discretion, and stakeholder influence all shaped outcomes.
At the same time, the case shows that collaboration is not automatically equal or fair. Witkowski et al. (2024) found that discourse within the task force could be shaped by more powerful actors, which supports Hafer et al.’s (2022) warning that power must be examined carefully in collaborative settings. This is where public administrators must exercise wisdom and integrity. Bryson et al. (2014) argue that governance should create public value, not merely efficient outputs. In Palm Beach County, public value meant protecting vulnerable people in recovery, improving accountability, and restoring trust in a damaged service environment.
This case can also be evaluated through a biblical-covenantal model of leadership. Fischer (2010) emphasizes that leadership should be rooted in moral responsibility, human dignity, and stewardship rather than self-interest. A fitting biblical lens is
**Zechariah 7:9–10**, which commands leaders to “administer true justice” and to show mercy and compassion. That passage is especially relevant here because the public sector’s duty was not only to regulate organizations, but to protect people who were vulnerable to exploitation. This matches the statesmanship tradition found in Shafritz and Hyde (2017), where public service is tied to ethical obligation and the common good. Even Ortiz (2002) is helpful here, because his discussion of governance reminds us that public administration operates within layered authority structures, where legitimacy and responsibility must be taken seriously.
Overall, the Palm Beach case demonstrates that good governance requires more than coordination. It requires ethical leadership, attention to power imbalances, legal awareness, and a commitment to protecting the public good. In your view, how can public administrators preserve genuine collaboration when some stakeholders hold much greater institutional power than others?
**References**
Amsler, L. B. (2016). Collaborative governance: Integrating management, politics, and law.
_Public Administration Review, 76_(5), 700–711. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12605
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management.
_Public Administration Review, 74_(4), 445–456. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12238
Fischer, K. (2010).
_A biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership_. Liberty University. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/gov_fac_pubs/523/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Hafer, J., Ran, B., & Hossain, M. S. (2022). Rethinking perspectives of power in collaborative governance.
_Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs, 8_(2), 260–280. https://jpna.org/index.php/jpna/article/view/692
Ortiz, J. (2002). Tribal governance and public administration.
_Administration & Society, 34_(5), 459–481. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/009539902237271
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2017).
_Classics of public administration_ (8th ed.). Cengage.
Vigoda, E. (2002). From responsiveness to collaboration: Governance, citizens, and the next generation of public administration.
_Public Administration Review, 62_(5), 527–540.
[https://www.jstor.org/stable/3110014Links to an external site.](https://www.jstor.org/stable/3110014?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Witkowski, K., Whetsell, T. A., & Ganapati, N. E. (2024). Using collaborative governance to regulate sober living facilities: Structures and strategies for mitigating the influence of powerful actors in multi-sectoral networks.
_Administration & Society, 56_(4), 473–510. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00953997241235102
**## Replies.docx**
**LEWIS Paper**
The Amman Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) case presents a clear example of how governance failure—not just technical or managerial shortcomings—can derail a major public infrastructure project. At first glance, the delays, cost overruns, and public frustration surrounding the BRT appear consistent with common project management failures seen globally. However, a closer analysis shows that the core issue is rooted in fragmented governance, weak political stewardship, and misalignment between imported policy models and local institutional realities.
Evidence from the article demonstrates that decision-making within Jordan’s governance structure was inconsistent and often reactive rather than strategic. Multiple actors—parliament, municipal authorities, and central government—operated without coordinated alignment, leading to repeated project halts despite audits confirming the project’s feasibility. This pattern reflects a system where authority is diffused but not effectively integrated, producing paralysis at critical decision points. The Amman BRT case illustrates not just fragmented governance, but a failure of structural design—specifically, the absence of cross-functional integration across key policy actors. The project was effectively departmentalized across governing bodies, each operating within its own silo without a unifying decision-making structure. This produced conflicting actions, duplicated oversight, and ultimately policy paralysis at critical junctures. A cross-functional governance model could have aligned stakeholders around a shared operational picture, reducing political interference and improving continuity of execution (Fischer, 2010).
At a deeper level, the case reflects a breakdown in rational decision-making itself. Classical public administration theory frames decision-making as a means–end relationship, where administrators select appropriate means based on clearly defined and stable policy goals (Shafritz & Hyde, 2016). In the BRT case, this relationship was inverted and destabilized. Ends were neither fixed nor collectively agreed upon, as political actors redefined priorities in response to pressure, public perception, and institutional rivalry. As a result, means were repeatedly disrupted, abandoned, or reconfigured, preventing coherent policy execution. The 2011 suspension of the project, driven by unsubstantiated corruption concerns during political unrest, illustrates how political pressure displaced rational, evidence-based decision-making.
The interpretation that emerges is that governance culture played a decisive role in shaping outcomes. The article highlights a risk-averse administrative environment where officials prioritized avoiding blame over advancing public interest. This aligns with broader public administration theory suggesting that excessive anti-corruption pressures, when not balanced with procedural clarity, can create institutional hesitation and decision avoidance. In this case, the fear of political and legal repercussions contributed to delayed action, inconsistent leadership decisions, and erosion of institutional credibility. Governance, therefore, was not just a background condition—it actively produced failure conditions.
Strategically, the case also exposes the limitations of policy transfer. The BRT model, influenced by Western planning frameworks and external financing, assumed a level of institutional coordination and collaborative governance that did not exist within Jordan’s centralized and politically fragmented system. This mismatch between model and context created structural friction. Instead of adapting the policy to fit the governance environment, actors attempted to implement it as designed, resulting in repeated breakdowns. The reliance on external consultants and funding further weakened domestic ownership and accountability, compounding implementation challenges.
The broader implication for public administration is that effective infrastructure delivery depends less on technical design and more on governance capacity. Collaborative governance requires not only formal structures but also political alignment, institutional trust, and clear authority boundaries. Without these elements, even well-designed projects become vulnerable to disruption. The Amman BRT case reinforces that governance is the determining variable in complex policy implementation, particularly in developing contexts where institutional fragmentation and political interference are more pronounced.
Amsler, L.B. (2016), Collaborative Governance: Integrating Management, Politics, and Law. Public Admin Rev, 76: 700-711.
[https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12605Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12605)
Fischer, K. (2010).
_A Biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership_. Liberty University Digital Commons.
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2016).
_Classics of public administration_ (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
**ALEXIS paper**
Hello,
In examining governance in public administration, the Palm Beach County Sober Homes Task Force provides a strong case of how collaborative governance can be used to address a complex public problem. Rather than relying on one agency alone, Palm Beach County responded to fraud, patient brokering, and abuse in the addiction recovery housing system by developing a cross-sector task force that brought together public officials, law enforcement, and other stakeholders to confront a policy area marked by fragmented authority and competing interests (Witkowski et al., 2024). This makes the case especially useful because it shows governance not simply as command-and-control administration, but as the difficult work of coordination, accountability, and public protection.
This case reflects Vigoda’s (2002) argument that public administration must move beyond simple responsiveness and toward collaboration with citizens and stakeholders. The problem in Palm Beach County was not one that government could solve through bureaucracy alone. The issue required coordination across legal, administrative, and community boundaries. In that sense, the case also aligns with Amsler’s (2016) explanation that collaborative governance requires the integration of management, politics, and law. The task force existed in a setting where legal constraints, administrative discretion, and stakeholder influence all shaped outcomes.
At the same time, the case shows that collaboration is not automatically equal or fair. Witkowski et al. (2024) found that discourse within the task force could be shaped by more powerful actors, which supports Hafer et al.’s (2022) warning that power must be examined carefully in collaborative settings. This is where public administrators must exercise wisdom and integrity. Bryson et al. (2014) argue that governance should create public value, not merely efficient outputs. In Palm Beach County, public value meant protecting vulnerable people in recovery, improving accountability, and restoring trust in a damaged service environment.
This case can also be evaluated through a biblical-covenantal model of leadership. Fischer (2010) emphasizes that leadership should be rooted in moral responsibility, human dignity, and stewardship rather than self-interest. A fitting biblical lens is
**Zechariah 7:9–10**, which commands leaders to “administer true justice” and to show mercy and compassion. That passage is especially relevant here because the public sector’s duty was not only to regulate organizations, but to protect people who were vulnerable to exploitation. This matches the statesmanship tradition found in Shafritz and Hyde (2017), where public service is tied to ethical obligation and the common good. Even Ortiz (2002) is helpful here, because his discussion of governance reminds us that public administration operates within layered authority structures, where legitimacy and responsibility must be taken seriously.
Overall, the Palm Beach case demonstrates that good governance requires more than coordination. It requires ethical leadership, attention to power imbalances, legal awareness, and a commitment to protecting the public good. In your view, how can public administrators preserve genuine collaboration when some stakeholders hold much greater institutional power than others?
**References**
Amsler, L. B. (2016). Collaborative governance: Integrating management, politics, and law.
_Public Administration Review, 76_(5), 700–711. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12605
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management.
_Public Administration Review, 74_(4), 445–456. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12238
Fischer, K. (2010).
_A biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership_. Liberty University. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/gov_fac_pubs/523/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Hafer, J., Ran, B., & Hossain, M. S. (2022). Rethinking perspectives of power in collaborative governance.
_Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs, 8_(2), 260–280. https://jpna.org/index.php/jpna/article/view/692
Ortiz, J. (2002). Tribal governance and public administration.
_Administration & Society, 34_(5), 459–481. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/009539902237271
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2017).
_Classics of public administration_ (8th ed.). Cengage.
Vigoda, E. (2002). From responsiveness to collaboration: Governance, citizens, and the next generation of public administration.
_Public Administration Review, 62_(5), 527–540.
[https://www.jstor.org/stable/3110014Links to an external site.](https://www.jstor.org/stable/3110014?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Witkowski, K., Whetsell, T. A., & Ganapati, N. E. (2024). Using collaborative governance to regulate sober living facilities: Structures and strategies for mitigating the influence of powerful actors in multi-sectoral networks.
_Administration & Society, 56_(4), 473–510. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00953997241235102
**## repliesinstruction.docx**
**Discussion Ethics in Public Administration reply Assignment Instructions**
you will post replies of 200–250 words each to 2 classmates’ threads. Each reply must be unique and must integrate ideas (and citations) from the required reading. Merely posting the same reply in 2 places is not sufficient. The original thread must incorporate ideas and citations from all of the required readings and presentations for that Module: Week. It must also address statecraft as part of a meaningful discussion of effective statesmanship and it must include citations from at least two additional scholarly sources. The reply posts must also integrate ideas and citations from the required readings and presentations for the Module: Week, as appropriate, and at least two scholarly sources.
**Replies:**
· 2 replies
· 200-250 words per reply
· Ideas and citations from required reading and presentations from the Module: Week, as appropriate
· Ideas and citations from two scholarly sources per reply
Remember that the art of communication is in many ways the lifeblood of effective political leadership. Everything you write—every paper, post, and email—creates or reinforces an impression of you. Begin to cultivate the communication skills of the statesman and stateswoman—the ability to logically and persuasively speak the truth with compassion and respect. Each response post must include new research and analysis, and must build upon the ideas communicated in the original post. Thus, they must go beyond merely restating and affirming what a classmate has said and instead bring in more depth, research and analysis. Accordingly, each response post must include citations from the required reading and presentations.
Responding to a classmate’s thread requires both the addition of new ideas and analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order
**to move the conversation forward**. Thus, the reply is a rigorous assignment that requires you to build upon the thread to develop deeper and more thorough discussion of the ideas introduced. As such, replies that merely affirm, restate or unprofessionally quarrel with the previous thread(s) and fail to make a valuable, substantive contribution to the discussion will receive appropriate point deductions.
**## Replies.docx**
**LEWIS Paper**
The Amman Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) case presents a clear example of how governance failure—not just technical or managerial shortcomings—can derail a major public infrastructure project. At first glance, the delays, cost overruns, and public frustration surrounding the BRT appear consistent with common project management failures seen globally. However, a closer analysis shows that the core issue is rooted in fragmented governance, weak political stewardship, and misalignment between imported policy models and local institutional realities.
Evidence from the article demonstrates that decision-making within Jordan’s governance structure was inconsistent and often reactive rather than strategic. Multiple actors—parliament, municipal authorities, and central government—operated without coordinated alignment, leading to repeated project halts despite audits confirming the project’s feasibility. This pattern reflects a system where authority is diffused but not effectively integrated, producing paralysis at critical decision points. The Amman BRT case illustrates not just fragmented governance, but a failure of structural design—specifically, the absence of cross-functional integration across key policy actors. The project was effectively departmentalized across governing bodies, each operating within its own silo without a unifying decision-making structure. This produced conflicting actions, duplicated oversight, and ultimately policy paralysis at critical junctures. A cross-functional governance model could have aligned stakeholders around a shared operational picture, reducing political interference and improving continuity of execution (Fischer, 2010).
At a deeper level, the case reflects a breakdown in rational decision-making itself. Classical public administration theory frames decision-making as a means–end relationship, where administrators select appropriate means based on clearly defined and stable policy goals (Shafritz & Hyde, 2016). In the BRT case, this relationship was inverted and destabilized. Ends were neither fixed nor collectively agreed upon, as political actors redefined priorities in response to pressure, public perception, and institutional rivalry. As a result, means were repeatedly disrupted, abandoned, or reconfigured, preventing coherent policy execution. The 2011 suspension of the project, driven by unsubstantiated corruption concerns during political unrest, illustrates how political pressure displaced rational, evidence-based decision-making.
The interpretation that emerges is that governance culture played a decisive role in shaping outcomes. The article highlights a risk-averse administrative environment where officials prioritized avoiding blame over advancing public interest. This aligns with broader public administration theory suggesting that excessive anti-corruption pressures, when not balanced with procedural clarity, can create institutional hesitation and decision avoidance. In this case, the fear of political and legal repercussions contributed to delayed action, inconsistent leadership decisions, and erosion of institutional credibility. Governance, therefore, was not just a background condition—it actively produced failure conditions.
Strategically, the case also exposes the limitations of policy transfer. The BRT model, influenced by Western planning frameworks and external financing, assumed a level of institutional coordination and collaborative governance that did not exist within Jordan’s centralized and politically fragmented system. This mismatch between model and context created structural friction. Instead of adapting the policy to fit the governance environment, actors attempted to implement it as designed, resulting in repeated breakdowns. The reliance on external consultants and funding further weakened domestic ownership and accountability, compounding implementation challenges.
The broader implication for public administration is that effective infrastructure delivery depends less on technical design and more on governance capacity. Collaborative governance requires not only formal structures but also political alignment, institutional trust, and clear authority boundaries. Without these elements, even well-designed projects become vulnerable to disruption. The Amman BRT case reinforces that governance is the determining variable in complex policy implementation, particularly in developing contexts where institutional fragmentation and political interference are more pronounced.
Amsler, L.B. (2016), Collaborative Governance: Integrating Management, Politics, and Law. Public Admin Rev, 76: 700-711.
[https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12605Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12605)
Fischer, K. (2010).
_A Biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership_. Liberty University Digital Commons.
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2016).
_Classics of public administration_ (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
**ALEXIS paper**
Hello,
In examining governance in public administration, the Palm Beach County Sober Homes Task Force provides a strong case of how collaborative governance can be used to address a complex public problem. Rather than relying on one agency alone, Palm Beach County responded to fraud, patient brokering, and abuse in the addiction recovery housing system by developing a cross-sector task force that brought together public officials, law enforcement, and other stakeholders to confront a policy area marked by fragmented authority and competing interests (Witkowski et al., 2024). This makes the case especially useful because it shows governance not simply as command-and-control administration, but as the difficult work of coordination, accountability, and public protection.
This case reflects Vigoda’s (2002) argument that public administration must move beyond simple responsiveness and toward collaboration with citizens and stakeholders. The problem in Palm Beach County was not one that government could solve through bureaucracy alone. The issue required coordination across legal, administrative, and community boundaries. In that sense, the case also aligns with Amsler’s (2016) explanation that collaborative governance requires the integration of management, politics, and law. The task force existed in a setting where legal constraints, administrative discretion, and stakeholder influence all shaped outcomes.
At the same time, the case shows that collaboration is not automatically equal or fair. Witkowski et al. (2024) found that discourse within the task force could be shaped by more powerful actors, which supports Hafer et al.’s (2022) warning that power must be examined carefully in collaborative settings. This is where public administrators must exercise wisdom and integrity. Bryson et al. (2014) argue that governance should create public value, not merely efficient outputs. In Palm Beach County, public value meant protecting vulnerable people in recovery, improving accountability, and restoring trust in a damaged service environment.
This case can also be evaluated through a biblical-covenantal model of leadership. Fischer (2010) emphasizes that leadership should be rooted in moral responsibility, human dignity, and stewardship rather than self-interest. A fitting biblical lens is
**Zechariah 7:9–10**, which commands leaders to “administer true justice” and to show mercy and compassion. That passage is especially relevant here because the public sector’s duty was not only to regulate organizations, but to protect people who were vulnerable to exploitation. This matches the statesmanship tradition found in Shafritz and Hyde (2017), where public service is tied to ethical obligation and the common good. Even Ortiz (2002) is helpful here, because his discussion of governance reminds us that public administration operates within layered authority structures, where legitimacy and responsibility must be taken seriously.
Overall, the Palm Beach case demonstrates that good governance requires more than coordination. It requires ethical leadership, attention to power imbalances, legal awareness, and a commitment to protecting the public good. In your view, how can public administrators preserve genuine collaboration when some stakeholders hold much greater institutional power than others?
**References**
Amsler, L. B. (2016). Collaborative governance: Integrating management, politics, and law.
_Public Administration Review, 76_(5), 700–711. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12605
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management.
_Public Administration Review, 74_(4), 445–456. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12238
Fischer, K. (2010).
_A biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership_. Liberty University. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/gov_fac_pubs/523/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Hafer, J., Ran, B., & Hossain, M. S. (2022). Rethinking perspectives of power in collaborative governance.
_Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs, 8_(2), 260–280. https://jpna.org/index.php/jpna/article/view/692
Ortiz, J. (2002). Tribal governance and public administration.
_Administration & Society, 34_(5), 459–481. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/009539902237271
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2017).
_Classics of public administration_ (8th ed.). Cengage.
Vigoda, E. (2002). From responsiveness to collaboration: Governance, citizens, and the next generation of public administration.
_Public Administration Review, 62_(5), 527–540.
[https://www.jstor.org/stable/3110014Links to an external site.](https://www.jstor.org/stable/3110014?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Witkowski, K., Whetsell, T. A., & Ganapati, N. E. (2024). Using collaborative governance to regulate sober living facilities: Structures and strategies for mitigating the influence of powerful actors in multi-sectoral networks.
_Administration & Society, 56_(4), 473–510. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00953997241235102
**## repliesinstruction.docx**
**Discussion Ethics in Public Administration reply Assignment Instructions**
you will post replies of 200–250 words each to 2 classmates’ threads. Each reply must be unique and must integrate ideas (and citations) from the required reading. Merely posting the same reply in 2 places is not sufficient. The original thread must incorporate ideas and citations from all of the required readings and presentations for that Module: Week. It must also address statecraft as part of a meaningful discussion of effective statesmanship and it must include citations from at least two additional scholarly sources. The reply posts must also integrate ideas and citations from the required readings and presentations for the Module: Week, as appropriate, and at least two scholarly sources.
**Replies:**
· 2 replies
· 200-250 words per reply
· Ideas and citations from required reading and presentations from the Module: Week, as appropriate
· Ideas and citations from two scholarly sources per reply
Remember that the art of communication is in many ways the lifeblood of effective political leadership. Everything you write—every paper, post, and email—creates or reinforces an impression of you. Begin to cultivate the communication skills of the statesman and stateswoman—the ability to logically and persuasively speak the truth with compassion and respect. Each response post must include new research and analysis, and must build upon the ideas communicated in the original post. Thus, they must go beyond merely restating and affirming what a classmate has said and instead bring in more depth, research and analysis. Accordingly, each response post must include citations from the required reading and presentations.
Responding to a classmate’s thread requires both the addition of new ideas and analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order
**to move the conversation forward**. Thus, the reply is a rigorous assignment that requires you to build upon the thread to develop deeper and more thorough discussion of the ideas introduced. As such, replies that merely affirm, restate or unprofessionally quarrel with the previous thread(s) and fail to make a valuable, substantive contribution to the discussion will receive appropriate point deductions.
**## Replies.docx**
**LEWIS Paper**
The Amman Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) case presents a clear example of how governance failure—not just technical or managerial shortcomings—can derail a major public infrastructure project. At first glance, the delays, cost overruns, and public frustration surrounding the BRT appear consistent with common project management failures seen globally. However, a closer analysis shows that the core issue is rooted in fragmented governance, weak political stewardship, and misalignment between imported policy models and local institutional realities.
Evidence from the article demonstrates that decision-making within Jordan’s governance structure was inconsistent and often reactive rather than strategic. Multiple actors—parliament, municipal authorities, and central government—operated without coordinated alignment, leading to repeated project halts despite audits confirming the project’s feasibility. This pattern reflects a system where authority is diffused but not effectively integrated, producing paralysis at critical decision points. The Amman BRT case illustrates not just fragmented governance, but a failure of structural design—specifically, the absence of cross-functional integration across key policy actors. The project was effectively departmentalized across governing bodies, each operating within its own silo without a unifying decision-making structure. This produced conflicting actions, duplicated oversight, and ultimately policy paralysis at critical junctures. A cross-functional governance model could have aligned stakeholders around a shared operational picture, reducing political interference and improving continuity of execution (Fischer, 2010).
At a deeper level, the case reflects a breakdown in rational decision-making itself. Classical public administration theory frames decision-making as a means–end relationship, where administrators select appropriate means based on clearly defined and stable policy goals (Shafritz & Hyde, 2016). In the BRT case, this relationship was inverted and destabilized. Ends were neither fixed nor collectively agreed upon, as political actors redefined priorities in response to pressure, public perception, and institutional rivalry. As a result, means were repeatedly disrupted, abandoned, or reconfigured, preventing coherent policy execution. The 2011 suspension of the project, driven by unsubstantiated corruption concerns during political unrest, illustrates how political pressure displaced rational, evidence-based decision-making.
The interpretation that emerges is that governance culture played a decisive role in shaping outcomes. The article highlights a risk-averse administrative environment where officials prioritized avoiding blame over advancing public interest. This aligns with broader public administration theory suggesting that excessive anti-corruption pressures, when not balanced with procedural clarity, can create institutional hesitation and decision avoidance. In this case, the fear of political and legal repercussions contributed to delayed action, inconsistent leadership decisions, and erosion of institutional credibility. Governance, therefore, was not just a background condition—it actively produced failure conditions.
Strategically, the case also exposes the limitations of policy transfer. The BRT model, influenced by Western planning frameworks and external financing, assumed a level of institutional coordination and collaborative governance that did not exist within Jordan’s centralized and politically fragmented system. This mismatch between model and context created structural friction. Instead of adapting the policy to fit the governance environment, actors attempted to implement it as designed, resulting in repeated breakdowns. The reliance on external consultants and funding further weakened domestic ownership and accountability, compounding implementation challenges.
The broader implication for public administration is that effective infrastructure delivery depends less on technical design and more on governance capacity. Collaborative governance requires not only formal structures but also political alignment, institutional trust, and clear authority boundaries. Without these elements, even well-designed projects become vulnerable to disruption. The Amman BRT case reinforces that governance is the determining variable in complex policy implementation, particularly in developing contexts where institutional fragmentation and political interference are more pronounced.
Amsler, L.B. (2016), Collaborative Governance: Integrating Management, Politics, and Law. Public Admin Rev, 76: 700-711.
[https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12605Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12605)
Fischer, K. (2010).
_A Biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership_. Liberty University Digital Commons.
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2016).
_Classics of public administration_ (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
**ALEXIS paper**
Hello,
In examining governance in public administration, the Palm Beach County Sober Homes Task Force provides a strong case of how collaborative governance can be used to address a complex public problem. Rather than relying on one agency alone, Palm Beach County responded to fraud, patient brokering, and abuse in the addiction recovery housing system by developing a cross-sector task force that brought together public officials, law enforcement, and other stakeholders to confront a policy area marked by fragmented authority and competing interests (Witkowski et al., 2024). This makes the case especially useful because it shows governance not simply as command-and-control administration, but as the difficult work of coordination, accountability, and public protection.
This case reflects Vigoda’s (2002) argument that public administration must move beyond simple responsiveness and toward collaboration with citizens and stakeholders. The problem in Palm Beach County was not one that government could solve through bureaucracy alone. The issue required coordination across legal, administrative, and community boundaries. In that sense, the case also aligns with Amsler’s (2016) explanation that collaborative governance requires the integration of management, politics, and law. The task force existed in a setting where legal constraints, administrative discretion, and stakeholder influence all shaped outcomes.
At the same time, the case shows that collaboration is not automatically equal or fair. Witkowski et al. (2024) found that discourse within the task force could be shaped by more powerful actors, which supports Hafer et al.’s (2022) warning that power must be examined carefully in collaborative settings. This is where public administrators must exercise wisdom and integrity. Bryson et al. (2014) argue that governance should create public value, not merely efficient outputs. In Palm Beach County, public value meant protecting vulnerable people in recovery, improving accountability, and restoring trust in a damaged service environment.
This case can also be evaluated through a biblical-covenantal model of leadership. Fischer (2010) emphasizes that leadership should be rooted in moral responsibility, human dignity, and stewardship rather than self-interest. A fitting biblical lens is
**Zechariah 7:9–10**, which commands leaders to “administer true justice” and to show mercy and compassion. That passage is especially relevant here because the public sector’s duty was not only to regulate organizations, but to protect people who were vulnerable to exploitation. This matches the statesmanship tradition found in Shafritz and Hyde (2017), where public service is tied to ethical obligation and the common good. Even Ortiz (2002) is helpful here, because his discussion of governance reminds us that public administration operates within layered authority structures, where legitimacy and responsibility must be taken seriously.
Overall, the Palm Beach case demonstrates that good governance requires more than coordination. It requires ethical leadership, attention to power imbalances, legal awareness, and a commitment to protecting the public good. In your view, how can public administrators preserve genuine collaboration when some stakeholders hold much greater institutional power than others?
**References**
Amsler, L. B. (2016). Collaborative governance: Integrating management, politics, and law.
_Public Administration Review, 76_(5), 700–711. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12605
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management.
_Public Administration Review, 74_(4), 445–456. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12238
Fischer, K. (2010).
_A biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership_. Liberty University. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/gov_fac_pubs/523/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Hafer, J., Ran, B., & Hossain, M. S. (2022). Rethinking perspectives of power in collaborative governance.
_Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs, 8_(2), 260–280. https://jpna.org/index.php/jpna/article/view/692
Ortiz, J. (2002). Tribal governance and public administration.
_Administration & Society, 34_(5), 459–481. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/009539902237271
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2017).
_Classics of public administration_ (8th ed.). Cengage.
Vigoda, E. (2002). From responsiveness to collaboration: Governance, citizens, and the next generation of public administration.
_Public Administration Review, 62_(5), 527–540.
[https://www.jstor.org/stable/3110014Links to an external site.](https://www.jstor.org/stable/3110014?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Witkowski, K., Whetsell, T. A., & Ganapati, N. E. (2024). Using collaborative governance to regulate sober living facilities: Structures and strategies for mitigating the influence of powerful actors in multi-sectoral networks.
_Administration & Society, 56_(4), 473–510. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00953997241235102
[>Criminal homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/law-criminal) ### **Discussion 1: Crime and the Development of the Criminal Justice System** Crime and criminal justice in the United States have evolved over time in response to social conditions, political priorities, economic change, and…
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →[>Criminal homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/law-criminal)
### **Discussion 1: Crime and the Development of the Criminal Justice System**
Crime and criminal justice in the United States have evolved over time in response to social conditions, political priorities, economic change, and public attitudes. What is considered a crime, how crime is punished, and how justice is administered have all shifted as society has changed.
To better understand the criminal justice system today, it is important to examine how crime in America developed historically and how responses to crime shaped modern law enforcement, courts, and corrections.
For this discussion, you will watch a short video that provides an overview of the history of crime and criminal justice in the United States and connect it to your textbook reading.
**Assigned Video:**
History of Crime in America (CrashCourse Criminal Justice)
[https://youtu.be/zBodqwAlW3A?si=ElVYTluWMHKCBVzG](https://youtu.be/zBodqwAlW3A?si=ElVYTluWMHKCBVzG)
**Assigned Reading:**
Schmalleger, Frank (2023). _Criminal Justice: A Brief Introduction_ (13th Edition). Pearson Publishing.
Pages 3 – 5; 23 – 32.
### **Prompt:**
After watching the video and completing the assigned reading, respond to the following questions:
1. According to the video and textbook, how has crime in the United States changed over time, and what social or historical factors contributed to those changes?
2. What role did early responses to crime (such as punishment practices or crime control strategies) play in shaping today’s criminal justice system?
3. Using at least one example from the video or textbook, explain how historical definitions of crime or punishment continue to influence modern criminal justice policies or practices.
[>Management homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/business-finance-management) Discussion
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →[>Management homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/business-finance-management)
Discussion
This week we focus on pregnancy and fertility. This discussion board will involve "looking forward". I would like you to quickly research a new tool, test or up and coming research studies regarding these topics. This is not expected to take you more than 15 minutes. Please provide a quick summary o…
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →This week we focus on pregnancy and fertility. This discussion board will involve "looking forward". I would like you to quickly research a new tool, test or up and coming research studies regarding these topics. This is not expected to take you more than 15 minutes. Please provide a quick summary of your findings and provide the reference you used in APA format. no AI and plaguiarism less than 15 %
OVERVIEW For Project Two, due in Module Seven, you will create a professional blog post. In this milestone, you will select the of your blog post and complete an annotated bibliography to prepare you to write your post. You will begin by finding five current articles (published no earlier than the y…
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →OVERVIEW
For Project Two, due in Module Seven, you will create a professional blog post. In this milestone, you will select the of your blog post and complete an annotated bibliography to prepare you to write your post. You will begin by finding five current articles (published no earlier than the year 2000) and ensuring three of them are primary research articles in which the authors collected their own data.
## Prompt
Use the following resources to support your work on this milestone:
– **Reading**: [What Is an Annotated Bibliography?](https://libanswers.snhu.edu/faq/8744) This Shapiro Library resource describes the purpose and characteristics of an annotated bibliography. It also includes examples of annotated bibliographies and a brief video.
– **Shapiro Library Research Guide**: [Psychology](https://learn.snhu.edu/d2l/common/dialogs/quickLink/quickLink.d2l?ou=2207916&type=content&rcode=snhu-1795156) Research guides are developed by librarians to help you find and locate the information you need for your classes, papers, and projects. This guide is a great resource to help you search for credible sources for your project. Scroll down to the Types of Psychology Sources table to help identify the types of sources you need to complete your milestone. Consider reaching out to a librarian using [email address](mailto:ask@snhu.libanswers.com) to ask a library-related question.
Select a for your Project Two blog post from the [Project Two Milestone Topics PDF](https://learn.snhu.edu/content/enforced/2207916-PSY-375-10657.202616-1/course_documents/PSY%20375%20Project%20Two%20Milestone%20Topics.pdf?ou=2207916) document. Next, using the Shapiro Library or other sources, identify three primary and two secondary sources to support your blog post. Complete your milestone using the [Project Two Milestone Template Word Document](https://learn.snhu.edu/content/enforced/2207916-PSY-375-10657.202616-1/course_documents/PSY%20375%20Project%20Two%20Milestone%20Template.docx?ou=2207916). You must address each of the rubric criteria listed below in about 1,000 to 1,200 words total.Specifically, you must address the following rubric criteria:
– Select a from the topics provided and explain why you selected that option.
– Create an annotated bibliography entry for your **first primary source**. Sources should be described in your own words for a general audience. Your entry should include a summary of the following:
– The problem addressed
– The methodology, measurements, and sample
– The findings
– Conclusions and limitations of the research design
– Create an annotated bibliography entry for your **second primary source**. Sources should be described in your own words for a general audience. Your entry should include a summary of the following:
– The problem addressed
– The methodology, measurements, and sample
– The findings
– Conclusions and limitations of the research design
– Create an annotated bibliography entry for your **third primary source**. Sources should be described in your own words for a general audience. Your entry should include a summary of the following:
– The problem addressed
– The methodology, measurements, and sample
– The findings
– Conclusions and limitations of the research design
– Compare two of the primary research report articles you selected for your annotated bibliography that use different **research methods**, and explain why the conclusions each article can draw are different.
– Compare two **secondary sources**. Your comparison should be described in your own words for a general audience. Your comparison should include a summary of the following:
– The types of research being reported
– The level of detail
– The intended audience of the publications
– [\
\
PSY375ProjectTwoMilestoneTemplate.docx](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/psy375projecttwomilestonetemplate-docx-10524651 "PSY375ProjectTwoMilestoneTemplate.docx")
– [\
\
PSY375ProjectTwoMilestoneTopics.pdf](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/psy375projecttwomilestonetopics-pdf-10524653 "PSY375ProjectTwoMilestoneTopics.pdf")
**files (1)** – ## NURSEPRACTICEHERassignment.docx **## NURSEPRACTICEHERassignment.docx** NURSE PRACTICE HER assignment The purpose of this assignment is to identify and evaluate nurses' safety measures when administering medications at a specific healthcare facility. This assignment is worth 15% of…
Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →**files (1)**
– ## NURSEPRACTICEHERassignment.docx
**## NURSEPRACTICEHERassignment.docx**
NURSE PRACTICE HER assignment
The purpose of this assignment is to identify and evaluate nurses' safety measures when administering medications at a specific healthcare facility. This assignment is worth 15% of your overall grade.
Students will identify and evaluate nurses' safety measures when administering medications at a specific healthcare facility.
##### Instructions:
1. Select one healthcare facility to evaluate an EHR system's safety measures.
2. Prepare a PowerPoint to present details of the evaluation.
· View the rubric for detailed components of the evaluation.
3. The PowerPoint Presentation should:
·
· No more than 20-25 minutes.
· Writing free of grammatical, spelling, &/or punctuation errors.
· Cite your references with the
[APA style guide\
Links to an external site.](https://libraryguides.mdc.edu/apa) (not included in the length of the post.
·
**Nurse Practice and EHR Assignment**
| | | |
| — | — | — |
| Nurse Practice and EHR Assignment |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverview of hospital, bed, capacity and services | **10 ptsProficient** Identifies and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the overview of the hospital, including history, bed capacity, services, etc.<br> <br>**5 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Identifies and demonstrates an accomplished understanding of the overview of the hospital, including history, bed capacity, services, etc.<br> <br>**2 ptsInadequate** Identifies and demonstrates acceptable understanding of the overview of the hospital, including history, bed capacity, services, etc.<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of Safety Measures Used by Nurses When Administering Medications | **30 ptsProficient** Presents an insightful and thorough analysis of all Safety Measures Used by Nurses When Administering Medications<br> <br>**20 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Presents a thorough analysis of most of the Safety Measures Used by Nurses When Administering Medications. Uses weak evidence to support the rationale.<br> <br>**15 ptsInadequate** Presents a superficial or incomplete analysis of some of the Safety Measures Used by Nurses When Administering Medications<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 30 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of Safety Measures Used Within an EHR System | **30 ptsProficient** Presents an insightful and thorough analysis of all Safety Measures Used Within an EHR System.<br> <br>**20 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Presents a thorough analysis of most of the safety measures used within an EHR system for a specific healthcare facility.<br> <br>**15 ptsInadequate** Presents little/no detail on the safety measures used within an EHR system for a specific healthcare facility.<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 30 pts |
| ckc | **20 ptsProficient** Makes appropriate and powerful connections that evaluate the safety measures used by nurses and within an EHR system and share recommendations with nurse leader<br> <br>**15 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections that evaluate the safety measures used by nurses and within an EHR system and share recommendations with nurse leader.<br> <br>**10 ptsInadequate** Limited Evaluation and research of the safety measures used by nurses and within an EHR system and share recommendations with nurse leader.<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePresentation/Writing Mechanics and Formatting Guidelines | **10 ptsProficient** Demonstrates clarity, conciseness and correctness; formatting is appropriate and writing is free of grammar and spelling errors. Uses APA 7th ed. Correctly for citations and references.<br> <br>**8 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Occasional grammar or spelling errors, but still a clear presentation of ideas; lacks organization. Uses APA 7th ed. Correctly for citations and references with minor issues.<br> <br>**5 ptsInadequate** Writing is unfocused, rambling, or contains serious errors; poorly organized and does not follow specified guidelines. Does no adhere to APA 7th ed. Guidelines.<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 10 pts |
· Total Points: 100
·
**## NURSEPRACTICEHERassignment.docx**
NURSE PRACTICE HER assignment
The purpose of this assignment is to identify and evaluate nurses' safety measures when administering medications at a specific healthcare facility. This assignment is worth 15% of your overall grade.
Students will identify and evaluate nurses' safety measures when administering medications at a specific healthcare facility.
##### Instructions:
1. Select one healthcare facility to evaluate an EHR system's safety measures.
2. Prepare a PowerPoint to present details of the evaluation.
· View the rubric for detailed components of the evaluation.
3. The PowerPoint Presentation should:
·
· No more than 20-25 minutes.
· Writing free of grammatical, spelling, &/or punctuation errors.
· Cite your references with the
[APA style guide\
Links to an external site.](https://libraryguides.mdc.edu/apa) (not included in the length of the post.
·
**Nurse Practice and EHR Assignment**
| | | |
| — | — | — |
| Nurse Practice and EHR Assignment |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverview of hospital, bed, capacity and services | **10 ptsProficient** Identifies and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the overview of the hospital, including history, bed capacity, services, etc.<br> <br>**5 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Identifies and demonstrates an accomplished understanding of the overview of the hospital, including history, bed capacity, services, etc.<br> <br>**2 ptsInadequate** Identifies and demonstrates acceptable understanding of the overview of the hospital, including history, bed capacity, services, etc.<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of Safety Measures Used by Nurses When Administering Medications | **30 ptsProficient** Presents an insightful and thorough analysis of all Safety Measures Used by Nurses When Administering Medications<br> <br>**20 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Presents a thorough analysis of most of the Safety Measures Used by Nurses When Administering Medications. Uses weak evidence to support the rationale.<br> <br>**15 ptsInadequate** Presents a superficial or incomplete analysis of some of the Safety Measures Used by Nurses When Administering Medications<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 30 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of Safety Measures Used Within an EHR System | **30 ptsProficient** Presents an insightful and thorough analysis of all Safety Measures Used Within an EHR System.<br> <br>**20 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Presents a thorough analysis of most of the safety measures used within an EHR system for a specific healthcare facility.<br> <br>**15 ptsInadequate** Presents little/no detail on the safety measures used within an EHR system for a specific healthcare facility.<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 30 pts |
| ckc | **20 ptsProficient** Makes appropriate and powerful connections that evaluate the safety measures used by nurses and within an EHR system and share recommendations with nurse leader<br> <br>**15 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections that evaluate the safety measures used by nurses and within an EHR system and share recommendations with nurse leader.<br> <br>**10 ptsInadequate** Limited Evaluation and research of the safety measures used by nurses and within an EHR system and share recommendations with nurse leader.<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePresentation/Writing Mechanics and Formatting Guidelines | **10 ptsProficient** Demonstrates clarity, conciseness and correctness; formatting is appropriate and writing is free of grammar and spelling errors. Uses APA 7th ed. Correctly for citations and references.<br> <br>**8 ptsDeveloping Proficiency** Occasional grammar or spelling errors, but still a clear presentation of ideas; lacks organization. Uses APA 7th ed. Correctly for citations and references with minor issues.<br> <br>**5 ptsInadequate** Writing is unfocused, rambling, or contains serious errors; poorly organized and does not follow specified guidelines. Does no adhere to APA 7th ed. Guidelines.<br> <br>**0 ptsNo Marks** | 10 pts |
· Total Points: 100
·