google-site-verification=-CxNBF1tY1OFq-FxGj905sLa3tg462Giw6WbFn0gZDA

You are on the right track in evaluating the preliminary care coordination plan you developed in Assessment 1 using best practices found in the literature and then expanding it here in the final paper. You described the priorities that a care coordinator would establish when discussing the plan with a patient and family members. You discussed how the plan includes elements of Healthy People 2030. You also included relevant healthcare policy provisions that are important considerations for care coordination and the continuum of care. Overall, this is a good effort on this final care coordination plan addressing the care of a patient with a specific diagnosis or healthcare concern. I value your time and professionalism and creativity in preparing this. I made a few recommendations on how some criteria might achieve a higher performance score.
————————————————–
I did not see that you designed health interventions and timelines for care. For this section, I would ask that you refer back to Assessment 1. You will need only one patient diagnosis or health concern in this paper. Choose only three patient-centered health interventions for the one patient diagnosis or health concern. The patient goals that you created in Assessment 1 will become the patient-centered health interventions in Assessment 4. In creating the patient-centered health interventions, please follow the example under patient goals under feedback. Your interventions should follow this format, “exercise three times a day for 30 minutes” to satisfy the health interventions and timelines. I like the community resources that you included.
I see that you described priorities that a care coordinator would establish when discussing the plan with a patient and family member like clear communication and a supportive language. I like the example you provided about providing culturally diverse care to the patient while providing close attention to his/her needs. I like that you discussed changes that may be needed to the plan. To earn distinguished in this criterion, you will need to include evidence as this will strengthen the quality of your work and demonstrates how the evidence supports your ideas.
I like that you used the literature on evaluation as a guide to compare learning session content with best practices, including how to align teaching sessions with the Healthy People 2030 document. Consider what other revisions might be needed in the future to improve health outcomes.
I see that you considered ill-defined or ambiguous ethical decisions. I would like for you to provide a solid discussion of the ethical decision based upon the literature. I am looking to see that you discuss a specific ethical principle toward designing patient-centered interventions.
I like that you identified relevant health policy implications for the coordination and continuum of care, like HIPAA. I see that you based this on precise and accurate interpretations of relevant policy revisions. I appreciate your valid and insightful inferences about how these policies can improve the safety of medical information and improve how data is transferred across systems.
You applied APA formatting to the in-text citations. I like that you utilized level 1 headers in the paper. The headers should be centered and shortened to be on one line of the paper to provide more clarity to your paper. I like that the references were compiled as a list. Be sure to put the title of any journals and the volume numbers in italics. I am including a resource to help you with APA reference formatting: https://academicwriter-apa-org.library.capella.edu/learn/browse/QG-57.
I like that your writing was logical. Some paragraphs need to be more coherent.