Unit Outline

Theories of regulation, governance and national standards for accreditation are reviewed to provide a foundation for organisational management requirements and clinical systems for effective, sustainable high-quality healthcare. Healthcare organisations need for effective understanding of and approaches to risk management, interprofessional practice and continuous quality improvement are reviewed. Analysis will investigate the effectiveness of clinical governance systems for assessing, monitoring, and improving management and clinical systems. To operationalise these requirements, this unit reviews the overarching National Model Clinical Governance Framework (NMCGF) and National Safety and Quality Health Service (NSQHS) standards to determine appropriate systems for clinical governance, accountability and clinical performance and effectiveness. This involves the review and application of the NSQHS Clinical Governance Standard.

Intended Learning Outcomes

As per the Assessment and Results Policy 1.3, your results will reflect your achievement against specified learning outcomes.

On completion of this unit, you will be able to:


1.	Analyse implications of change, complexity, and ambiguity on health and work practices
2.	Apply clinical governance to the provision of high standards of safety and quality in healthcare
3.	Describe the relationship between principles of governance and legislature

Alterations as a result of student feedback

Iterative improvements have been made to this unit based on student feedback.

How will I be Assessed?

For more detailed assessment information please see MyLO.

Assessment schedule


ASSESSMENT TASK #	ASSESSMENT TASK NAME	DATE DUE	WEIGHT	LINKS TO INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES
Assessment Task 1:	ePoster	Week 7	20 %	LO1, LO2, LO3
Assessment Task 2:	Case Study	Week 11	40 %	LO1, LO2, LO3
Assessment Task 3:	Critical Reflection	Week 13	40 %	LO1, LO2, LO3

Assessment details

Assessment Task 1: ePoster

Task Description:

Design an e-poster that identifies effective approaches for the organisation to address the National Safety and Quality in Health Service (NSQHS) Clinical Governance Standard. The e-poster should be evidence based, and designed to educate and inform a target audience about the importance of complying with the standard and provide practical guidance on how the organisation can improve its practices and processes to meet the standard.

Task Length:

400 words

Due Date:

Week 7

Weight:

20 %

CRITERION #

CRITERION

MEASURES INTENDED

LEARNING OUTCOME(S)


1	Presents the organisation, service context, and reason that led to the poster design	LO1
2	Defines major goals with linkage to the NSQHS Clinical Governance Standard	LO3
3	Provides an overview the topic design, including specific initiatives implemented, stakeholders involved and time frame	LO2
4	Identifies outcome measures used to evaluate goals of topic	LO2
5	Presents findings as the result of the investigation	LO3
6	Presents conclusion and implications for practice	LO3
7	Supports with a range of relevant contemporary evidence, including peer-reviewed research, industry and government literature	LO2
8	Visual presentation connects and engages the target audience with your message	LO2

Assessment Task 2: Case Study

Task Description:

Undertake a Case Study analysis that provides hands-on experience in dealing with the National Safety and Quality in Health Service (NSQHS) Clinical Governance Standard. This enables you to better equip yourself to implement effective safety and quality improvement initiatives in your healthcare role. In the Case Study, analyse a real-world scenario, identify areas for improvement in safety and quality of care, and recommend approaches to enhance governance practices. approaches to enhance governance practices.

Task Length:

1500 words

Due Date:

Week 11

Weight:

40 %

CRITERION #

CRITERION

MEASURES INTENDED

LEARNING OUTCOME(S)


1	Describes the organisation in the context of the NSQHS Clinical Governance Standard	LO3
2	Demonstrates an analysis of what NSQHS Clinical Governance Standard means for your organisation?	LO2
3	Describes the gaps and offers solutions necessary to facilitate engagement with NSQHS Clinical Governance Standard	LO2
4	Describes the potential challenges faced and offers practical solutions to those challenges to facilitate engagement with the NSQHS Clinical Governance Standard	LO1
5	Summarises key findings, outcomes, and implications of the analysis conducted throughout the case	LO3
6	Provides recommendations, offers actionable suggestions or solutions to address a specific challenges identified within the case	LO3
7	Supports with a range of relevant contemporary evidence, including peer- reviewed research, industry, and government literature	LO1

Assessment Task 3: Critical Reflection

Task Description:

Critical Reflection (Formative due weeks 4,8,12,13) Summative due week 13.
Engage in critical reflection relating to the National Safety and Quality in Health Service (NSQHS) Clinical Governance Standard. Critical reflection entails scrutinising, identifying, questioning, and analysing all aspects of events and experiences from multiple perspectives. To improve safety and quality of the healthcare system, critical reflection must be relevant and continue to promote personal, professional, and academic learning. Through critical reflection, you develop a deeper understanding of the subject matter, challenge existing beliefs, and generate new insights.

Task Length:

1500 words in total (the task involves multiple short answer critical reflections)

Due Date:

Week 13

Weight:

40 %

CRITERION #

CRITERION

MEASURES INTENDED

LEARNING OUTCOME(S)


1	Descriptive level of critical reflection. Provides a brief critical description on existing knowledge (The What?)	LO3
2	Theory and knowledge building. Provides analytical interpretations and connections to academic concepts (The So What?)	LO1
3	Action orientated reflection. Provides an outcome, evidence of development (The Now What?)	LO2
4	Supports with a range of relevant contemporary evidence including peer-reviewed research industry and government literature	LO2

How your final result is determined

To pass this unit, you need to demonstrate your attainment of each of the Intended Learning Outcomes, achieve a final unit grade of 50% or greater, and pass any hurdle tasks.

Submission of assignments

Where practicable, assignments should be submitted to an assignment submission folder in MYLO. You must submit assignments by the due date or receive a penalty (unless an extension of time has been approved by the Unit Coordinator). Students submitting any assignment in hard copy, or because of a practicum finalisation, must attach a student cover sheet and signed declaration for the submission to be accepted for marking.

Requests for extensions

If you are unable to submit an assessment task by the due date, you should apply for an extension.

A request for an extension should first be discussed with your Unit Coordinator or teaching support team where possible. A request for an extension must be submitted by the assessment due date, except where you can provide evidence it was not possible to do so. Typically, an application for an extension will be supported by documentary evidence: however, where it is not possible for you to provide evidence please contact your Unit Coordinator.

The Unit Coordinator must notify you of the outcome of an extension request within 3 working days of receiving the request.

Late penalties

Assignments submitted after the deadline will receive a late penalty of 5% of the original available mark for each calendar day (or part day) that the assignment is late. Late submissions will not be accepted more than 10 calendar days after the due date, or after assignments have been returned to other students on a scheduled date, whichever occurs first. Further information on Late Penalties can be found on the Assessments and Results Procedure.

Review of results and appeals

You are entitled to ask for a review of the marking and grading of your assessment task if there is an irregularity in the marking standards or an error in the process for determining the outcome of an assessment. Details on how to request a review of a mark for an assignment are outlined in the Review and Appeal of Academic Decisions Procedure.