Unit Outline

The organisational resilience and communication fields of knowledge provide frameworks to review clinical governance arrangements. Additionally, quality improvement theory, techniques and approaches are addressed to equip professionals with the practical skills to enhance safe, high-quality care. This knowledge is used to investigate how to achieve effective performance and monitoring systems. To operationalise these requirements, this unit investigates the application of the National Safety and Quality in Health Service (NSQHS) Communicating for Safety and Recognising and Responding to Acute Deterioration Blood Safety Management Standards. Their necessity and integration with other standards in the NSQHS are also reviewed.

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.	Apply legal and ethical frameworks, policies and procedures to clinical safety and quality
2.	Evaluate, plan, and initiate effective clinical safety, quality and accountability
3.	Critically review the key principles of communicating for safety for clinical accountability within the healthcare context

Requisites


REQUISITE TYPE	REQUISITES
Concurrent Pre-requisite	BAA543

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 practical approaches for the organisation to address one of the National Safety and Quality in Health Service (NSQHS) Standards: Communicating for Safety, or Blood Management, or Recognising or Responding to Acute Deterioration.
The e-poster should be evidence based, and designed to educate and inform a target audience about the importance of complying with the standard (or standards) and provide practical guidance on how the organisation can improve its practices and processes to meet actions or criteria within one 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	LO2
2	Defines major goals with linkage to the NSQHS Communicating for Safety OR Blood Management OR Recognising & Responding to Acute Deterioration Standards	LO1
3	Provides an overview of 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	LO2
6	Presents conclusion and implications for practice	LO1
7	Supported with a range of relevant contemporary evidence, including peer-reviewed research, industry and government literature	LO3
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 to gain hands-on experience in dealing with the National Safety and Quality in Health Services (NSQHS) Communicating for Safety or Blood Management or Recognising and Responding to Acute Deterioration Standards. This will help you equip yourself better to implement effective safety and quality improvement initiatives in your healthcare role. In the case study, you will need to analyse a real-world scenario, identify areas for improvement in safety and quality of care, and recommend 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 NSQHS Communicating for Safety, Blood Management or Recognising & Responding to Acute Deterioration Standards	LO1
2	Demonstrates an analysis of what NSQHS Communicating for Safety, Blood Management or Recognising & Responding to Acute Deterioration Standard/s mean for your organisation.	LO3
3	Describes the gaps and offers solutions necessary to facilitate engagement with the NSQHS Communicating for Safety, Blood Management or Recognising & Responding to Acute Deterioration Standard(s)	LO2
4	Describes the potential challenges faced and offer practical solutions to those challenges to facilitate engagement with NSQHS Communicating for Safety, Blood Management or Recognising & Responding to Acute Deterioration Standard(s)	LO3
5	Summarises key findings, outcomes and implications of the analysis conducted throughout the study	LO3
6	Provides recommendations, offers actionable suggestions or solutions to address a specific challenges identified within the case	LO2
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.

Critically reflect on the National Safety and Quality in Health Service (NSQHS) Communicating for Safety or Blood Management or Recognising and Responding to Acute Deterioration Standards. 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 insight.

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?)	LO1
2	Theory and knowledge building. Provides analytical interpretations and connections to academic concepts (The So What?)	LO2
3	Action orientated reflection. Provides an outcome, evidence of development (The Now What?)	LO3
4	Supports with a range of relevant reviewed research, industry, and government literature	LO1

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.

Academic integrity

Academic integrity is about acting responsibly, honestly, ethically, and collegially when using, producing, and communicating information with other students and staff members.

In written work, you must correctly reference the work of others to maintain academic integrity. To find out the referencing style for this unit, see the assessment information in the MyLO site, or contact your teaching staff. For more detail about Academic Integrity, see Important Guidelines & Support.

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.