Supply of Health Services

CATEGORY EXCELLENT – above expectations GOOD – met expectations FAIR – below expectations POOR – significantly below expectations or missing SCORE
Recommendations for 1) number of physicians and nurse practitioners; 2) reimbursement method: salary or fee-for-service; 3) recommendations for financial incentives to address challenges of supplier induced demand and ensure efficiency

(10 points)
The recommendations are accurate and show depth and breadth in critical thinking when addressing the key points related to economic efficiency.

(9–10 points)
The recommendations are accurate and fully address the key points related to economic efficiency.

(8 points)
The recommendations are partially accurate or lack depth, breadth, or clarity in addressing the key points related to economic efficiency.

(7 points) The recommendations are inaccurate (zero points) or poorly address key points related to economic efficiency.

(0–6 points)
Interpretation of the net profit from the ACO contract based on recommendations

(8 points) The interpretation shows critical thinking, considers divergent and competing opinions, and demonstrates creative problem solving in its analysis of the net profit from the ACO contract based on recommendations.

(8 points)
The interpretation fully addresses the net profit from the ACO contract based on recommendations.

(7 points)
The interpretation lacks depth or clarity in addressing the net profit from the ACO contract based on recommendations.

(6 points) The interpretation does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses net profit from the ACO contract based on recommendations.

(0–5 points)

Rationale, including how the financial calculations impacted your recommendations

(7 points)
The rationale shows critical thinking, considers divergent and competing opinions, and demonstrates creative problem solving in its analysis of how the financial calculations impacted the recommendations.

(7 points)
The rationale fully addresses how the financial calculations impacted the recommendations.

(6 points) The rationale lacks depth or clarity in addressing how the financial calculations impacted the recommendations.

(5 points) The rationale does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses how the financial calculations impacted the recommendations.

(0–4 points)
Writing

(5 points possible)

The paper is well organized, uses scholarly tone, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, follows APA style, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate-level writing style.

(5 points) The paper is mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style and may have some spelling, APA, and writing errors.

(4 points) The paper is somewhat consistent with graduate-level writing style and may have some spelling, APA, and writing errors.

(3 points) The paper is well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting.

(0–2 points) Instructor comments:

Total Score (30 possible points): points