| Course | IHP 435 Performance Improvement Measurement and Methodologies |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 1 |
| Paper type | discussion post on the Model for Improvement |
| Length | About 360 words, 3 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | BS Healthcare Administration |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for IHP 435 Module 1
Module One Discussion
We Added a Window and Called It Improvement
Last spring, a committee at Cedar Point Medical Center, a composite 260-bed hospital, decided emergency department waits were too long and opened a second registration window. Two months later, the committee's report said patients were happier and waits were shorter. No one had measured either. By fall, the extra window was often unstaffed, and complaints were back. This week's readings explained what went wrong.
Berwick (1996) argued that every system produces exactly the results it is designed to produce, so better results require changing the system, but not every change is an improvement. His primer offers three questions to guide the work. The first asks what, specifically, we are trying to accomplish, which calls for a target stated in numbers with a deadline. The second asks what evidence would show a change truly helped, which calls for measures defined before the change. The third asks what changes might produce improvement, which calls for ideas tested on a small scale. Our committee answered only the third, and only once.
Donabedian (1988) gives a way to answer the second question. He proposed judging quality through structure, the resources and setting of care, process, what is actually done, and outcome, the results for patients, and argued that the three are linked, with good structure making good process more likely. The second window was a structure change. A good project would also have measured process, such as minutes from arrival to registration, and outcome, such as how many patients left before being seen.
Taylor et al. (2014) looked across published projects that described themselves as PDSA work; few of them ran small, repeated tests with data collected over time. Many made one large change, like our window, and reported a single before-and-after comparison. That pattern produces confident reports and little learning.
If I could restart, I would write an aim, such as reducing the median time from arrival to registration from 14 minutes to 7 within three months, define the measures first and test staffing changes on one shift before spreading them. My question for classmates: which of Berwick's three questions do projects in your workplace most often skip?
References
Berwick, D. M. (1996). A primer on leading the improvement of systems. BMJ, 312(7031), 619-622. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7031.619
Donabedian, A. (1988). The quality of care: How can it be assessed? JAMA, 260(12), 1743-1748. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1988.03410120089033
Taylor, M. J., McNicholas, C., Nicolay, C., Darzi, A., Bell, D., & Reed, J. E. (2014). Systematic review of the application of the plan-do-study-act method to improve quality in healthcare. BMJ Quality & Safety, 23(4), 290-298. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2013-001862
What the IHP 435 Module 1 instructions ask for
The opening IHP 435 Discussion generally asks what performance improvement means in health care and how organizations know whether a change helped. Most sections look for a first post somewhere near 300 words, supported by at least one peer-reviewed source in APA 7, and replies to classmates later in the week. Use a real or composite example, apply a recognized framework such as the Model for Improvement and explain how you would measure success. Show that you understand the difference between a change and an improvement. Finish by asking classmates to set their own experience beside yours and compare how improvement actually happens in their own workplaces, departments or clinical settings. IHP 435 graders notice clean headings in IHP 435 papers.
How this IHP 435 Module 1 discussion example is built
This post comes from a registration supervisor whose hospital opened a second registration window to shorten emergency waits and declared success without data. Berwick's primer supplies three questions, about the aim, the measures and the changes, and the post shows the committee answered only the last. Donabedian's structure, process and outcome model shows the window was a structure change that needed process and outcome measures. Taylor and colleagues' review of PDSA misuse explains why single large changes produce little learning. The writer proposes an aim with a number and date, measures defined first and small tests, and asks classmates which question their projects skip. IHP 435 students can reuse this structure for IHP 435 work. IHP 435 claims here trace to cited IHP 435 sources.
Where the IHP 435 Module 1 rubric puts the points
First-week discussions in IHP 435 are commonly scored on understanding of improvement concepts, correct use of a framework, attention to measurement, relevance of the example, APA 7 and contributions to classmates' thinking. Strong posts use a specific example, apply the Model for Improvement or a similar framework accurately and define measures before describing changes. Posts lose points when they describe improvement as any change leaders make, when measures are absent or vague or when responses only echo the original post. A response that helps a classmate turn a vague goal into a measurable aim shows exactly the skill this course builds across the term. IHP 435 marks favor careful formatting across IHP 435 sections. IHP 435 citations keep every IHP 435 argument credible.
IHP 435 Module 1 help: the mistakes that cost points
In week one of IHP 435, posts often lose points for describing projects without aims or measures, for confusing structure changes with results, for sources that are not scholarly and for replies that add nothing. A frequent weakness is treating a single before-and-after comparison as proof. Use an example, apply the three questions, name measures at more than one level and ask a real question. If your instructor assigned a specific framework or reading, add it to your IHP 435 notes so the draft uses it directly and accurately. IHP 435 drafts start well from a IHP 435 outline. IHP 435 feedback already received guides IHP 435 revisions.
Get IHP 435 Module 1 written to your instructions
Share the IHP 435 prompt along with an improvement effort you have seen. You will get a post that applies the Model for Improvement, defines measures before changes and uses evidence on how improvement projects succeed or fail, within 24 to 48 hours, free the first time. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More IHP 435 papers and related BS Healthcare Administration samples
- IHP 420 Module 5 Malpractice Case Milestone Two
- IHP 430 Module 8 Final Project Performance Improvement Plan
- HCM 340 Module 4 Access to Care Short Paper
- IHP 410 Module 4 Final Project Milestone Two
IHP 435 Module 1 questions, answered
Where can I find a free IHP 435 Module 1 Discussion sample?
The full post is on this page: a failed waiting room project analyzed with the Model for Improvement, Donabedian's model and evidence on PDSA.
Which questions anchor the Model for Improvement?
They ask what the team aims to achieve, how it will tell whether a change helped and which changes are worth testing.
What is the difference between change and improvement?
Improvement requires change, but a change counts as improvement only if measures show better results.
What are structure, process and outcome measures?
Structure measures resources and setting, process measures what is done and outcome measures results for patients.
Why do many improvement projects fail?
Common reasons include no clear aim, no measures defined in advance and one large change instead of small, repeated tests.