|Type of paper:||Course work|
|Categories:||Health and Social Care Medicine Society|
Almost every organization mitigates risks by assessing the possibility of occurrence of adverse events that could negate their operations. Usually, the fluctuations of the banks' interest rates tend to cause ripple economic effects that may either result in the rise or fall in demand for the business' services and products. Indeed, the fear that an adverse economic event may unfavourably impact the performance of the organization, typically, causes firms to identify and manage risks periodically. In examining the possible threats to business, firms, usually relying on the expertise of the risk managers, follow the guidelines in the risk management programs (Hopkin, 2012). The programs that organizations use to examine threat levels contain elements that can synchronously exhibit similar and dissimilar features, and each element can conform to the legal standards and laws. Thus, it is important to examine how these elements present in the sample risk management programs of two organizations.
Organization 1 Organization 2
Identifying the risk
Incidences are reporting using techniques such as claims, verbal methods and electronic methods.
The analysis of the risk
Gathering of details by examining the source of the threat, and the individual responsible for causing it, and their response.
Analysis of the information to understand how severe the threat is, and its legal implications.
The reduction of the risk
The strategies for reducing future loss.
The maintenance of the risk.
Manage information using methods such as controlling those who can access the information. The establishment of the context.
Development of the criterions for the assessment of the risk by deciding on the risk's acceptable level.
Defining the scheme of the process by dividing it into elements.
Identifying clinical risk.
Outline each requirement that can help in identifying risks.
Use questions such as the probable worst case scenario, including its triggers, and frequency of occurrence.
Examine some of the actions that the firm should undertake to address the problem.
Ask core questions including the source of the risk.
Use various tools including complaints details, and information from audit reports to assess the risks (Hopkin, 2012).
Apply methods such as qualitative or quantitative techniques in analyzing risks.
Assess the availability of existing mitigation mechanisms.
Assess the adverse ramifications of the risks.
Determine if the available management procedures are effective.
Evaluation of the risks.
Compare the risk against the set risk level.
Examine the person to refer the risk information to.
Use an inventory to examine what the organization can manage to address.
Establish the process of treating the risk by avoiding, transferring, retaining or reducing it.
Based on the compiled list of the two risk mitigation programs (RMP), it is evident that their elements partly exhibit coherent features. Notably, the identification of the risk as well as the analysis of the same is an attribute common to the two risk management programs which confine to the legal standards and laws (Kavaler, Alexander, & Kavaler, 2014). Besides, the elements exhibit shared characteristics in the sense that they follow a flow of procedures that eventually culminate to the reduction of the risk. For example, the process involved in identifying and mitigating risks in both cases, begin with the initial step, which in the case of the organization 1, entails the identification of the risk. However, the organization 2 has more detailed RMP, and unlike that of organization 1, it has five key elements. Again, their difference emanates from their first elements considering that the identification of the risk is synonymous with the organization 1 while the initial procedure in the organization 2 is the establishment of the context. Despite their differences, the processes under each firm reflect the legal laws such as the requirement that organizations must adhere to the quality standards that guide the delivery of public services.
RMP Report for Various Facilities
Facility Measurement of quality Types of ongoing measures/ indicators The person the information is reported to
Hospital The information on the cases of re-hospitalization.
Rates of hospital-related injuries to demonstrate safety issues. Patient experience. Hospital administrator
Long term care The number of patients that show improvements such as the ability to perform tasks such as movement. The positive response from clients. Quality assurance team.
Ambulatory care The ability of adult patients to access ambulatory services (Carroll, 2011). Satisfaction in people who previously used ambulatory services. Ambulatory personnel
Behavioral Health Access to mental health care services. The time one can wait before they can be assigned a therapy program. Mental health supervisor.
Hospice Feedback from patients. The patient experiences reduced pain. Hospital management
Home health The stabilization in the patient's health. The patient's body temperature improves. They show improvement. Health care representative.
Rehabilitation Functional assessment The ability of the person to act normally and exhibit desirable behaviours. The quality assurance team.
Developmental disabilities. Learning outcomes Ongoing assessment includes determining whether they can answer questions about what they are taught (Youngberg, 2011). The mental health professional is responsible for supervising mental health treatment.
Managed Care Organizations Risk assessment Examine the patient's risk of fall The quality team.
Risk management is important to the organization in the sense that the practice enhances organizations' capacity to recognize issues that could threaten their performance. Usually, the RMP integrates elements such as risk identification, which guide risk managers through the process of recognizing the possible threats, and the solution to the same. While some of the elements can be similar for any set of programs, they can synchronously differ, sometimes. Although the programs 1 and 2 exhibits shared characteristics such as shared approaches to the analysis of threats, the latter seems detailed compared to the latter. However, the elements in both cases focus on reducing the risk.
Carroll, R. (2011). Risk management handbook for health care organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hopkin, P. (2012). Fundamentals of risk management: Understanding evaluating and implementing effective risk management. London: Kogan Page.
Kavaler, F., Alexander, R. S., & Kavaler, F. (2014). Risk management in healthcare institutions: Limiting liability and enhancing care. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Shaughnessy, P. W., Crisler, K. S., Schlenker, R. E., Arnold, A. G., Kramer, A. M., Powell, M. C., & Hittle, D. F. (1994). Measuring and assuring the quality of home health care. Health care financing review, 16(1), 35-67.
Youngberg, B. J. (2011). Principles of risk management and patient safety. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Cite this page
Quality Measurement Strategies. (2022, Dec 09). Retrieved from https://speedypaper.com/essays/quality-measurement-strategies
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal:
- The Scarlet Letter Essay Example
- Mobile Advertisements - Presentation Example
- Free Essay with Case Study Analysis: Microsoft Anticompetitive Behavior
- Essay Example Dedicated to the Age of Enlightenment: Reason and the Reformation of Society
- Theories for Quality Care: Paper Example
- Free Essay: Analysis of Malaysian and Singaporean Domino Pizza Advertisements
- Channels of Communication and Corporate Social Responsibility