| Course | NURS 6441 Project Management: Healthcare Information Technology |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 2 |
| Paper type | Project charter |
| Length | About 790 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 6441 Week 2
Project Charter: Electronic Procedural Consent Across Three Hospitals of a Composite Health System
Student Name
College of Nursing, Walden University
NURS 6441: Project Management: Healthcare Information Technology
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Project Charter: Electronic Procedural Consent Across Three Hospitals of a Composite Health System
1. Project Purpose
Procedural consent at the health system's three hospitals is recorded on paper forms that are printed, signed at the bedside, carried to the procedure area and scanned into the record afterward. Consents are regularly found incomplete or missing at the time-out, procedures are delayed while a new form is signed, and the scanned copies are hard to find later. This project will replace paper procedural consent with an electronic consent completed and signed on a tablet and stored directly in the record. The charter authorizes the project, names who decides and sets its outer boundary; the scope statement that follows will make that boundary testable, as project management practice separates authorization from detailed definition (Project Management Institute [PMI], 2021).
2. Objective
Replace paper consent for scheduled procedures in the perioperative, interventional radiology, endoscopy and cardiac catheterization areas of all three hospitals with an electronic consent integrated into the clinical record. The project succeeds if, ninety days after the final hospital goes live, at least 90% of consents for scheduled procedures in those areas are completed electronically and pass the required-elements check before the time-out.
3. Scope Boundary
In scope: consent for scheduled procedures in the four named procedural areas at the three hospitals; configuration of the consent forms already approved by the health system's consent committee; tablet devices and secure storage in the record; training for staff who obtain or witness consent in those areas; interpreter workflow for patients with limited English proficiency.
Out of scope: (a) emergency consent and consent for procedures performed at the bedside on inpatient units; (b) consent for blood transfusion, which follows a separate policy; (c) research consent, which is governed by the institutional review board; (d) changes to the legal content of consent forms, which remain with the consent committee and legal counsel; (e) ambulatory clinics and physician offices; (f) patient-facing remote signature before the day of procedure. Each exclusion is something a stakeholder has asked about or could reasonably expect, and each may be proposed later through the change process.
4. Milestones
Milestones are named events without dates, because this charter is written before the work has been estimated. M1: charter approved. M2: scope statement approved. M3: forms configured and tested. M4: training complete at the first hospital. M5: first hospital live. M6: second hospital live. M7: third hospital live. M8: ninety-day measurement complete and project closed. Dates will be set in the schedule once the work breakdown has been estimated, and the sponsor will approve the baseline.
5. Assumptions
The consent committee's approved forms will not change during configuration. The clinical record vendor's consent module is licensed and supported. Each procedural area has wireless coverage adequate for tablets in pre-procedure bays. Interpreter services can join consent conversations by video on the same tablet. Each hospital will release super-users for training and go-live support.
6. Constraints
The project must comply with the health system's consent policy and state law on informed consent without changing either. Go-live cannot occur at any hospital during a major accreditation survey window. The project shares its analyst team with two other clinical projects, so configuration effort is limited to the analysts' allocated hours; inadequate or shared staffing is a recognized source of software project risk (Keil et al., 1998). Paper consent must remain available as a fallback throughout the project and for ninety days after each go-live.
7. Stakeholders and Roles
Sponsor: Chief Nursing Officer, accountable for the project's success and for decisions outside the project manager's authority. Clinical co-lead: perioperative medical director. Project manager: nursing informatics specialist. Consent content owner: consent committee chair, with legal counsel. Technical lead: clinical applications manager. Site leads: one perioperative nurse manager at each hospital. A fuller stakeholder analysis will follow in the stakeholder plan.
8. Decision Authority
The project manager decides alone: the order of configuration tasks, the training schedule within approved milestones, the assignment of super-users and the handling of issues that do not change scope, milestones or risk exposure. The sponsor decides: any change to scope, any movement of a go-live milestone, any change to the objective or success measure, and any risk response that requires resources beyond the project's allocation. The consent committee decides: any change to consent wording. When the project manager and a site lead disagree about readiness for go-live, the question goes to the sponsor, who settles it within five working days. Unclear ownership of decisions is among the most common managerial causes of health IT project failure (Kaplan & Harris-Salamone, 2009), which is why this section is written before any other work begins. The charter takes effect when the sponsor signs it, and it is revised only through the sponsor.
References
Kaplan, B., & Harris-Salamone, K. D. (2009). Health IT success and failure: Recommendations from literature and an AMIA workshop. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 16(3), 291-299. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M2997
Keil, M., Cule, P. E., Lyytinen, K., & Schmidt, R. C. (1998). A framework for identifying software project risks. Communications of the ACM, 41(11), 76-83. https://doi.org/10.1145/287831.287843
Project Management Institute. (2021). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide) (7th ed.).
The Walden NURS 6441 Week 2 instructions
The Week 2 assignment usually asks for a project charter for a health IT project, including purpose, objectives, scope, milestones, assumptions, constraints, stakeholders and authority, often following a template or a project management standard. Charters commonly run three to five pages. Some sections ask for a budget estimate and others do not; include one only if required, and label it as an order of magnitude. Choose a project small enough to define in a few pages and real enough to have stakeholders who disagree. Describe the organization as a composite, name roles rather than people, and leave out any actual vendor contract or executive signature.
Inside the NURS 6441 Week 2 example
The purpose section describes the paper consent problem in operational terms and explains that the charter authorizes while the scope statement will define. The objective carries one measurable condition. The scope section lists what is in and then six numbered exclusions, each something a stakeholder has asked about or could expect. Milestones run M1 to M8 without dates, with a sentence explaining why. Assumptions and constraints are separate, the second including shared analyst capacity, cited to a software risk framework. Roles are listed, and the decision authority section divides decisions among the project manager, the sponsor and the consent committee, citing a review of health IT failure.
Where the marks sit in the NURS 6441 Week 2 rubric
Charter rubrics usually score completeness of required sections, clarity and measurability of objectives, definition of scope and exclusions, realism of milestones and assumptions, identification of roles and authority, and professional presentation. Measurability is often decisive: an objective someone could check later scores much higher than a statement of intent. Exclusions earn credit when they name things stakeholders would plausibly expect. Authority is frequently underweighted by students but valued by graders, since a charter's purpose is to say who decides. Presentation covers numbered sections, concise language and correct citation of any project management sources used. Some sections also reward a short explanation of how the charter will be revised, which the example handles by giving revision authority to the sponsor alone.
NURS 6441 Week 2 help from the desk
The most frequent loss is an objective such as improve consent processes, which no one could ever confirm or refute. Another is a scope with no exclusions, or exclusions nobody would have asked for. Some charters give milestone dates before any estimate exists, which weakens credibility. Many mix assumptions with constraints, or leave authority unstated. Write one measurable objective, list exclusions stakeholders might expect, name milestones as events, separate what you assume from what binds you and state plainly who decides what. Keep the charter to a length a sponsor will read in one sitting. Finally, check that nothing in the charter contradicts the scope statement you will write next week.
Get a NURS 6441 Week 2 example written to your instructions
Charter templates vary by classroom, so send yours if there is one, together with the prompt and the rubric. A NURS 6441 charter returns for a composite health system carrying the same section discipline and the same exclusion list shown here. A signed charter from your employer is never source material. First sample free, inside 24-48h.
More NURS 6441 papers and MSN samples
- NURS 6441 Week 1: Discussion post
- NURS 6441 Week 3: Scope statement
- NURS 6441 Week 4: Work breakdown
- NURS 6441 Week 5: Schedule
- NURS 6441 Week 6: Risk register
- NURS 6441 Week 7: Stakeholder plan
- NURS 6441 Week 8: Communication plan
- NURS 6441 Week 9: Discussion post
- NURS 6441 Week 10: Go-live plan
- NURS 6441 Week 11: Lessons learned
- NURS 6421 Week 2: Observation log
- NURS 6501 Week 2: Immune mechanism case analysis
- NURS 6412 Week 2: Data dictionary
- NURS 6512 Week 2: Tailored history interview plan
NURS 6441 Week 2 questions, answered
How long should a project charter run?
Short enough that the sponsor reads all of it. Your prompt may set a page count and it decides, but a charter stretching past a handful of pages has usually absorbed material belonging to the scope statement or the plan. The example holds at four pages by keeping every section to what a reader must look up. Anything much longer usually signals borrowed material.
Can I charter a project my organization is actually running?
Write about your own setting if the prompt asks for it, and that draft stays with you. We build the sample on a composite health system instead, because a live project's charter, its budget and its vendor arrangements are the organization's property. The document structure carries over to your own version without any of that content. Structure transfers cleanly; the organization's content does not.
Does the charter need a budget figure?
Only if the prompt requires one, and then it should be labeled as an order of magnitude rather than presented as an estimate. The example carries no dollar amount, because nothing in the assignment produced one and a fabricated figure invites questions no other section of the charter can answer. Resource needs appear as roles and effort. Order of magnitude, clearly labeled as such, is defensible.
Where can I find a free NURS 6441 Week 2 sample paper?
The full eight-section charter, from purpose to decision authority, can be read here free. Charters for other projects, written to your section's template, are available from the desk on request.
Should a NURS 6441 charter include dates?
Usually not before estimation. Named milestones without dates are more honest at the charter stage; dates belong in the schedule once the work has been broken down and estimated.