| Course | NURS 8600 DNP Field Experience |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 6 |
| Paper type | Course-correction memo |
| Length | About 850 words, 5 pages |
| Format | Memo, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 8600 Week 6
Memorandum
To: Medical Director and Nurse Manager, Composite Rural Family Medicine Clinic
From: DNP Project Lead
Date: Month Day, Year
Re: Request to adopt provider delivery of the alcohol brief intervention on nurse phone-coverage days, with a structured note shortcut
Request
I ask that you approve provider delivery of the scripted alcohol brief intervention on days when the registered nurse is covering the phone line, supported by a structured note shortcut in the record system that prompts all three core elements. The change formalizes something some providers already do, makes it count in our measures and protects the part of the intervention most often lost.
Situation
Screening documentation has risen from a baseline of 24 percent to 84 percent of annual visits by July, and referral offers have improved since the telehealth introduction. The brief intervention is the exception: since April it has been charted for barely more than half of the patients who screen positive, month after month. The midpoint report traced most of the gap to one pattern: whenever the nurse is assigned to answer phones, which happens two or three days in most weeks, positive screens are flagged but no one is free to deliver the brief intervention before the provider enters. On those days in July, brief intervention was documented for only 3 of 10 positive screens, compared with 9 of 12 on other days. All figures are illustrative, drawn up for a composite clinic.
Two further findings shaped this request. First, some providers were already delivering the brief intervention on those days, but in free text that our report cannot count and that often left out the question about readiness to change. Second, the monthly fidelity review found that readiness question to be the element most often missing across all notes.
What We Tested
In early August, one provider team tested the change for two weeks. On phone-coverage days, the provider delivered the brief intervention using a note shortcut that inserted three prompts: the patient's score and what it means, the advice given and the patient's answer to a readiness question. On those days, brief intervention was documented for 6 of 7 positive screens, and all 6 notes contained all three elements. The provider reported that the conversation took about four minutes and the shortcut saved time compared with free text. This was the project's second improvement cycle, run on a small scale before any wider change, as the Model for Improvement recommends (Langley et al., 2009).
Does Changing Who Delivers It Threaten Fidelity?
Fidelity concerns whether an intervention's essential content is delivered as intended, not necessarily who delivers it (Carroll et al., 2007). The brief intervention's core is its content: feedback, advice and a question about readiness. The shortcut is designed to protect that content, and in the test it did so more reliably than nurse notes had. Recording the change as a planned adaptation, with who made it, why and whether it preserves the core, keeps the project honest about what was actually delivered (Wiltsey Stirman et al., 2019). The final report will present results before and after the change separately.
What Would Change
1. On phone-coverage days, the medical assistant's flag would route to the provider instead of the nurse.
2. Providers would use the shortcut to deliver and document the brief intervention during the visit.
3. On other days, the nurse would continue to deliver it, now using the same shortcut so documentation is consistent.
4. The monthly report would count shortcut notes from both roles.
5. The project lead would give each provider a ten-minute walkthrough of the shortcut at the next provider meeting.
Costs and Risks
The change adds about four minutes to provider visits on two or three days a week, for roughly one or two patients per provider per day. Providers who tested it did not report running late as a result, but the balancing measure will be watched. A risk is that providers treat the shortcut as a checkbox and skip the conversation; the monthly fidelity review, and occasional observation by the nurse manager with patient permission, will watch for this. Another risk is that nurses feel displaced from a role they were trained for; the change applies only on phone-coverage days, and nurses remain the primary deliverers on other days.
Reporting to Faculty
Because this changes an element of the approved project plan, I will notify my DNP project faculty and practice mentor before the change takes effect and submit a short amendment describing the adaptation and its rationale, as the program requires for changes to an approved plan.
Requested Decision
If the change is approved, success in September would look like brief intervention documented for at least seven of every ten positive screens on phone-coverage days, all three core elements present in at least four of five reviewed notes and no rise in median rooming or visit time. If those targets are not met by the end of October, I will return with the data and either a revised approach or a recommendation to reverse the change.
Please approve the change to take effect on September 1, which allows time for the analyst to build the shortcut for all providers and for the provider walkthrough. I am happy to discuss it at your convenience before then.
References
Carroll, C., Patterson, M., Wood, S., Booth, A., Rick, J., & Balain, S. (2007). A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implementation Science, 2, Article 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-40
Langley, G. J., Moen, R. D., Nolan, K. M., Nolan, T. W., Norman, C. L., & Provost, L. P. (2009). The improvement guide: A practical approach to enhancing organizational performance (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Wiltsey Stirman, S., Baumann, A. A., & Miller, C. J. (2019). The FRAME: An expanded framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to evidence-based interventions. Implementation Science, 14, Article 58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-019-0898-y
NURS 8600 Week 6 instructions, in plain terms
The course-correction assignment in Week 6 typically asks you to propose a change to your intervention when data show an aim is not being met, addressed to the leaders who must approve it. Memos of two to three pages are common. State the request in the first lines. Summarize only the evidence the decision needs, referring to earlier reports by name. Describe any small test you ran. Explain whether the change affects fidelity and how you will know. List what would change in the workflow, what it costs and what could go wrong. Set targets that would show success and say what you will do if they are missed. Note how and when you will inform faculty.
Inside the NURS 8600 Week 6 example
The request opens the memo in two sentences. A situation section summarizes screening and referral progress, the stall in brief intervention and the phone-day gap, with illustrative counts, and describes providers' informal delivery. A section describes the second improvement cycle, six of seven positive screens reached, citing Langley and colleagues. A fidelity section cites Carroll and colleagues and Wiltsey Stirman and colleagues to argue that content, not the deliverer, is the core. Five numbered changes follow, then costs and risks, a note on reporting to faculty, success targets and a requested decision with a start date. The memo stays under three pages.
NURS 8600 Week 6 rubric: what earns full marks
Course-correction memos are commonly graded on the clarity of the request, the strength and economy of the evidence, attention to fidelity and the plan for monitoring. Request clarity is judged in the first paragraph. Evidence earns credit when it is enough to justify the change without reproducing whole reports. Fidelity is often a named criterion, and addressing it before it is raised shows judgment. Monitoring earns credit when targets and a fallback are stated. Faculty also check that changes to an approved plan are reported through the right channel. Professional memo format and concise writing complete the rubric, with APA citations for the frameworks used. A stated fallback, what happens if targets are missed, is often what separates a strong memo from an adequate one.
NURS 8600 Week 6 help from the desk
Course-correction memos lose marks when the request is vague, such as improving brief intervention rates, with no specific change named. Another common loss is proposing a change without testing it first. Some memos ignore fidelity, leaving leaders to wonder whether the intervention is still the same. Others forget to say how faculty will be informed. State one specific change, show the evidence in brief, describe your test, address fidelity, list costs and risks, set targets with a fallback and note faculty notification. The desk can draft a memo for the change your own data call for. Keep the memo short enough to be read in a few minutes.
Get a NURS 8600 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Send the course-correction prompt and rubric with a short account of the problem your implementation hit, and a decision memo structured around your request arrives in 24-48h, with the first one free. The phone line, the director and the nurse manager are fictional, and the correction your memo proposes answers what your own project's data show.
More NURS 8600 papers and DNP samples
- NURS 8600 Week 1: DNP project baseline summary
- NURS 8600 Week 2: DNP project launch brief
- NURS 8600 Week 3: DNP as-implemented workflow map
- NURS 8600 Week 4: DNP project PDSA cycle report
- NURS 8600 Week 5: DNP implementation midpoint report
- NURS 8600 Week 7: DNP project run chart analysis
- NURS 8600 Week 8: DNP sustainment handoff plan
- NURS 8600 Week 9: DNP final report discussion section
- NURS 8600 Week 10: DNP SQUIRE manuscript outline
- NURS 8600 Week 11: DNP essentials attainment reflection
- DNRS 6211 Week 6: Discussion post
- DNRS 6630 Week 6: Treatment plan
NURS 8600 Week 6 questions, answered
Does a course correction have to be reported to faculty before it happens?
Program expectations vary, and some require faculty agreement for any change to the approved intervention. The example is addressed to clinic leadership and copies faculty on the change. Your course may treat the memo itself as the notification, so the prompt's wording tells you who the audience is and whether any additional review is needed first.
Is changing who delivers the intervention a threat to fidelity?
It can be, which is why the example keeps the scripted elements identical and adds fidelity reviews for provider-delivered interventions. Changing the deliverer is an adaptation; changing the content would make it a different intervention. Your memo should say which kind of change you are proposing and how you will know whether the essential elements are still being delivered.
How much evidence belongs in a memo?
Only what the request needs. The example summarizes data from documents the recipients have already seen and refers to them by name rather than reproducing tables. Leaders are more likely to act on a memo they can read in a few minutes, and faculty tend to credit that economy, provided every claim can be traced to data you are able to produce.
Where can I find a free NURS 8600 Week 6 sample paper?
The complete memo, request, situation, test, fidelity section, changes, risks and targets, can be read here free. A memo for the change your own project needs can be requested.
What targets does the NURS 8600 Week 6 memo set for September?
Brief intervention documented for at least seven in ten positive screens on phone days, all three core elements in at least four of five reviewed notes and no rise in rooming or visit time.