AHS 7615 Wilmington Wk 5 Partnerships in Faith Based Organizations Reaction Paper

  • Post category:Nursing
  • Reading time:10 mins read
  • Post author:

AHS 7615 Wilmington Wk 5 Partnerships in Faith Based Organizations Reaction Paper

Description

Nursing homework help

 

After reading the article, ‘Partnerships: Frameworks for Working Together’, please complete a 2-4 page reaction paper addressing the following questions:

  • What is a partnership?
  • What are five (5) key components of the most common approaches to partnerships?
  • What are five (5) barriers to successful partnerships?
  • Choose one (1) faith-based organization that you included in the resource list that you developed in Week 3.
    • Name the faith-based organization and name a potential partner organization.
    • What category (type) of partnership will it be?
    • How would you suggest that the faith-based organization build capacity through this partnership?

It is suggested that you use headings to address each bulleted item. This will help to ensure that you cover all of what is asked for this assignment.

Please make sure that your paper is written in the appropriate APA format, including specific references to the learning resources.

ARTICLES:

Partnerships: Frameworks for Working Together (Links to an external site.)

This web toolkit discusses how to create and manage partnerships.
**This resource should be used to complete your Reaction Paper, this week.
By: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

Promising Practices for Improving the Capacity of Faith-Based Organizations (Links to an external site.)

This web article discusses best practices in improving the capacity of faith-based and community-based organizations.
By: Barbara Fink & Alvia Y. Branch, Branch Associates, Inc., 2005

Partnership in Action

This article discusses partnerships between faith-based organizations and employers.
By: United States Department of Labor, Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives

Partnering with Faith-Based and Community Organizations

This article is a guide for state and local officials who administer federal grant funds.
By: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives

Guidance to Faith-Based and Community Organizations on Partnering with the Federal Government

This article provides guidance to faith and community-based organizations on how to partner with the federal government.
By: The White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives

Faith-Based Tool Kit – Partnerships for the Common Good

This is a tool kit that serves as a partnership guide for faith-based and neighborhood organizations.
By: The White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships

United Way of Delaware Study on Faith-Based Organizations

The goal of this study was to provide The United Way of Delaware and the Jessie Ball duPont Fund with information about the social contributions of local religious congregations of Wilmington, Delaware, and their interactions with local social services organizations.
By: Dr. Ram A. Cnaan & Dr. Bob Wineburg, 2009.

Videos:Video: United Way of Delaware Study on Faith-Based Organizations Part 1 (Links to an external site.)

This video describes the findings of the United Way of Delaware Study on Partnerships with Faith-Based Organizations. Part 1

Video: United Way of Delaware Study on Faith-Based Organizations Part 2 (Links to an external site.)

 

This video describes the findings of the United Way of Delaware Study on Partnerships with Faith-Based Organizations. Part 2

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

 

Supported by at least three credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Post is cited with two credible sources.

 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Contains only one or no credible sources.

 

Not written clearly or concisely.

 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100