Week 1 Discussion: Syllabus and Course Expectations Review

Unit Information

Course code: PSY101
Course title: Introduction to Psychology (Online)
Assessment title: Week 1 Discussion – Syllabus and Course Expectations
Assessment type: Discussion board initial post and replies
Weighting: 5% of final grade (part of Online Participation)
Timing: Week 1, due by the end of the first teaching week

Assessment Description

This Week 1 discussion requires you to read the PSY101 unit outline carefully and then reflect on key expectations, requirements, and potential challenges. The activity ensures that you have understood how the unit is structured and how you will be assessed, and it gives you a space to clarify uncertainties before the main content begins.

Engaging carefully with the syllabus at the start of the semester supports clearer expectations, stronger time management, and more consistent participation throughout an online course. Research on syllabus design shows that when students actively interpret assessment requirements, workload expectations, and participation criteria early on, they are more likely to remain engaged and perform effectively across the semester (Habanek, 2015; Richmond, Boysen and Gurung, 2016; Harrington and Thomas, 2018; Lowe and El Hakim, 2020; Lo, 2020).

Task Instructions

Part A: Initial Post – Syllabus Review (300–400 words)

By the initial post deadline, write and post a short response of 300–400 words in the “Week 1: Syllabus and Course Expectations” discussion forum.

Complete the steps below using the PSY101 syllabus and online site as your primary source.

1. Key information: Identify two or three details from the syllabus that you consider essential for planning your semester in PSY101, such as assessment weighting, major due dates, weekly workload, or late penalties. Explain briefly why each detail matters for you.

2. Weekly routine: Describe in one short paragraph what a typical study week in PSY101 will look like for you, drawing on the course schedule, weekly activities, or assessment overview sections of the syllabus.

3. Questions or concerns: Identify at least one question, uncertainty, or potential challenge that arises for you from reading the syllabus, such as timing of assessments, discussion participation, group work, or required technologies. State your question clearly so your instructor or classmates can respond.

4. Commitment statement: In one or two sentences, state one specific action you will take in Week 1 to stay on track with the expectations outlined in the syllabus, such as entering key dates into a calendar, setting reminders, or organising regular study time.

Write in the first person, use complete sentences and short paragraphs, and ground your comments in specific sections or details from the syllabus so it is clear that you have read it closely.

Part B: Replies to Classmates (2 posts, 100–150 words each)

After posting your own response, read through the posts in the forum and reply to at least two different classmates with focused responses of 100–150 words each.

1. Begin each reply with a brief greeting using the classmate’s preferred name.

2. Refer directly to something specific they noticed or a question they raised about the syllabus.

3. Offer a constructive comment, suggestion, or clarification based on your reading of the same document, or add a related question that helps deepen shared understanding of expectations.

4. Maintain a respectful and professional tone in all replies.

Submission and Technical Requirements

• Post your initial syllabus review (300–400 words) directly into the “Week 1: Syllabus and Course Expectations” forum in the learning management system by Day and date at 11:59 pm.

• Post at least two reply messages (100–150 words each) to different classmates by Day and date at 11:59 pm.

• Do not upload a separate file. All contributions must appear as discussion posts.

• If you encounter technical issues, capture a screenshot and contact IT support and your instructor as soon as possible.

Marking Criteria / Rubric

Criterion 1: Evidence of Careful Syllabus Reading (40%)

• High distinction: The initial post clearly references multiple specific elements of the PSY101 syllabus, such as assessment dates, grading breakdown, participation requirements, or policies, and explains accurately why they matter for planning and workload management.

• Pass: The initial post identifies some key information from the syllabus and explains why it matters, but references may be general or incomplete.

• Unsatisfactory: The post is vague, relies on assumptions, or shows little evidence of careful reading.

Criterion 2: Reflection on Expectations and Challenges (30%)

• High distinction: The post presents a clear weekly routine linked to unit structure, articulates at least one thoughtful question or concern, and states a specific and realistic action to meet expectations.

• Pass: The post includes some reflection and at least one basic question or concern, with a general commitment statement.

• Unsatisfactory: Minimal reflection, no clear question or commitment, or a superficial response.

Criterion 3: Engagement with Classmates and Communication (30%)

• High distinction: At least two timely replies of 100–150 words that refer to specific points in classmates’ posts, clarify aspects of the syllabus, and demonstrate professional academic communication.

• Pass: At least two replies that acknowledge classmates’ posts and show some engagement, though comments may be general.

• Unsatisfactory: Fewer than the required replies, overly brief responses, or posts submitted after the forum closes.

Sample Response (Model for Students)

The PSY101 syllabus makes it clear that the unit relies heavily on weekly preparation and early engagement, so the assessment overview and schedule are the sections that matter most to my planning. I noticed that the first major quiz falls in Week 4 and that discussion board participation is worth 15 percent across the semester, which means I cannot treat the weekly forums as optional. The breakdown of expected study time also shows that I should be setting aside around nine hours each week for lectures, readings, and assessment tasks, so I will need to block this time into my calendar early. One question I still have concerns how strict the late penalties are for short quizzes and discussions, as this will affect how I manage weeks when work commitments increase. In Week 1, my practical commitment is to enter all PSY101 due dates into my digital calendar and log into the unit site several times during the week to establish a consistent routine.

 Learning Resources

• Habanek, D. V. (2015). An examination of the integrity of the syllabus. College Teaching, 53(2), 62–64. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.53.2.62-64

• Richmond, A. S., Boysen, G. A., and Gurung, R. A. R. (2016). The syllabus: A tool that shapes students’ academic experiences. Teaching of Psychology, 43(1), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315622914

• Lowe, T., and El Hakim, Y. (2020). Fostering student engagement through holistic curriculum design: A focus on the programme-level student experience. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 8(3), 36–43. https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v8i3.431

• Harrington, C., and Thomas, M. (2018). Designing a motivational syllabus: Creating a learning path for student engagement. Stylus Publishing.

• Lo, C. K. (2020). Student perceptions of effective teaching in higher education: Development and validation of a comprehensive questionnaire. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4), 580–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1673702

• Nilson, L. B., and Goodson, L. A. (2018). Online teaching at its best: Merging instructional design with teaching and learning research. Jossey-Bass.

The post Week 1 syllabus review discussion post for my online psychology course? appeared first on EssayBishops.

Assignment 3: Evidence-Based Practice Paper

Course Details

Course Code: NURS 350

Course Title: Research in Nursing

University: West Coast University

Semester: Spring 2026

Level: Undergraduate (Year 2 or 3)

Assessment Weighting: 30%

Due Date: Week 7

Word Count: 1,050–1,400 words

Context

This assignment introduces evidence-based practice as a foundation for nursing research and clinical decision-making. It aligns with AACN essentials for baccalaureate education, focusing on integrating research evidence with clinical expertise and patient preferences. Students will explore a clinical issue relevant to medical-surgical or community nursing, using skills from prior modules on research methods and ethics. This prepares you for implementing EBP in settings like hospitals or primary care, where evidence informs quality improvement.

Task Description

Formulate a PICOT question on a nursing-related clinical problem, conduct a literature search, and propose an EBP intervention. Summarize and critique at least four peer-reviewed articles, then outline how the evidence could be applied in practice, including potential barriers and evaluation methods.

Requirements

• Select a topic such as pain management, infection control, or patient education.
• Develop a clear PICOT question (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Time).
• Search databases like CINAHL or PubMed for articles published within the last 5 years.
• Include a literature summary table and critical appraisal.
• Use APA 7th edition for formatting, citations, and references.
• Submit as a Word document via the course platform, with title page and reference list.

Marking Criteria/Rubric

1. PICOT Question and Introduction (15%): Question is focused, relevant, and well-justified. Introduction provides background on the clinical issue.
2. Literature Review (30%): At least four articles summarized accurately, with strengths, weaknesses, and relevance discussed.
3. EBP Proposal (25%): Clear plan for implementation, including barriers, facilitators, and evaluation.
4. Critical Analysis (15%): Demonstrates understanding of evidence quality and applicability to nursing.
5. Academic Standards (15%): Adheres to word count, grammar, and APA style.

The PICOT question addressed whether diabetic patients receiving structured education programs showed better glycemic control compared to standard care over six months. Literature revealed consistent findings that nurse-led interventions improved HbA1c levels through self-management strategies. One study highlighted reduced hospital readmissions when education incorporated cultural preferences. Barriers included limited access to resources in rural areas, yet telehealth adaptations mitigated this issue. Evaluation involved pre- and post-intervention surveys to measure adherence. As noted by Melnyk et al. (2023), EBP implementation links directly to enhanced patient safety and outcomes, supporting healthcare ROI. Ongoing monitoring ensured sustained improvements in practice.

• References

1. Melnyk, B. M., Gallagher‐Ford, L., Zellefrow, C., Tucker, S., Thomas, B., Sinnott, L. T. and Tan, A. (2018) ‘The first U.S. study on nurses’ evidence‐based practice competencies indicates major deficits that threaten healthcare quality, safety, and patient outcomes’, Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, 15(1), pp. 16-25. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12269.
2. Chien, L.-Y. (2019) ‘Evidence-based practice and nursing research’, The Journal of Nursing Research, 27(4), p. e29. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000346.
3. Connor, L., Dean, J., McNett, M., Tume, L. N., Fernandez, R. S., Relf, M. V. and Gonzalez‐Guarda, R. M. (2023) ‘Evidence‐based practice improves patient outcomes and healthcare system return on investment: Findings from a scoping review’, Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, 20(1), pp. 6-15. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12621.
4. Ominyi, J. and Alabi, A. (2025) ‘Enhancing evidence-based practice implementation in acute care: A qualitative case study of nurses’ roles, interprofessional collaboration, and professional development’, Canadian Journal of Nursing Research. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/08445621251351056.

The post NURS 350 Evidence Based Practice Paper appeared first on EssayBishops.

NURS-FPX4030: Assessment 3 – Patient Safety Improvement Plan

Course: NURS-FPX4030 – Making Evidence-Based Decisions Institutional Context: Common undergraduate nursing assessment used across U.S., Canadian, UK, Australian, and UAE universities Assessment Type: Written Assignment Length: 1,050–1,400 words Weighting: 25 percent Due: Week 7 of semester

Assessment Overview

Healthcare organisations depend on nurses who can identify safety risks and design practical solutions. This assessment requires you to create a structured Patient Safety Improvement Plan based on a real or simulated clinical problem. The task reflects common professional expectations placed on graduate nurses in hospitals, community health centres, and aged-care facilities. Your plan must demonstrate clear reasoning, appropriate use of evidence, and realistic strategies for improving patient outcomes.

Assessment Purpose

This assignment evaluates your ability to analyse a safety concern, apply evidence-based research, and propose targeted interventions that reduce harm. You must show that you can connect theory to practice and communicate professional ideas in an organised written format. The assessment measures critical thinking, academic writing, and practical problem-solving skills that are essential for safe nursing practice.

Task Description

Select one patient safety issue commonly encountered in clinical environments. Examples include medication errors, patient falls, hospital-acquired infections, poor handover communication, or incorrect patient identification. Using current scholarly evidence, develop a detailed improvement plan that addresses the problem and explains how your proposed strategies would be implemented in a real healthcare setting.

Required Components

Your assignment must include the following sections:

• Clear identification and description of the chosen patient safety issue
• Explanation of why the issue is significant to patients, staff, and organisations
• Analysis of contributing factors and potential root causes
• Review of recent scholarly evidence related to the problem
• Specific improvement strategies supported by research
• Implementation plan including roles, resources, and timelines
• Methods for evaluating the success of the proposed interventions
• Ethical, cultural, and professional considerations

Structure Requirements

Present your work using the following format:

1. Introduction outlining the safety problem and context
2. Background and significance of the issue
3. Evidence review from peer-reviewed sources
4. Proposed improvement strategies
5. Implementation plan
6. Evaluation and outcome measures
7. Conclusion summarising key points

Formatting and Submission Guidelines

• Word count: 1,050–1,400 words excluding references
• APA 7th edition referencing style
• Minimum of six scholarly sources published within the last five years
• Double-spaced, 12-point professional font
• Title page and reference list required
• Submit as a Word document through the course learning portal

Grading Rubric

Content and Analysis – 40 percent

• Accurate identification of safety issue
• Depth of analysis and critical thinking
• Understanding of clinical context

Use of Evidence – 25 percent

• Quality of research sources
• Integration of scholarly literature
• Appropriate application of evidence

Improvement Plan – 25 percent

• Practicality of strategies
• Clarity of implementation steps
• Evaluation methods

Academic Writing – 10 percent

• Organisation and coherence
• Grammar and professional language
• Correct referencing and citation

Academic Integrity Requirements

All work must be original and produced individually. Use of artificial intelligence tools to generate assessed content is not permitted unless specifically authorised by the instructor. Plagiarism, contract cheating, and academic misconduct will result in formal penalties according to institutional policy.

Learning Outcomes

On successful completion of this task, students will be able to analyse patient safety risks, interpret scholarly evidence, design realistic improvement strategies, and communicate professional nursing recommendations in a formal academic format.

Sample Answer Guide

Patient safety remains a central responsibility in every area of nursing practice. Medication administration errors continue to represent one of the most frequent preventable causes of patient harm in acute care settings. Evidence shows that structured double-checking systems and barcode scanning technologies significantly reduce adverse drug events. Staff education programs focused on safe medication practices improve both knowledge and compliance among nurses. Clear communication during shift handover further limits the risk of incorrect dosing or patient misidentification. An effective improvement plan must combine technology, training, and organisational support to create lasting change. The World Health Organization confirms that system-based approaches to safety are more effective than relying solely on individual vigilance (World Health Organization, 2019, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241515488).

Study Resources – Scholarly References

World Health Organization. (2019). Patient Safety: Global Action on Patient Safety. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241515488

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2020). Patient Safety Primer: Medication Errors. https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primer/medication-errors

Hughes, R. G., & Blegen, M. A. (2021). Medication administration safety in hospitals. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 36(2), 123-130. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000503

Hammoudi, B. M., Ismaile, S., & Abu Yahya, O. (2018). Factors associated with medication administration errors. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 27(1-2), e99-e108. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13839

Vaismoradi, M., Jordan, S., & Kangasniemi, M. (2020). Patient safety in nursing practice. Nursing Ethics, 27(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733019876995

The post Write NURS-FPX4030 Assessment 3 Patient Safety Improvement Plan appeared first on EssayBishops.

BUSI 1301: Business Principles – Module 4 Assessment: Business Ethics & Social Responsibility Analysis

Assessment Overview

Course: BUSI 1301 – Business Principles (Lamar State College / General U.S. Business Core)

Assessment Type: Critical Analysis Case Study / Written Essay

Weighting: 15% of Final Grade

Length: 750- to 1,000-word essay

Submission Format: Microsoft Word (.docx) uploaded via LMS (Blackboard/Canvas)

Due Date: End of Week 4

Context

In the modern global marketplace, a company’s success is no longer measured solely by its bottom line. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and ethical decision-making are now central to brand reputation, investor relations, and long-term sustainability. This assignment requires you to move beyond definitions and apply ethical frameworks to real-world corporate behavior. You will evaluate how businesses balance the conflicting interests of shareholders, employees, customers, and the environment.

Task Description

For this assessment, you must select one major corporation (e.g., Patagonia, Tesla, Amazon, or Wells Fargo) and analyze their approach to ethics and social responsibility. Your written essay must address the following components:

1. Ethical Framework Identification

Describe the organization’s stated values or code of ethics. Does the company lean toward a stakeholder-driven model or a shareholder-centric model? Explain the difference between these two approaches within the context of your chosen firm.

2. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Audit

Evaluate the company’s performance in at least two of the following areas:

• Environmental Sustainability (Carbon footprint, waste management)
• Ethical Labor Practices (Fair wages, workplace safety, diversity and inclusion)
• Philanthropy and Community Engagement
• Product Safety and Consumer Rights

3. Ethical Dilemma Analysis

Identify a specific ethical scandal or dilemma the company has faced in the last five years. Analyze how they responded. Was the response proactive and transparent, or reactive and defensive? Provide your assessment of whether their actions aligned with their stated corporate values.

4. Recommendations

Based on your analysis, provide two specific recommendations for how this company can improve its social responsibility profile while remaining profitable.

Requirements & Formatting

• Structure: Include an introduction with a clear thesis statement, body paragraphs with topic sentences, and a concluding summary.
• Formatting: Use 12-point Times New Roman font, double-spaced, with 1-inch margins.
• Citation Style: APA 7th edition is required for both in-text citations and the reference list.
• Originality: All submissions will be processed through SafeAssign/Turnitin. Ensure your work is original and properly cited.

Grading Rubric / Marking Criteria

Criteria	Proficient (A/B)	Developing (C/D)
Content & Analysis	In-depth evaluation of CSR and ethical frameworks; specific corporate examples used effectively.	Description is accurate but lacks critical analysis or specific examples of corporate behavior.
Evidence-Based Support	Arguments are supported by at least three credible sources, including the textbook and external business news.	Relies on general knowledge; lacks sufficient citations or uses non-credible sources.
Organization & Style	Logical flow with strong transitions; professional business tone throughout.	Disorganized structure; tone is too informal or inconsistent.

The transition from shareholder primacy to stakeholder capitalism represents a fundamental shift in how modern business leaders define success. When examining Patagonia’s business model, it becomes clear that environmental stewardship is not a secondary goal but the core of their operational strategy. Their decision to transfer ownership to a non-profit dedicated to fighting climate change serves as a definitive example of deep-seated corporate social responsibility. This level of commitment often creates a competitive advantage by fostering intense brand loyalty among environmentally conscious consumers. Research suggests that firms prioritizing social performance often experience enhanced long-term financial stability compared to those focused solely on short-term gains (Carroll, 2021). Consequently, ethical leadership must be viewed as a strategic necessity rather than a mere public relations exercise. Companies that fail to integrate these values into their supply chain risk significant reputational damage in an era of high transparency.

 References

• Carroll, A.B. (2021) Business and Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management. 11th edn. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Available at: https://www.cengage.com/c/business-and-society-ethics-sustainability-stakeholder-management-11e-carroll/9780357716199/
• Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, L. (2019) Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making & Cases. 12th edn. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Available at: 10.1017/S095581870000185X
• Trevino, L.K. and Nelson, K.A. (2021) Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk about How to Do It Right. 8th edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Available at: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Managing+Business+Ethics

The post BUSI 1301 Business Ethics Assignment Help: CSR Analysis Essay appeared first on EssayBishops.

Assessment Task 2: Community Health Assessment – Windshield Survey

Course Details

Course Code: NURS 450

Course Title: Community Health Nursing

University: University of Texas at Arlington

Semester: Spring 2026

Level: Undergraduate (Year 3)

Assessment Weighting: 25%

Due Date: Week 5

Word Count: 1,000–1,500 words

Context

This assessment develops skills in community health nursing by using systematic observation to evaluate environmental, social, and health factors in a selected area. It aligns with AACN essentials and Healthy People 2030 objectives, promoting population-focused care. Students apply knowledge from lectures on epidemiology, social determinants, and public health to identify risks and resources in real or simulated communities, preparing for roles in preventive healthcare across diverse settings like urban clinics or rural outreach.

Task Description

Perform a windshield survey of a chosen community (real neighborhood or virtual like Sentinel City suburb). Document observations on physical environment, people, services, and signs of health issues. Analyze findings to identify key health concerns, link to global issues, and propose nursing interventions with evaluation methods.

Requirements

• Select a suburb or neighborhood; use driving, walking, or virtual tools like Google Maps for safety.
• Organize observations in a table covering boundaries, housing, open spaces, transportation, race/ethnicity, services, religion, signs of decay, media, and politics.
• Discuss a target population’s demographics, health status, and risks, incorporating at least one global health comparison.
• Apply two Healthy People 2030 objectives to address concerns.
• Include at least three peer-reviewed references; use APA 7th edition.
• Submit as Word document via LMS, with title page and references.

Marking Criteria/Rubric

1. Observations and Data Collection (30%): Comprehensive coverage of all categories; data is detailed, objective, and organized in table format.
2. Analysis of Health Concerns (25%): Identifies 2-3 key issues with links to demographics and global context; logical and evidence-based.
3. Interventions and Healthy People 2030 (20%): Proposes feasible nursing actions; aligns with objectives; includes evaluation plan.
4. Target Population Discussion (15%): Relevant data on vulnerabilities; discusses local vs. broader risks.
5. Academic Standards (10%): Clear writing, adheres to word count, proper APA with references.

Observations noted well-maintained housing in the suburban area with a mix of single-family homes and apartments showing signs of middle-income status. People visible included families walking dogs and children playing in parks, reflecting a diverse age range from young to elderly. Services encompassed a local clinic, grocery stores, and public transport stops, though limited mental health facilities raised concerns for access. Health indicators pointed to potential obesity risks from fast-food outlets outnumbering gyms. Interventions could involve community education on nutrition tied to Healthy People 2030 goals for physical activity. As detailed in Guin (2020), windshield surveys enable nurses to pinpoint environmental influences on health, fostering targeted interventions. Evaluation would track participation rates in programs over six months.

• References

1. Guin, N. (2020) ‘Windshield and walking surveys in community health nursing’, International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 9(11), pp. 523-525. Available at: https://doi.org/10.21275/SR201022161001.
2. DeMarco, R. and Healey-Walsh, J. (2020) Community and public health nursing: evidence for practice. 3rd edn. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer. Available at: https://shop.lww.com/Community-and-Public-Health-Nursing/p/9781975137441.
3. Stanhope, M. and Lancaster, J. (2020) Public health nursing: population-centered health care in the community. 10th edn. St. Louis: Elsevier. Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/books/public-health-nursing/stanhope/978-0-323-58150-9.
4. Connor, L. et al. (2023) ‘Evidence-based practice improves patient outcomes and healthcare system return on investment: findings from a scoping review’, Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 20(1), pp. 6-15. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12621.

The post NURS 450 Community Health Assessment Windshield Survey Assignment appeared first on EssayBishops.

BUSN20017 – Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility Assessment 2: Ethical Decision-Making Case Study Analysis

Course Code: BUSN20017 Course Title: Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility Institutional Context: Standard undergraduate business unit used in Australian, UK, US, Canadian and UAE universities Assessment Type: Individual Written Case Study Length: 2,000 words Weighting: 30 percent Due Date: Week 8 of semester

Assessment Context

Modern organisations operate in environments shaped by social expectations, regulatory pressures, and global scrutiny. Business graduates must be able to recognise ethical problems and respond with structured professional judgment. This assessment mirrors a common task used in business programs across multiple countries. You are required to analyse a real-world corporate ethics case and apply formal ethical frameworks to recommend practical actions.

Purpose of the Assessment

This assessment measures your ability to evaluate complex ethical situations in business. You must demonstrate critical reasoning, apply ethical theories, and communicate recommendations in a professional written format. The task develops skills in analysis, research, argument construction, and evidence-based decision-making.

Assessment Task

Select one contemporary corporate ethics case from the last five years. Suitable examples include data privacy breaches, environmental misconduct, misleading marketing, supply chain exploitation, whistleblowing disputes, or conflicts of interest. Using credible academic sources, prepare a structured analysis that explains the ethical issues and proposes justified solutions.

Core Requirements

Your written case study must address the following elements:

• Clear description of the organisation and situation
• Identification of the main ethical dilemmas
• Application of at least two ethical theories
• Evaluation of stakeholder impacts
• Assessment of legal and social responsibilities
• Well-reasoned recommendations for action
• Reflection on long-term organisational consequences

Required Structure

Organise your paper using these headings:

1. Introduction and background to the case
2. Explanation of key ethical issues
3. Analysis using ethical frameworks
4. Stakeholder impact assessment
5. Alternative courses of action
6. Final recommendations
7. Conclusion

Research Expectations

• Use a minimum of eight academic sources
• Include at least six peer-reviewed journal articles
• Use Harvard referencing style
• Sources must be published between 2018 and 2026
• All claims must be supported with citations

Formatting Guidelines

• 2,000 words plus or minus 10 percent
• 12-point professional font
• Double-spaced with standard margins
• Title page and reference list required
• Submit as a single Word document

Marking Criteria

Issue Identification – 25 percent

• Accuracy of case description
• Depth of problem identification
• Clarity of ethical focus

Application of Theory – 30 percent

• Correct use of ethical frameworks
• Quality of critical reasoning
• Integration of academic literature

Recommendations – 25 percent

• Practicality of proposed actions
• Justification of decisions
• Consideration of stakeholders

Academic Presentation – 20 percent

• Structure and coherence
• Quality of written expression
• Referencing accuracy

Submission Rules

This is an individual assessment. Collusion, contract writing, and use of pre-written online materials are strictly prohibited. All submissions will be checked using academic integrity software. Breaches will be managed under institutional academic misconduct policies.

Learning Outcomes Assessed

This task assesses your ability to interpret ethical problems, apply theoretical models, evaluate business responsibilities, and present reasoned professional arguments in written form.

Corporate ethics cases require careful evaluation of competing interests and responsibilities. Data privacy breaches present clear examples of conflicts between profit motives and consumer protection. Ethical theories such as utilitarianism and deontological ethics provide structured methods for evaluating organisational behavior. Stakeholders including customers, employees, regulators, and shareholders experience different levels of risk and benefit from corporate decisions. Transparent governance systems help organisations prevent repeated ethical failures. Strong internal reporting mechanisms encourage responsible employee conduct. Long-term reputation depends on consistent ethical leadership. Research confirms that ethical corporate cultures reduce legal risk and improve organisational trust (Treviño & Nelson, 2021, https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Managing+Business+Ethics).

Scholarly References

Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2021). Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk About How to Do It Right. Wiley. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Managing+Business+Ethics

Crane, A., Matten, D., Glozer, S., & Spence, L. (2019). Business Ethics: Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com

Valentine, S., & Godkin, L. (2019). Moral intensity, ethical decision making, and whistleblowing intention. Journal of Business Ethics, 155(1), 85-99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3521-7

Kaptein, M. (2020). The effectiveness of ethics programs. Journal of Business Ethics, 165(4), 561-582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4094-2

The post Complete BUSN20017 Ethics Case Study Assignment – Corporate Ethics appeared first on EssayBishops.

BUSI 223: Business Modeling for Entrepreneurs – Unit 5 Project: Startup Financial Modeling & Risk Analysis

Assessment Overview

Course: BUSI 223 – Business Modeling for Entrepreneurs (Entrepreneurship Core)

Assessment Type: Financial Modeling Project & Executive Summary

Weighting: 25% of Final Grade

Length: Excel Financial Model (3-Tabs) + 825-to 1,050-word written analysis

Submission Format: ZIP file containing Excel Workbook and Word Document

Due Date: Friday, 11:59 PM (PST) of Week 5

Context

A brilliant business idea remains a hobby until it is quantified. For entrepreneurs, the ability to build a “bottom-up” financial model is vital for securing venture capital, managing burn rates, and testing the viability of a value proposition. In this unit, we move away from abstract theory and into the mechanics of fiscal projection. You will demonstrate how your business generates revenue, manages cost of goods sold (COGS), and maintains enough liquidity to reach a break-even point. This project mimics the “Financials” section of a professional business plan suitable for presentation to an angel investor or a traditional lending institution.

Task Description

Using the business concept you developed in Unit 2, you must construct a comprehensive 12-month financial projection and a corresponding narrative analysis.

Part 1: The Excel Model

Your Excel workbook must include three clearly labeled tabs:

• Revenue Model: Detail your “unit of sale,” pricing strategy, and monthly sales volume projections based on specific marketing assumptions.
• Operating Budget: List fixed and variable costs, including personnel, rent, marketing, and utilities.
• Cash Flow Statement: A month-by-month projection showing cash-in vs. cash-out, highlighting the “valley of death” (maximum cumulative cash deficit).

Part 2: The Written Analysis (825–1,050 words)

Your written report must interpret the data from your model, focusing on the following:

1. Key Assumptions: Clearly state the logic behind your sales growth and pricing. Why did you choose these numbers?
2. Break-Even Analysis: Identify the exact month or sales volume required to cover all expenses.
3. Risk Mitigation: Conduct a “Sensitivity Analysis.” If your sales are 20% lower than projected, what happens to your cash runway? How will you pivot?
4. Capital Requirements: Based on the model, how much total startup capital do you need, and what specific assets will it fund?

Requirements & Formatting

• Excel: Use formulas for all totals and cross-tab references; do not “hard-code” final numbers.
• Document Style: The written report must follow APA 7th edition formatting for the title page and references.
• Professionalism: Use business-grade language. Avoid “I think” or “I hope”; use “Projected data indicates” or “Assumptions are based on.”

Grading Rubric / Marking Criteria

Criteria	Advanced (A-Level)	Proficient (B/C Level)
Financial Accuracy	Formulas are error-free; Revenue and Cash Flow tabs link perfectly; assumptions are realistic for the industry.	Minor formula errors; some assumptions appear arbitrary or lack market justification.
Risk Assessment	Identifies specific, high-impact risks and provides a detailed, feasible contingency plan.	Identifies general risks but provides vague or unrealistic mitigation strategies.
Written Clarity	Professional tone; adheres to the 825–1,050 word count; clear evidence of proofreading.	Informal tone; falls significantly short of word count; contains mechanical errors.

Constructing a realistic financial model requires a disciplined approach to bottom-up forecasting rather than relying on top-down market percentages. In this specific startup model, the customer acquisition cost serves as the primary driver for all subsequent cash flow projections. If the marketing spend fails to yield the anticipated conversion rate, the burn rate will accelerate and deplete the initial seed capital before the third quarter. Investors typically scrutinize the relationship between variable costs and scaling capacity to ensure the business possesses a viable path to profitability. According to recent research, the majority of early-stage failures stem not from poor product design but from a fundamental misunderstanding of cash runway management (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). Establishing a 20% contingency fund within the operating budget provides a necessary buffer against unforeseen supply chain disruptions. Detailed sensitivity analysis further confirms that the break-even point remains achievable even under a moderate sales slump. Success ultimately depends on maintaining a lean operational structure during the initial twelve months of the launch phase.

 References

• Blank, S. and Dorf, B. (2020) The Startup Owner’s Manual: The Step-By-Step Guide for Building a Great Company. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Available at: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/The+Startup+Owner%27s+Manual
• Feld, B. and Mendelson, J. (2019) Venture Deals: Be Smarter Than Your Lawyer and Venture Capitalist. 4th edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. doi: 10.1002/9781119593591
• Osterwalder, A. and Pigneur, Y. (2010) Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Available at: https://www.strategyzer.com/books/business-model-generation
• Scarborough, N.M. and Cornwall, J.R. (2019) Essentials of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management. 9th edn. New York, NY: Pearson. Available at: https://www.pearson.com/en-us/essentials-of-entrepreneurship

The post BUSI 223 Business Modeling Project Help: Startup Financial Analysis appeared first on EssayBishops.

Assignment 4: Delegation and Prioritization Case Study

Course Details

Course Code: NURS 440

Course Title: Nursing Leadership and Management

University: Galen College of Nursing

Semester: Spring 2026

Level: Undergraduate (Year 3 or 4)

Assessment Weighting: 20%

Due Date: Week 9

Page Length: 3–4 pages

Context

This assignment builds skills in delegation and prioritization essential for nursing leadership. It aligns with NCSBN guidelines and the five rights of delegation, focusing on safe task assignment in high-pressure scenarios. Students draw from lectures on scope of practice, team dynamics, and ethical considerations to manage care effectively, preparing for roles in acute settings where quick decisions impact patient outcomes.

Task Description

Review the provided case study involving a busy medical-surgical unit with multiple patients. Prioritize care needs, delegate tasks to appropriate team members (RN, LPN, UAP), and provide rationales based on scope of practice and patient acuity. Include potential risks and evaluation strategies.

Requirements

• Use the case scenario: Charge nurse on night shift with four RNs, one LPN, two UAPs, and patients with varying conditions (e.g., post-op, unstable vitals, routine care).
• Prioritize at least five tasks or patients; delegate using the five rights (right task, circumstance, person, direction, supervision).
• Support decisions with at least three evidence-based sources.
• Format as a structured report with sections for prioritization, delegation, rationales, and evaluation.
• Adhere to APA 7th edition for citations and references.
• Submit via the online platform as a Word document, double-spaced, with title page.

Marking Criteria/Rubric

1. Prioritization (25%): Accurate ranking of tasks/patients with clear rationale using acuity tools like ABCs or Maslow’s hierarchy.
2. Delegation Decisions (30%): Appropriate assignments to team members, adhering to scopes of practice; identifies five rights.
3. Rationales and Risks (20%): Evidence-based explanations; discusses potential errors or oversights.
4. Evaluation and Ethics (15%): Plans for monitoring outcomes; addresses ethical issues like accountability.
5. Academic Standards (10%): Clear writing, page limit compliance, proper APA with references.

The charge nurse assessed the unit with a post-op patient reporting severe pain at 8/10 and unstable vitals, prioritizing them first over routine med passes. Delegation assigned the LPN to administer IV meds to a stable diabetic patient, ensuring the task matched their scope. UAP handled ambulation for a low-risk mobility case, with RN supervision outlined. Risks included potential miscommunication, so clear directions were given via SBAR. Evaluation checked patient response within one hour, adjusting as needed. As emphasized by LaCharity et al. (2021), effective delegation enhances team efficiency and patient safety in dynamic settings. This approach prevented escalation in acuity levels.

Table 1: Regional Assignment Variations

Table 2: Rubric Breakdown Trends

• References

1. LaCharity, L. A., Kumagai, C. K. and Bartz, B. (2021) Prioritization, delegation, and assignment: practice exercises for the NCLEX-RN® examination. 5th edn. St. Louis: Elsevier. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/C2020-0-00012-3.
2. Yoder-Wise, P. S. (2019) Leading and managing in nursing. 7th edn. St. Louis: Elsevier. Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/books/leading-and-managing-in-nursing/yoder-wise/978-0-323-44913-7.
3. Marquis, B. L. and Huston, C. J. (2021) Leadership roles and management functions in nursing: theory and application. 10th edn. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer. Available at: https://shop.lww.com/Leadership-Roles-and-Management-Functions-in-Nursing/p/9781975139216.
4. Motacki, K. and Burke, K. (2023) Nursing delegation and management of patient care. 3rd edn. St. Louis: Elsevier. Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/books/nursing-delegation-and-management-of-patient-care/motacki/978-0-323-69782-8.

The post NURS 440 Delegation and Prioritization Case Study Assignment appeared first on EssayBishops.

EDUC3005 – Inclusive Education Strategies Assessment 2: Classroom Inclusion Action Plan

Course Code: EDUC3005 Course Title: Inclusive Education Strategies Program Level: Undergraduate Teacher Education Institutional Model: Common to universities in Australia, UK, USA, Canada and UAE Assessment Type: Individual Assignment Length: 2,500 words Weighting: 40 percent Due Date: Week 9 of semester

Assessment Overview

Inclusive education is a core professional responsibility for modern teachers. Schools require educators who can design learning environments that respond to diverse student needs. This assessment requires you to create a practical inclusion action plan for a real or realistic classroom context. The task reflects standard assessment practices used in teacher education programs from 2023 to 2026.

Purpose of the Assessment

This assessment evaluates your ability to translate inclusive education theory into classroom practice. You must demonstrate knowledge of differentiation, universal design for learning, and reasonable adjustments for students with additional needs. The task measures professional planning skills, evidence-based decision making, and reflective teaching practice.

Assessment Task Description

You are required to design a detailed Classroom Inclusion Action Plan for a primary or secondary class of your choice. The plan must address the needs of at least three different learner profiles within the same classroom. These profiles may include students with learning disabilities, language barriers, behavioral challenges, giftedness, or cultural diversity.

Required Components

Your assignment must include the following sections:

• Context description of the selected classroom
• Identification of three learner profiles
• Analysis of barriers to learning
• Inclusive teaching strategies
• Assessment adjustments
• Collaboration and support approaches
• Evaluation methods

Mandatory Structure

1. Introduction to inclusive education principles
2. Description of classroom context
3. Detailed learner profiles
4. Identification of learning barriers
5. Planned instructional strategies
6. Assessment and feedback modifications
7. Monitoring and evaluation plan
8. Conclusion and professional reflection

Research Requirements

• Minimum of ten academic sources
• At least eight peer-reviewed journal articles
• Publications dated between 2018 and 2026
• Harvard referencing style required
• Integration of policy and curriculum documents

Formatting Instructions

• 2,500 words plus or minus 10 percent
• Professional academic language
• 12-point readable font
• Double line spacing
• APA or Harvard referencing as specified by institution
• Title page and reference list required

Assessment Rubric

Knowledge of Inclusive Education – 25 percent

• Understanding of inclusion principles
• Use of relevant academic literature
• Connection to educational policy

Quality of Action Plan – 35 percent

• Appropriateness of strategies
• Alignment with learner needs
• Practical classroom application

Critical Analysis – 20 percent

• Identification of barriers
• Justification of adjustments
• Depth of professional reasoning

Academic Presentation – 20 percent

• Structure and coherence
• Referencing accuracy
• Clarity of written communication

Submission Guidelines

Submit your assignment through the official learning management system by the due date. Late submissions will be penalized according to university policy. All work must be original and produced individually. Artificial intelligence tools may be used only for proofreading and idea organization, not for generating assessed content.

Learning Outcomes Assessed

This task assesses your ability to plan inclusive learning experiences, evaluate diverse learner needs, apply evidence-based strategies, and design fair assessment practices.

Inclusive classrooms succeed when teachers plan proactively for student diversity. Differentiated instruction allows educators to respond to varied learning styles and abilities. Universal Design for Learning principles help remove unnecessary barriers before they affect participation. Collaboration with specialist staff strengthens classroom support systems. Assessment adjustments ensure that evaluation methods measure learning rather than disability. Positive behavior supports encourage engagement and reduce exclusionary practices. Culturally responsive pedagogy builds respectful learning communities. Research demonstrates that well-planned inclusive strategies improve academic outcomes for all students (Florian, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1622801).

Scholarly References

Florian, L. (2019). On the necessary co-existence of special and inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7-8), 691-704. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1622801

Graham, L. (2020). Inclusive education in the 21st century. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 45(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2020v45n2.1

Tomlinson, C. (2018). Differentiated classroom practices. The Educational Forum, 82(3), 239-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2018.1465457

Black-Hawkins, K. (2021). Inclusive classroom practice and learner participation. Cambridge Journal of Education, 51(2), 219-236. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2020.1831441

The post Write EDUC3005 Classroom Inclusion Action Plan appeared first on EssayBishops.

NUR 220 Case Study Analysis: Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Heart Failure

Unit Information

Course code: NUR 220 (or equivalent second-year Medical-Surgical Nursing / Adult Health Nursing)
Course title: Adult Health Nursing / Medical-Surgical Nursing II
Assessment title: Case Study Analysis – Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Heart Failure
Assessment type: Individual written case study analysis (nursing care plan and critical discussion)
Weighting: 20–25% of final grade, common for a major case study assignment
Length: 1,500–2,000 words (excluding title page and reference list)
Due: Week 6 (refer to the unit schedule for the exact date)

Assessment Description

In this assessment, you will analyse a case of an adult patient admitted with an acute exacerbation of chronic heart failure and develop a focused nursing care plan supported by current evidence. You will demonstrate clinical reasoning as you interpret assessment data, prioritise nursing diagnoses, plan and justify interventions, and evaluate anticipated outcomes in line with best-practice guidelines.

Effective case study analysis enhances the integration of theory and practice by requiring students to apply pathophysiological knowledge to patient care decisions. Research indicates that structured case study assignments improve critical thinking and clinical judgment in second-year nursing students (Dalgaard et al., 2020).

Case Scenario (Provided in LMS)

You will be given a de-identified case vignette in the learning management system that includes patient history, presenting symptoms, physical assessment findings, vital signs, diagnostic results (e.g., ECG, chest X-ray summary, basic blood tests, BNP) and current medications. Use only the information supplied in the case and your required readings to complete the assignment.

Task Instructions

Part A: Patient Assessment Summary (Approx. 300–400 words)

1. Summarise the key subjective data (what the patient reports) and objective data (what you observe or measure) relevant to the heart failure exacerbation, such as dyspnoea, orthopnoea, oedema, weight gain, vital sign trends, lung sounds, oxygen saturation, and lab results.

2. Organise your summary logically (e.g., by body system or using an ABC approach) and highlight abnormal findings that require nursing action.

Part B: Priority Nursing Diagnoses (Approx. 300–400 words)

1. Identify two priority NANDA-I nursing diagnoses directly supported by the assessment data (e.g., “Decreased cardiac output related to impaired myocardial contractility as evidenced by…”, “Excess fluid volume related to compromised regulatory mechanism as evidenced by…”).

2. For each diagnosis, list:

   • Related factors (etiology)

   • Defining characteristics (signs and symptoms) drawn from the case

3. Briefly justify the prioritisation of these diagnoses using an appropriate framework, such as ABC, Maslow’s hierarchy, or risk to life/organ function.

Part C: Planning – Goals and Outcomes (Approx. 250–350 words)

1. Formulate one short-term goal and one longer-term goal for each nursing diagnosis.

2. Write each goal as a SMART statement (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-framed), clearly linked to the identified problem (e.g., “Within 24 hours, the patient’s respiratory rate will stabilise at 12–20 breaths per minute with SpO₂ ≥ 94% on prescribed oxygen therapy”).

Part D: Nursing Interventions and Rationale (Approx. 450–600 words)

1. For each nursing diagnosis, identify at least three evidence-based nursing interventions to implement during the first 24–48 hours of care (e.g., monitoring fluid balance, positioning, oxygen therapy, medication management, patient education).

2. Describe how each intervention will be carried out (frequency, specific observations, patient teaching points, collaboration with the multidisciplinary team).

3. Provide a brief rationale for each intervention, supported with in-text citations from current clinical guidelines or peer-reviewed literature (2018–2026).

Part E: Evaluation and Reflection (Approx. 250–300 words)

1. Explain how you would evaluate whether the goals for each nursing diagnosis have been met (e.g., specific changes in vital signs, weight, lung sounds, functional status, symptom reports).

2. Identify one potential challenge in managing this patient’s care (e.g., adherence to fluid restriction, comorbidities, health literacy, social support) and discuss how you would address it within your nursing role, including collaboration with other professionals as needed.

Formatting and Referencing Requirements

• 1,500–2,000 words, typed, double-spaced

• Clear 12-point font with standard margins

• Formal academic English, using third person and professional nursing terminology

• APA 7th edition referencing for in-text citations and reference list

• Include at least 5–8 recent scholarly sources (2018–2026), including clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews, and peer-reviewed journal articles

• Maintain patient confidentiality; ensure all details in the case remain de-identified

Marking Criteria / Rubric

Criterion 1: Clinical Data Interpretation and Assessment (25%)

• High distinction: Provides a concise and thorough summary of subjective and objective data, distinguishes normal from abnormal findings, and shows accurate clinical reasoning in identifying priority issues.

• Pass: Summarises main findings with some interpretation; may omit minor details or discuss significance minimally.

• Unsatisfactory: Summary is incomplete or descriptive; key abnormalities missing or misinterpreted.

Criterion 2: Nursing Diagnoses, Goals and Planning (25%)

• High distinction: Identifies two accurate, high-priority nursing diagnoses with clear related factors and defining characteristics; provides well-constructed SMART goals aligned with assessment data.

• Pass: Appropriate diagnoses and goals with minor issues in specificity, justification, or prioritisation.

• Unsatisfactory: Diagnoses inaccurate, poorly supported, or not prioritised; goals vague or not clearly linked to diagnoses.

Criterion 3: Interventions, Rationale and Evidence Use (30%)

• High distinction: Clear, detailed, realistic interventions for each diagnosis; rationales demonstrate understanding of pathophysiology and best practice with accurate APA citations.

• Pass: Interventions appropriate with some rationale and evidence; may rely on general statements.

• Unsatisfactory: Interventions vague, incomplete, or not linked to diagnoses; rationales lack evidence or contain inaccuracies.

Criterion 4: Evaluation, Reflection and Academic Writing (20%)

• High distinction: Clearly explains outcome evaluation and reflects thoughtfully on challenges; writing is coherent, well-structured, and adheres to academic and referencing standards.

• Pass: Addresses evaluation and reflection with some depth; minor structural or referencing issues.

• Unsatisfactory: Superficial or missing evaluation/reflection; frequent errors impede clarity.

Nursing Diagnosis and Intervention)

The assessment data indicate that the patient’s worsening dyspnoea on exertion, bilateral ankle oedema, weight gain of 3 kg over four days, basal crackles, and elevated jugular venous pressure are consistent with fluid overload secondary to impaired cardiac function. A priority nursing diagnosis is therefore Excess fluid volume related to compromised regulatory mechanism (reduced cardiac output) as evidenced by peripheral oedema, rapid weight gain, and crackles at lung bases. A key intervention is strict fluid balance monitoring, including accurate documentation of oral and intravenous intake and urinary output, as well as daily weight at the same time each morning. Close tracking allows early detection of further fluid accumulation or response to diuretic therapy, which prevents progression to pulmonary oedema and respiratory compromise. Current guidelines emphasise that combining fluid monitoring with patient education on fluid and sodium restriction can reduce readmissions and improve symptom control. Additionally, incorporating structured patient education sessions enhances self-management and adherence to lifestyle modifications, which has been shown to improve long-term outcomes in chronic heart failure (Tongpeth et al., 2018).

Learning Resources

• Ponikowski, P. et al. (2016). 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. European Heart Journal, 37(27), 2129–2200. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehw128

• Heidenreich, P.A. et al. (2022). 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the management of heart failure. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 79(17), e263–e421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.12.012

• Tongpeth, J., Schwartz, C., & McKinley, S. (2018). Patients’ adherence to fluid restriction and dietary sodium recommendations in heart failure: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 27(9–10), 1950–1960. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14334

• Dalgaard, L.S. et al. (2020). Nursing interventions for patients with chronic heart failure: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 19(3), 188–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515119881733

• Riegel, B., Moser, D.K., & Buck, H.G. (2019). Self-care for the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease and stroke: A scientific statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association. Journal of the American Heart Association, 8(2), e009944. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.118.009944

• McMurray, J.J.V., & Packer, M. (2021). Emerging therapies in chronic heart failure: Mechanistic insights and clinical applications. Lancet, 398(10302), 1227–1240. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01813-5

The post Nursing case study analysis on acute heart failure for NUR 220 appeared first on EssayBishops.