Every order is original, expert-done, and screened for AI — full report on request.See how it works

Assignment questions
Healthcare administrationResearch paperRisk management

Risk management program analysis

This is a document analysis, so the first task is finding a plan with enough content to analyse. Choose it before anything else — an organisation's one-page policy summary will not support a comparison.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 15, 2026

01

You need a real plan before you can analyse one

Everything depends on the document you find, so spend real effort there before drafting. The assignment warns you to look for a plan with sufficient content, and the warning is earned: many published risk management policies are a page of principles with no administrative detail, and no comparison can be built on one. Look for a full plan with a governance structure, a reporting pathway, defined committees, an event classification scheme and a review cycle. Public hospital systems, state health departments and university medical centres publish these. Once you have it, say what type of plan it is and why you chose it, which the first requirement asks for explicitly, and describe the organisation it applies to and what risk management does in that setting — a community hospital, an imaging centre and a long-term care facility all run different risks, and the plan you found should be read against the risks its own setting actually carries.

The comparison is the analytical core and it needs two lists, not one. Establish the standard administrative steps first from the accrediting body the assignment points you to, since a MIPPA-approved accreditor sets the requirements your example is supposed to meet. The standard cycle runs: identify risks, analyse and prioritise them, control or mitigate, finance the residual, then monitor and review, wrapped in incident reporting, root cause analysis, education and a governance line that reaches the board. Then set your example against it step by step and report what is present, what is absent and what is done differently. Absences are the most useful finding — a plan with no defined escalation to governance, or no stated review interval, has a gap you can name. Close with recommendations that follow from those gaps rather than from general good practice, since a recommendation the plan already contains reads as though you did not read it.

Likely learning objectives

Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.

  • 01
    Select a source document capable of supporting a structured comparison.
  • 02
    Describe the organisational context that determines which risks matter.
  • 03
    Establish a standard from an accrediting body rather than from general knowledge.
  • 04
    Identify gaps by comparison and recommend against those gaps specifically.
Assignment instructionsQuoted verbatim

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

Conduct research on approaches to risk management processes, policies, and concerns in your current or anticipated professional arena to find an example of a risk management plan. Look for a plan with sufficient content to be able to complete this assignment successfully. In a 1,000‐1,250-word paper, provide an analysis of the risk management plan that includes the following: Summary of the type of risk management plan you selected (new employee, specific audience, community‐focused, etc.) and your rationale for selecting that example. Describe the health care organization to which the plan applies and the role risk management plays in that setting. Description of the standard administrative steps and processes in a typical health care organization’s risk management program compared to the administrative steps and processes you identify in your selected example plan. (Note: For standard risk management policies and procedures, look up the MIPPA-approved accrediting body that regulates the risk management standards in your chosen health care sector, and consider federal, state, and local statutes as well.) Analysis of the key agencies and organizations that regulate the administration of safe health care in your area of concentration and an evaluation of the roles each one plays in the risk management oversight process. Evaluation of your selected risk management plan’s compliance with the standards of its corresponding MIPPA-approved accrediting body relevant to privacy, health care worker safety, and patient safety. Proposed recommendations or changes you would implement in your risk management program example to enhance, improve, or secure the aforementioned compliance standards. In addition to your textbook, you are required to support your analysis with a minimum of three peer‐reviewed references. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance. Benchmark Information This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency: BS Health Sciences 3.2 Discuss compliance with risk management protocol.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes. Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages. Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor. The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01
    A 1,000-1,250 word paper.
  2. 02
    The plan type, its source and your rationale for choosing it.
  3. 03
    A description of the organisation and risk management's role in it.
  4. 04
    A step-by-step comparison against the accrediting body's standard.
  5. 05
    Recommendations that follow from identified gaps, with APA citations.
03

The plan, the organisation, the comparison, the gaps

01

The plan and why you chose it

Identify the plan type, its source and your rationale.

02

The organisation and its risks

Describe the setting and what risk management does there.

03

The standard from the accrediting body

Set out the expected administrative steps and processes.

04

The comparison

Match the example against the standard step by step.

05

Gaps and recommendations

Name what is missing and recommend changes that close those gaps.

04

Finding a plan and its accrediting standard

Recommended databases

  • Published hospital and health system risk management plans
  • The MIPPA-approved accrediting body for your chosen setting
  • American Society for Health Care Risk Management
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Search sequence

  1. 1.
    Find the document first and confirm it has governance, reporting and review detail before committing to it.
  2. 2.
    Identify which accreditor regulates your chosen setting, since MIPPA approval is setting-specific.
  3. 3.
    Read the accreditor's standards for the elements a plan must contain — that list becomes your comparison framework.
  4. 4.
    Look for published root cause analysis or incident reporting guidance to judge whether the example's process is adequate.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.

  1. 01

    Advancing Health Care Risk Management

    American Society for Health Care Risk Management · 2025

    The professional body for health care risk management, and a source for what a complete programme contains.

  2. 02

    Sentinel Event Data

    The Joint Commission · 2024

    Accreditor data on serious events, which grounds the comparison in what risk management is supposed to prevent.

  3. 03

    Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality · 2024

    Patient safety frameworks and reporting systems, useful for judging the example plan's reporting pathway.

  4. 04

    International Patient Safety Goals

    Joint Commission International · 2024

    A published standard against which an example plan's controls can be checked.

06

Review before submission

Common mistakes

  • Choosing a plan too thin to analyse, which makes the comparison impossible.
  • Describing the standard and the example separately instead of comparing them.
  • Skipping the accrediting body, which is where the standard is supposed to come from.
  • Recommending measures the plan already contains.
  • Treating risk management as clinical safety only, ignoring financial and reputational risk.

Submission checklist

  • Does your chosen plan have administrative detail to compare?
  • Have you identified the MIPPA-approved accrediting body for that setting?
  • Is the comparison step by step rather than two descriptions?
  • Have you named at least one absence in the example plan?
  • Do your recommendations address gaps you actually found?

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Aaron Bishop

MA, Education

assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines

Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by

Dr. Nathan Cole

PhD, Rhetoric & Composition

Argumentation and thesis development

Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order