London School of Technology

Awarding Body: Association of Business Practitioners (ABP) Course name:

ABE Level and Social Care Sector (&C') E!tended "i#loma in Leadershi# and $anagement in the %ealth

Unit name: Leading and managing for the future Unit Level: QCF Level 7 Unit Code: N/A Credit Value: 20

Lecturer: Lead #V:

M Mar!am La"al Mr$ %arren &ind or

(E) "ATES %i tri'ution date: +u'mi ion date: ,eturn date: +u'mit to: ( t )cto'er* 2013 31st October, 2013 - "ee. after u'mi ion Camellia Fia/0Mahdha'i at the ,ece1tion de .

Assessment Criteria ,-, ,-. ,-/ ,-0 ,-1

*rade

Assessor+s comment

.-, .-. .-/ .-0 .-1

/-, /-. /-/ /-0 /-1

0-, 0-. 0-/ 0-0

1-1

2-, 2-. 2-/ 2-0 2-1 3verall comments: Student feed4ac5

TASK 1 ASSIGNMENT: CASE STUDY LO 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 (1000 words MA!KS: 20"
L#$d%&' ( M$&$'%&' )or *+,+r#. S+-.%ss%o& D$,#: 31s, O/,o-#r, 2013 The task of the new NHS England is to deliver a sustainable health care s ste! in the face of the !ost challenging environ!ents" One of the strategic !easures include establishing the ##$ % #linical #o!!issioning $rou& to oversee and !anage the budgets for !a'orit of health services such as $()s, e!ergenc care, hos&ital care, !aternit services, !ental health services, So!e of the threats of the NHS are the growing diseases, finance and un!et needs* but there are o&&ortunities in the !edical advances to treat diseases and to deliver +ualit care to &eo&le" 6se this case study to: Criticall! evaluate "h! the e i ue are of trategic im1ortance ($( #nve tigate .e! macro and micro environmental i ue ($2 Choo e an organi ation in the healthcare ector !ou are familiar "ith and di cu an environmental frame"or. to a 1articular grou1 e$g$ frame"or. for care of elderl!* learning di a'ilit! etc$ ($2 Anal! e the im1act of e3ternal factor e$g$ 41olitical5 on a cho en organi ational deci ion0ma.ing ($-

ASSESSMENT G!ADING 0 DESC!I1TO!S

E!cellent 7 8"9 )ut tanding6 to a ver! high tandard6 a high level of critical anal! i and evaluation* inci ive original thin.ing6 commenda'le originalit!6 e3ce1tionall! "ell re earched6 high 7ualit! 1re entation6 e3ce1tional clarit! of idea 6 e3cellent coherence and logic$ 8rivial or ver! minor error onl!$ All of the learning outcome "ere ati fied and the learner "ent far 'e!ond the minimum a e ment re7uirement :ery good 7 8$9 A ver! good tandard6 a ver! good level of critical anal! i and evaluation6 ignificant originalit!6 "ell re earched6 a ver! good tandard of 1re entation6 1lea ing clarit! of idea 6 thoughtful and effective 1re entation6 ver! good en e of coherence and logic$ Minor error onl!$ All of the learning outcome /criteria "ere ati fied and the learner "ent 'e!ond the minimum a e ment re7uirement *ood 7 8P9 A good tandard6 a fairl! good level of critical anal! i and evaluation6 ome evidence of original thin.ing or originalit!6 7uite "ell re earched6 a good tandard of 1re entation6 idea generall! clear and coherent* ome evidence of mi under tanding 6 ome deficiencie in 1re entation$ All of the learning outcome /criteria "ere ati fied$

"istinction

$erit

Pass

Satisfactory 8P9 A ound tandard of "or.6 a fair level of critical anal! i and evaluation6 little evidence of original thin.ing or originalit!6 ade7uatel! re earched6 a ound tandard of 1re entation6 idea fairl! clear and coherent* ome ignificant mi under tanding and error 6 ome "ea.ne in t!le or 1re entation 'ut ati factor! overall$ All of the learning outcome /criteria "ere ati fied$ 6nsatisfactory ; 8'$9 )verall marginall! un ati factor!6 ome ound a 1ect 'ut ome of the follo"ing "ea.ne e are evident: inade7uate critical anal! i and evaluation6 little evidence of originalit!6 not "ell re earched6 tandard of 1re entation i unacce1ta'le6 idea are unclear and incoherent6 ome ignificant error and mi under tanding $ Marginal fail$ )ne or more of the learning outcome /criteria "ere N)8 ati fied $arginal 'ail