What are the legal implications and what laws, or statutes were involved?

In this assignment, we examine the legal and ethical implications of fraud and abuse. Use the CSU-Global Library and the Internet to identify a real-world case of Medicare fraud and/or abuse. Write a 4-5 page Risk Management Plan for your healthcare facility using the readings, research, and your knowledge of health law and ethics to analyze this case.
Your report should address the following substantive requirements:
Description of what occurred, who was affected, and why.
Assess the case from the following perspectives:
Ethical—Identify the ethical principles involved in this situation from the perspective of all those involved.
Legal—What are the legal implications and what laws, or statutes were involved?
Develop appropriate policies and procedures to prevent this from occurring in the future.
Provide specific prevention mechanisms to deal with the case at hand.
Your report should meet the following structural requirements:
Be 4-5 pages in length, not including the cover or reference pages.
Be formatted according to the CSU Global Writing Center
(Links to an external site.)
.
Provide support for your statements with in-text citations from a minimum of four (4) scholarly articles. Two (2) of these sources may be from the class readings, textbook, or lectures, but two (2) must be external. The CSU Global Library is a good place to find these references.
Utilize the following headings to organize the content in your work:
Assessment,
Recommendations, and
Conclusion.
You are strongly encouraged to submit all assignments to the Turnitin Originality Check prior to submitting them to your instructor for grading. If you are unsure how to submit an assignment to the Originality Check tool, review the Turnitin Originality Check Student Guide (PDF).
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Requirements
20 to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment, including length, knowledge of Medicare fraud/abuse, and ethical/legal issues.
16 to >12.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
12 to >8.0 pts
Below Expectation
Includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
8 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Content
25 to >20.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of what occurred, who was affected, and why; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources.
20 to >15.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Some significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge.
15 to >10.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge.
10 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Critical Analysis
25 to >20.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Provides a strong critical analysis and interpretation based on the information given; shows strong critical thinking in the analysis and development of the project submission.
20 to >15.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Some significant but not major errors or omissions in analysis and interpretation.
15 to >10.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major errors or omissions in analysis and interpretation.
10 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Fails to provide critical analysis and interpretation of the information given.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Sources / Examples
20 to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Sources or examples meet required criteria and are well chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination.
16 to >12.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Sources or examples meet required criteria but are less‐than adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination.
12 to >8.0 pts
Below Expectation
Sources or examples meet required criteria and are poorly chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination.
8 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Source or example selection and integration of knowledge from the course is clearly deficient.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Demonstrates college-level proficiency in organization, grammar and style.
10 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few errors in grammar and spelling.
8 to >6.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Project is fairly well organized and written, and is in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Reasonably good sentence and paragraph structure; significant number of errors in grammar and spelling.
6 to >4.0 pts
Below Expectation
Project is poorly organized and does not follow proper paper format. Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; numerous errors in grammar and spelling.
4 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Project is not organized or well written, and is not in proper paper format. Poor quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar and spelling.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Demonstrates proper use of APA style
10 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Project contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU Global Writing Center, with no more than one significant error.
8 to >6.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Few errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global Writing Center, with no more than two to three significant errors.
6 to >4.0 pts
Below Expectation
Significant errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global Writing Center, with four to five significant errors.
4 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Numerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global Writing Center, with more than five significant errors.
10 pts
Total Points: 110
Previous
Next

Last Completed Projects