| Course | NR 670 Advanced Nursing Leadership Concluding Graduate Experience |
|---|---|
| Week | 4 |
| Paper type | Evidence portfolio piece |
| Length | About 1,100 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | MSN, Nurse Executive |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 670 Week 4
Evidence Portfolio Piece: The Admission Acceptance Checklist I Drafted for Charge Nurses, Dated August 2026, and the Single Claim It Supports
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 670: Advanced Nursing Leadership Concluding Graduate Experience
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Evidence Portfolio Piece: The Admission Acceptance Checklist I Drafted for Charge Nurses, Dated August 2026, and the Single Claim It Supports
The Claim
I can turn a decision I made badly into a procedure that helps other charge nurses make it better.
The Item
Document: "Charge Nurse Admission Acceptance Checklist, Night Shift," version 2, one page, dated 2 September 2026. Approved by the unit manager on 4 September and placed at the charge desk. It was made for the unit, not for this course.
Who appears on it: drafted by me; reviewed by the unit manager, the night charge nurses as a group at the September staff meeting, and the house supervisor, who added one line about notifying the supervisor before accepting a sixth patient to any nurse.
My part: I wrote version 1 after the 15 August night, presented it at the staff meeting, rewrote it as version 2 with the night charge nurses' changes and took it to the manager for approval. The manager's part was approval and placing it in the unit's policy binder. The house supervisor's line is theirs.
What the Item Says
Five steps before accepting an admission that would put any nurse above five patients: check the on-call list and call the on-call nurse; check which patients on the unit are unstable or escalating, including withdrawal scores; ask the nurse who would take the patient; call the house supervisor; then decide, and record the assignment and the reason.
The Commentary
The item supports the claim through one line in particular: "Call the on-call nurse first, even if you expect no answer." That line comes directly from my own mistake on 15 August, when I assumed the on-call phone would go unanswered, acted on the guess and later found the nurse had been available. The line converts a personal error into a step anyone can follow, which is what the claim is about. Without the episode, the line would read as obvious; with it, the line shows a judgment about which assumption matters most at 03:00.
The second line that carries the claim is "ask the nurse who would take the patient." That came from the nurse who took six patients that night, who said they would rather have been asked. Including it shows that the procedure was shaped by the person who bore the cost, not only by me.
Why the Same Item Would Not Support a Wider Claim
It does not show that I can design procedures in general; it is one page for one decision on one unit. It does not show that the checklist improved outcomes; no one has measured how often it is used or whether assignments above five patients have fallen. It does not show leadership of change across a department; the house supervisor added a line, but no other unit has adopted it. Each wider claim would need a different item.
What Others Would Claim From It
The night charge nurses could fairly claim the wording of steps 3 and 4, which they rewrote at the staff meeting. The house supervisor could claim the notification line. The manager could claim the decision to make it the unit's standard. My claim is the idea, the first draft and the line that comes from my own error.
How the Item Was Made
Version 1 was a half page of notes written the morning after the August night, mainly for myself. I turned it into a checklist after the house supervisor's debrief, then took it to the September staff meeting, where the night charge nurses changed two steps and removed one I had included, a requirement to document every admission decision in a separate log, which they said would never be done at 03:00. That removal made the checklist better: a step no one would follow would have weakened the others.
Why This Item and Not Another
Choosing one item meant leaving others out. I considered the fall huddle tool, which is used more widely, and the six-week schedule, which I build regularly. The fall huddle tool supports a claim about improvement work, which the quality department shares. The schedule supports a claim about operations. Only the checklist supports the specific claim that I can turn my own error into a procedure for others, which is the leadership capability I most want this portfolio to show.
What the Item Shows About Workload
The checklist exists because assignments above five patients are a real risk. Research across many hospitals has linked higher nurse workloads with worse patient outcomes (Aiken et al., 2014). The checklist does not change staffing; it makes the decision to go above five patients slower and more deliberate, which is what a charge nurse can control.
What the Item Would Look Like If the Claim Were False
If I could not turn an error into a procedure, the item would read as a list of reminders written for myself: no steps others revised, no line traceable to a specific night and no approval. The fact that the night charge nurses removed a step and the supervisor added one shows the item left my hands, which is the test the claim must pass. A procedure that only its author uses is a personal habit, not a unit's practice, and the claim would be smaller. The removal of my logging step is, oddly, the strongest sign that the checklist became theirs.
Whether It Is Used
In the four weeks after approval, I asked each night charge nurse whether they had used it. Four of five said yes at least once; one said they had not needed to. Two reported that calling the on-call nurse first had brought in extra help. That is self-report, not measurement, and the piece does not lean on it, though it suggests the item is in use.
How It Relates to Leadership Literature
Leaders who model learning from their own errors, rather than hiding them, help create teams where others report and learn from mistakes (Edmondson, 1999). The checklist puts my error into a shared tool, which is a small instance of that. Leadership styles that build trust and shared ownership have been associated with better outcomes for nurses (Cummings et al., 2018), and a procedure the night charge nurses helped write is one place that ownership shows.
References
Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., Bruyneel, L., Van den Heede, K., Griffiths, P., Busse, R., Diomidous, M., Kinnunen, J., Kózka, M., Lesaffre, E., McHugh, M. D., Moreno-Casbas, M. T., Rafferty, A. M., Schwendimann, R., Scott, P. A., Tishelman, C., van Achterberg, T., & Sermeus, W. (2014). Nurse staffing and education and hospital mortality in nine European countries: A retrospective observational study. The Lancet, 383(9931), 1824-1830. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62631-8
Cummings, G. G., Tate, K., Lee, S., Wong, C. A., Paananen, T., Micaroni, S. P. M., & Chatterjee, G. E. (2018). Leadership styles and outcome patterns for the nursing workforce and work environment: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 85, 19-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.04.016
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Reading the NR 670 Week 4 instructions
State your capability claim in one sentence. Identify the item: what kind of document it is, when it was made, who else appears on it and what your own part in producing it was. Choose an item made before the assignment, for real use, not for the course. Then write a commentary of a few hundred words that argues the link rather than summarizing the item, pointing at the specific passage or line that shows the judgment you are claiming. Say whose part was whose, including what others could fairly claim. Explain why the same document would not support a wider claim. Report how it is used, with any limits on that evidence.
How the NR 670 Week 4 example is put together
The sample's claim is that the writer can turn their own error into a procedure for others. The item is version 2 of a one-page checklist, approved on 4 September, drafted by the writer, revised by night charge nurses and given one line by the house supervisor. The commentary points at the line telling charge nurses to call the on-call nurse first, which comes from the writer's own mistake, and at the line about asking the receiving nurse, which came from the nurse who bore the cost. It notes that charge nurses removed a step the writer included. Wider claims about procedure design, outcomes or departmental change are ruled out, and use is reported as self-report only. The piece also explains why this item was chosen over the fall huddle tool and the schedule.
NR 670 Week 4 rubric: what full points look like
Portfolio pieces lose most when they summarize the item instead of arguing how it shows the claim. Next is an item made for the course, which shows that the writer can complete an assignment rather than that they lead at work. Many entries claim the whole item when others shaped it, which graders read as overstatement. Claims too broad for one item, such as leading change across the organization, cannot be supported by a single page. Entries that never point at a specific line leave the reader to guess where the judgment is. Use reported as fact when it is only self-report also weakens the entry. Entries that omit how the item changed under others' revision also hide the best evidence that it left the writer's hands.
NR 670 Week 4 help: mistakes that cost points
Choosing one item and arguing exactly what it shows is harder than describing several. Looking at your candidate items together, we can pick one made for real use, state a claim it can carry and write commentary that points at the lines showing your judgment. We can also help you divide the credit fairly and say what the item cannot support. Asking a colleague which line they changed often clarifies whose part was whose. The claim and the item are yours. Recording how the item changed under others' revision is part of that help too.
Get a NR 670 Week 4 example written to your instructions
Send your instructions, the rubric and any capability wording your classroom uses, and a custom NR 670 example comes back inside 24-48h, the first one free. One thing never comes from this desk: the hour tally, the signed log sheet and whatever your preceptor writes about you are records of your attendance, and only you can produce those.
More NR 670 papers and MSN samples
- NR 670 Week 1: Leadership Occasion Post
- NR 670 Week 2: Competency Self-Inventory
- NR 670 Week 3: Leadership Episode Analysis
- NR 670 Week 5: Conflict Decision Write-up
- NR 670 Week 6: Organizational Impact Analysis
- NR 670 Week 7: Development Plan
- NR 670 Week 8: Leadership Portfolio Presentation
- NR 632 Week 4: Process Measure Summary
- NR 631 Week 4: Evidence Review
- NR 588AI Week 4: Bias and Equity Review
- NR 529 Week 4: Coaching Conversation Plan
NR 670 Week 4 questions, answered
What if the artifact cannot leave my employer?
That is ordinary and there are accepted ways around it. A redacted version, a reconstructed extract, or an identification giving the document type, its date, its audience and its length will usually satisfy the rubric. What matters is that the item existed independently of the course. State what was removed and why, rather than trimming it quietly.
Three of us wrote it. Can I still use it?
Yes, with the ownership made explicit. Name the sections you drafted, say who led the piece, and shrink the claim until it fits your share. Writers lose more here by leaving joint work ambiguous than by admitting a modest contribution, because an unsized share reads as an attempt to take the whole document.
Does older work still count?
Age is rarely the problem on its own; drift is. An item from four years ago is fine where the capability it supports is one you still exercise, and weak where your practice has moved on since. If most of your evidence is old, say what has kept the capability current, because a grader will otherwise ask.
Where can I find a free NR 670 Week 4 sample paper?
The complete evidence portfolio piece on an admission acceptance checklist appears in full here.
Which line in the NR 670 Week 4 checklist carries the claim?
The first step, calling the on-call nurse even when no answer is expected, which comes directly from the writer's own mistake on 15 August.