| Course | HA400 Health Care Ethics, Law, and Governance |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 6 |
| Paper type | Board memo |
| Length | About 790 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Health Care Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HA400 Unit 6
Slide Forty of Sixty: A Board Memo to the Quality Committee Chair of a Composite Community Hospital on Three Quarters of Rising Hospital-Onset Sepsis Deaths, the Directors' Oversight Duty and a Resolution to Close the Reporting Gap
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
HA400: Health Care Ethics, Law, and Governance
Unit 6 Board Memo
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The hospital, the figures and the officers are composite and bracketed; the legal discussion is simplified for a course and is not legal advice for any board.
Header
To: [Name], Chair, Quality and Patient Safety Committee From: [Name], Chief Quality Officer Date: [date] Re: Board oversight of hospital-onset sepsis and a proposed resolution
Summary and Recommendation
I recommend that the committee ask the full board to adopt three changes: a one-page quarterly quality dashboard presented at every full board meeting, a revised committee charter that names the measures the committee must review and a standing agenda item for any measure outside its threshold for two quarters. Hospital-onset sepsis deaths have risen for three straight quarters, and the board's current reporting did not bring that fact to its attention.
The Problem
Hospital-onset sepsis deaths per [1,000] discharges: Quarter 1: [0.9] Quarter 2: [1.2] Quarter 3: [1.5] Quarter 4: [1.8] The data existed in every quarter. It appeared in the quality department's monthly reports and once on slide forty of the board packet, without comment. No director asked about it, and none could reasonably have been expected to find it. The failure was not that nobody measured sepsis; it was that the board's information system did not put the measure in front of the people responsible for overseeing it.
Why This Concerns the Board
Directors of a hospital owe duties of care and loyalty. Since the Caremark decision in 1996, Delaware courts have held that directors must make a good faith effort to put in place a reporting system that brings them timely, accurate information, and that they may be liable if they utterly fail to create one or ignore the warnings it produces (Stone v. Ritter, 2006). A later decision found that a board can fail this duty when it makes no effort to monitor a risk that is essential to the organization's mission, such as safety in a food company (Marchand v. Barnhill, 2019). These cases arise under Delaware corporate law, but they are widely cited in discussions of nonprofit hospital governance, and patient safety is plainly central to a hospital's mission.
Why It Matters for Patients
Research on hospital boards found that boards giving more attention to clinical quality, with quality on every agenda and dashboards reviewed regularly, were associated with better performance on quality measures (Jha & Epstein, 2010). A board that sees a rising death rate early can ask for an explanation, resources or a plan, and can hold management to it.
What the Resolution Would Do
1. Dashboard: one page, [12] measures, each shown against a target and its trend over eight quarters, with red, yellow and green status.
2. Charter: the committee would review the dashboard monthly and report any measure in red for two quarters to the full board with management's plan.
3. Standing item: every full board meeting would include ten minutes on quality, led by the committee chair.
What Management Is Already Doing
The sepsis team has started a review of each death since Quarter 2, a deterioration alert built into the patient chart and nurse-driven screening on medical floors. The first results will be ready for the next committee meeting.
Cost and Workload
The dashboard can be produced from existing data by the quality department in about [eight] hours a month. No new systems are needed.
Risks of Not Acting
If the trend continues and becomes public, the board would be asked what it knew and when. The current packet would show that the figure was available but never discussed.
How the Gap Arose
Over [three] years, the board packet grew from [25] slides to [60] as new reports were added and none were removed. Quality data moved to the back of the packet, after finance and strategy. The committee's charter lists its purpose in general terms and does not name any measure it must review, so no one was responsible for noticing the trend.
Questions for the Committee
1. Which [12] measures should be on the dashboard?
2. What thresholds should trigger escalation?
3. Should the committee meet more often until sepsis deaths return to baseline?
Next Steps
If the committee agrees, I will bring a draft dashboard and charter to the next meeting on [date], for recommendation to the full board on [date].
Attachments
A. Draft dashboard. B. Draft charter amendment. C. Sepsis death review summary.
References
Jha, A., & Epstein, A. (2010). Hospital governance and the quality of care. Health Affairs, 29(1), 182-187. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0297
Marchand v. Barnhill, 212 A.3d 805 (Del. 2019).
Stone v. Ritter, 911 A.2d 362 (Del. 2006).
The Purdue Global HA400 Unit 6 instructions
Unit 6 commonly asks students to write a memo to a hospital board or one of its committees about a governance issue. Prompts typically ask for a clear recommendation, background data, an explanation of the board's legal duties, the proposed action and its cost and next steps. Many instructors want the memo written for a busy reader, with the decision requested near the top. Expect to cite legal sources on fiduciary or oversight duties and research on board practices in APA style, to keep the hospital composite and to use standard memo headings. Showing why the issue is a governance gap, not only a clinical one, is usually the point of the exercise.
Inside the HA400 Unit 6 example
The memo begins with its header block and a summary recommending three changes, with a margin note on putting the decision first. A short table shows sepsis deaths over four quarters, and the highlighted sentence says the board's information system did not surface the measure. The duty section cites two Delaware oversight decisions and explains why they matter to nonprofit boards, with a margin note. Research on boards and quality follows. The resolution, management's current work, cost with a third note, how the gap arose, risks, questions for the committee, next steps with dates and a list of three attachments complete the memo, which stays near three pages.
Where the points sit in the HA400 Unit 6 rubric
Board memo rubrics in HA 400 usually give points for a clear recommendation, accurate background, explanation of board duties, a workable proposal, attention to cost and risk, citations and memo format. Recommendation points depend on stating the decision requested early. Background points go to data presented simply. Duty points reward accurate, plain explanations of oversight. Proposal points require specific changes. Cost and risk points go to workload and the risk of inaction. Citation points need legal and research sources. Format points cover headings, length and attachments. Memos that frame the problem as a reporting gap rather than blame often reach the top band, because boards act more readily on a fixable system.
HA400 Unit 6 help: mistakes that cost points
Board memos often lose points by opening with background and leaving the recommendation for the last page. Another gap is explaining fiduciary duty in abstract terms without connecting it to the issue. Some memos blame clinical staff instead of the reporting system. Others propose changes without saying what they cost. Put the decision first, show the data in a small table, explain the duty in a few plain sentences, propose specific changes and estimate the workload. Then list the questions the committee must answer. Directors read quickly, so every paragraph should earn its place. Attach detail rather than putting it in the body, and check that every figure in the memo matches the attachment.
Get an HA400 Unit 6 example written to your instructions
Which board, which problem? Send the Unit 6 scenario and rubric, naming the committee your prompt addresses if it names one. The memo is drafted decision-first, with the duty explained and a resolution attached, and returned in 24-48h. A first custom sample is free, and the hospital in it is composite. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More HA400 papers and BS in Health Care Administration samples
- HA400 Unit 1: Law, Ethics and Governance Post
- HA400 Unit 2: Drug Shortage Ethics Case Analysis
- HA400 Unit 3: Agency Nurse Liability Analysis
- HA400 Unit 4: Capacity and Refusal Rights Analysis
- HA400 Unit 5: Home Health Compliance Plan
- HA400 Unit 7: Conflict of Interest Analysis
- HA400 Unit 8: Policy Proposal
- HA400 Unit 9: Seminar Reflection
- HA400 Unit 10: Integrated Case Study
- HA255 Unit 6: Behavioral Health Staffing Plan
HA400 Unit 6 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HA400 Unit 6 sample paper?
This page holds the full HA400 Unit 6 board memo on rising hospital-onset sepsis deaths at a composite community hospital and the oversight gap behind them, with three sources. You can write a memo on another governance issue in the same order.
What oversight duty does the HA400 Unit 6 memo describe?
Directors must try in good faith to have a reporting system that puts accurate, timely information on key risks such as patient deaths in front of them.
Do Delaware oversight cases apply to nonprofit hospitals?
They arise under corporate law, but they are widely cited in discussions of nonprofit hospital governance and directors' duties.
What should a hospital board quality dashboard include?
A small set of key measures, each with a target, trend and status, reviewed at every board meeting.
How long is the HA400 Unit 6 board memo?
Usually about two to three pages, with the recommendation in the first paragraph and attachments for detail.