HI540 · Unit 9

HI540 Unit 9 change control procedure example

Project Management of Health Information Systems Purdue University Global Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

Cardiac surgeons asking for a perfusion record template before wave 1 is the request walked through this HI540 Unit 9 change control procedure, and it ends up in front of the steering committee rather than the board. Written for the Calder go-live, the procedure sets who may approve what at three thresholds and prices the request in hours, dollars and critical-path days before anyone votes.

What this page holds

Who may approve a scope change, and at what size, is settled for Calder's rollout by the HI540 Unit 9 procedure, which prices one cardiac request and routes it to steering. Searches like "hi 540 unit 9 assignment example", "hi540 unit 9 sample" and "hi540 unit 9 example" land here.

What a finished HI540 Unit 9 change control procedure looks like

A controlled procedure document of seven pages with a version block, purpose, scope and definitions. A flow diagram shows a request moving through submission, triage, impact analysis, decision and baseline update. The authority table is its core. The project manager may approve changes under 10,000 dollars that use no more than half the available float and touch no charter condition. The change control board, five voting members from perioperative nursing, the CMIO's office, application services, finance and surgery, decides changes up to 150,000 dollars that leave both go-live dates intact. Steering decides anything moving a go-live or altering a completion condition. The worked request follows: 180 analyst hours, 38,500 dollars and seven working days on the critical path, routed to steering and deferred to the post-wave-2 queue. An emergency path and a log template close the document.

How a HI540 Unit 9 example is structured

The procedure is written to be followed by someone who was not in the room when it was designed. Definitions come first, separating a change request from a defect and from a clarification, because only the first alters a baseline. The flow diagram precedes the text so the path is visible before its rules. Authority is set by impact, not by who asks, which means a department chair's request follows the same route as a scheduler's. Impact analysis always covers scope, schedule traced through the network, cost, risk and the charter's completion conditions, in that order. Board membership, quorum and voting rule are spelled out, with the project manager serving as secretary without a vote, since the manager prepares each analysis. The worked example then tests the thresholds. An emergency route for go-live fixes follows with retrospective review, and the rule for updating baselines comes last.

Change, defect or clarification

Three definitions that decide whether a request enters the procedure at all, since only a genuine change alters a baseline.

Authority set by impact

Three thresholds in dollars, float and charter effect, applied identically whether a request comes from a chair or a scheduler.

Five votes, one secretary

Membership, quorum and a majority rule, with the project manager preparing every analysis and recording decisions without a vote.

The perfusion template, priced

One hundred eighty analyst hours, 38,500 dollars and seven critical-path days, enough to carry the request past the board to steering.

An emergency route for cutover

Fixes approved on the spot by the command center lead during go-live, each logged and reviewed by the board within two working days.

When a baseline moves

The rule for revising scope, schedule and cost baselines after approval, and the version number each revision receives.

Where marks go in HI540 Unit 9

Authority is the element this unit exists to test, so a procedure that treats change control as a principle without saying who decides draws the heaviest deductions. Thresholds keyed to the requester's seniority rather than to impact are a common graduate-level comment. Impact analysis limited to cost, or schedule effects guessed from a request's size instead of traced through the network, understates what a change does. A board without stated membership, quorum or voting rule leaves the decision undefined. Making the project manager the approver of everything, or giving the manager a vote on analyses the manager wrote, confuses roles. Missing emergency provisions leave go-live fixes either blocked or uncontrolled. Worked examples in which every request is approved, and no rule for updating baselines afterward, are further recurring notes.

Get a HI540 Unit 9 example written to your instructions

Change procedures work best built on real baselines, so include the Unit 9 prompt, the rubric, and the schedule and budget from the plan you have been developing. At no charge for a first sample and within 24-48h, a procedure comes back with thresholds, a board and one request priced end to end.

HI540 Unit 9 questions, answered

Who should sit on a change control board?

People who represent the areas a change affects and who can commit resources. In the example that means perioperative nursing, the CMIO's office, application services, finance and a surgeon, five voting members. Sponsors usually sit above the board, deciding only what exceeds its authority. Graders tend to question boards staffed entirely by the project team, which cannot weigh operational cost.

Why was the example's request deferred rather than approved?

Because it would have moved the wave 1 go-live by seven working days on a zero-float chain, and the procedure sends any go-live change to steering. Steering judged that perfusion documentation could wait for the enhancement queue after wave 2. The procedure has no preference for deferral; it simply makes the cost of approval visible before anyone decides.

Is an emergency change process really necessary?

For any project with a go-live, usually yes. During cutover a broken order set or charge rule may need fixing within the hour, and waiting for a board meeting is not realistic. The example lets the command center lead approve such fixes, requires a log entry for each, and has the board review them within two working days.