| Course | HI580 Information Systems Design and Implementation |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 9 |
| Paper type | Go-live plan |
| Length | About 860 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MS in Health Informatics |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HI580 Unit 9
A Unit That Cannot Close: A Unit 9 Go-Live Plan Phased by Function, With Conditions to Proceed and a Tested Way Back
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
HI580: Information Systems Design and Implementation
Unit 9 Go-Live Plan
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Brackenridge Medical Center, its unit, staff, dates and every count are composite; the sources cited are real.
Options Considered
Two approaches were compared. A single cutover would move surveillance, archive and documentation together on one night. It is simpler to plan and shortens the period of running two systems, but a labor unit that averages six patients at any hour offers no quiet window, and a single cutover means everything that can fail does so at once, during labors that cannot pause.
A phased cutover by function splits surveillance and archive from documentation. Monitoring moves first, while nurses keep charting as they do now; documentation follows two weeks later, once the monitoring is stable. This halves what can fail at once and lets the unit learn one change before the next. The plan chooses the phased approach. Implementation research supports staging complex changes where the organization cannot absorb them together (Cresswell & Sheikh, 2013).
Timeline
Minus eight weeks: final acceptance testing complete; defect review. Minus six weeks: training opens on all three shifts, with backfill funded in the budget. Minus four weeks: super users complete advanced training and practice on the test system. Minus two weeks: downtime forms printed and placed in every room; families' information sheet prepared explaining the new room displays. Minus one week: go or no-go review for phase one.
Day 0, phase one: surveillance and archive cut over at 0400 on a Tuesday, the lowest-census hour in the past year. The legacy central station keeps running in read-only mode for seventy-two hours.
Day 14, phase two: documentation cuts over at 0400 on a Tuesday, after a second go or no-go review.
Plus six weeks: support ends; post-implementation measures begin.
Conditions to Proceed
Written as observable conditions, reviewed at each go or no-go meeting:
1. No open severity 1 defects and no more than three severity 2 defects, each with a documented workaround.
2. At least 90 percent of labor nurses trained, each having passed a skills check on the test system, with every shift represented.
3. Interface failure scripts passed within the last ten days, and the clock check clean for five consecutive days.
4. Downtime forms in every room and the downtime drill completed.
5. Super users scheduled at the elbow on every shift for the first seventy-two hours.
The decision is made by a named pair: the unit's clinical director and the project's technical lead. Both must agree to proceed; either can stop.
Either the clinical director or the technical lead can stop a cutover, but neither can start one alone.
Rollback
Rollback is tested, not assumed. During acceptance testing, the team switched monitoring back to the legacy central station in a simulated failure and timed it: eleven minutes with no loss of tracing data, because the monitors store locally. During phase one, rollback is available for seventy-two hours while the legacy station runs read-only. The decision to roll back belongs to the same pair, triggered by any loss of surveillance display in more than one room for longer than five minutes, or any patient identity error.
For phase two, rollback means returning to paper worksheets and the current record entry, which nurses still know. It is available for the first seven days.
Support
Super users work at the elbow on all shifts for seventy-two hours after each phase, then on day shift only through week two. A command center staffed by the vendor and the technical lead runs for the first five days of each phase. Issues are logged with a severity and reviewed at a daily huddle at 0700 and 1900, matching shift change. Patient safety guidance for electronic records stresses close monitoring in the first days after go-live, when identification and communication errors are most likely (Sittig & Singh, 2012).
After Each Phase
At the end of each phase's first week, the pair meets with super users and the vendor to review every logged issue. Defects are assigned owners and dates, and any workaround staff invented during the week is recorded, since an unrecorded workaround is how the old paper worksheet began. Phase two does not open until phase one's open issues are below the go threshold.
Communication
Staff receive the go-live date six weeks ahead and a reminder each week. Obstetricians and midwives receive a one-page guide to where interpretations now appear. Families see a short sheet in each room explaining that the display shows their baby's monitoring and that staff can explain anything on it.
What Could Still Go Wrong
A high-census night could fall on a cutover date. The plan allows the pair to delay a cutover by one week if census exceeds ten patients at 0200, without a new review. Training attendance could fall short on nights; backfill is funded so that managers can release staff, which the seminar case showed is the usual cause of empty sessions (Kaplan & Harris-Salamone, 2009).
References
Cresswell, K., & Sheikh, A. (2013). Organizational issues in the implementation and adoption of health information technology innovations: An interpretative review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82(5), e73-e86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.10.007
Kaplan, B., & Harris-Salamone, K. D. (2009). Health IT success and failure: Recommendations from literature and an AMIA workshop. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 16(3), 291-299. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M2997
Sittig, D. F., & Singh, H. (2012). Electronic health records and national patient-safety goals. New England Journal of Medicine, 367(19), 1854-1860. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsb1205420
Reading the HI 580 Unit 9 instructions
The ninth unit typically asks for a go-live plan for a health information system. Expect an options analysis for the cutover approach, a timeline with dependencies, conditions for proceeding, a rollback plan, support arrangements and communication. Nine pages organized as a timeline is common. Argue the cutover approach from the setting's own constraints rather than general preference. Work the timeline backward from each cutover so dependencies are visible. Write go conditions as observable facts, such as defect counts and training completion, and name who decides. Test rollback before relying on it. Plan support across all shifts, not just days, and include communication for staff, providers and patients or families where displays change.
How the HI 580 Unit 9 example is put together
The options section compares a single cutover with a phased approach and chooses phasing for a unit averaging six patients at any hour, citing implementation research. A timeline runs from minus eight weeks through two cutovers at 0400 on Tuesdays to plus six weeks. Five numbered conditions govern each go decision, and a named pair must agree, as the highlighted sentence summarizes. Rollback describes a timed test of eleven minutes and the triggers for using it. Support covers super users on all shifts and a command center, linked to patient safety goals. Closing sections cover the review after each phase, how each audience hears the news and the risks that remain, including a census threshold for delay.
HI580 Unit 9 rubric: what earns full points
Rubrics for a cutover plan generally weigh how well the approach is argued, completeness of the timeline, quality of go conditions, credibility of rollback, support and communication. Go conditions and rollback often carry the most points: graders reward observable criteria, named decision makers and a rollback that has been tested. The approach earns credit when argued from the setting's constraints. The timeline is judged on whether dependencies such as training and testing are visible. Support across all shifts and communication to every audience add points. A rule for adapting to real conditions, such as high census, shows maturity. Correct citations complete the rubric. Plans that set a date without conditions or assume rollback will work tend to lose points.
Common HI580 Unit 9 mistakes, and how to avoid them
The most common problem with go-live plans is a fixed date with no conditions for proceeding. Another is a rollback plan that has never been tested. Some students plan support for day shift only, leaving nights alone. Training completion is often assumed rather than measured with a skills check. Communication to providers and families is frequently forgotten. Plans rarely say what happens if conditions on the night are worse than expected. If your go-live involves a different setting, perhaps an emergency department or a clinic network, share its constraints and we will argue the approach and timeline from them.
Get an HI580 Unit 9 example written to your instructions
Share your Unit 9 prompt, its rubric and the setting's constraints, such as hours of operation or census patterns, and a custom go-live plan will choose its approach from those facts and keep a tested way back. The first sample is free, and it arrives inside 24-48h. 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 HI580 papers and MS in Health Informatics samples
- HI580 Unit 1: Discussion Board Post
- HI580 Unit 2: Stakeholder Requirements List
- HI580 Unit 3: Current Workflow Map
- HI580 Unit 4: System Selection Matrix
- HI580 Unit 5: Proposed Workflow Design
- HI580 Unit 6: Interface Specification
- HI580 Unit 7: Test Plan
- HI580 Unit 8: Seminar Reflection
- HI580 Unit 10: Post-implementation Evaluation
- HI575 Unit 9: Contingency and Recovery Plan
- HI501 Unit 9: Seminar Reflection
- HI570 Unit 9: Policy Revision
- HI510 Unit 9: Seminar Reflection
HI580 Unit 9 questions, answered
Is a single cutover ever the right choice?
Often, especially where two systems cannot run side by side or where parallel operation would confuse staff. The example rejects it because a labor unit has no quiet window and splitting surveillance from documentation limits what can fail at once. The rubric generally rewards the argument, so a well-reasoned single cutover can score as well as phasing.
What makes a rollback plan credible?
Steps, owners, a trigger and a time limit, plus evidence the old path still works. The example keeps the legacy central station powered and archived for thirty days and rehearses the switch back before phase one. A rollback described as possible but never tested tends to fail precisely when needed, and graders often ask how it would be carried out.
How long should go-live support last?
Until measures say it can end rather than until a date arrives. The example scales support down when severity-one defects stop and call volume falls below a stated threshold for three consecutive days. Setting the rule in advance keeps the decision from being made by fatigue or budget pressure in the second week.
Where can I find a free HI580 Unit 9 sample paper?
You can read the whole Unit 9 plan here, from the phased approach and timeline to go conditions, tested rollback and support.
When is a phased cutover better than a single go-live?
When the setting cannot close and has no quiet window, phasing by function limits how much can fail at once and lets staff absorb one change before the next.