NU702 Unit 6 Interprofessional Team Charter Example

Course	NU702 Translating Evidence into Nursing Practice
Unit	Unit 6
Paper type	Interprofessional team charter
Length	About 840 words, 6 pages double-spaced
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Purdue University Global
Program	Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP)
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for NU702 Unit 6

Nine People Who Touch One Pen: A Unit 6 Interprofessional Team Charter for an Insulin Discharge Readiness Bundle

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

NU702: Translating Evidence into Nursing Practice

Unit 6 Interprofessional Team Charter

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The hospital, team members and roles are composite and illustrative; the sources cited are real.

What this part is doingCounting the people who touch one pen in the lead shows why the project cannot be a nursing initiative alone.

Purpose

The team's aim is that every patient on the composite Dubuque hospital's two medical-surgical units who goes home on insulin new to them can show, before discharge, that they or their caregiver can give a correct dose, leaves with the pen and supplies in hand, and receives a follow-up call within 72 hours. The measurable goals for the first six months are a documented return demonstration for at least 85 percent of eligible patients, bedside pen delivery for at least 90 percent, and a reduction in glucose-related returns within a month from about 14.5 percent toward 9 percent.

Why an Interprofessional Team

Each part of the bundle depends on a different profession. Nurses coach and observe, using teach-back, which helped patients in almost every study of it that a recent review identified (Talevski et al., 2020); pharmacy supplies the pen; hospitalists time the discharge and the prescription; the diabetes educator makes the follow-up call; informatics builds the record field; case management handles insurance. The Interprofessional Education Collaborative's competencies describe the shared work such a team needs: shared values, clear roles, good communication and effective teamwork (Interprofessional Education Collaborative [IPEC], 2023).

The evidence that formal collaboration improves patient outcomes is still modest. Reeves and colleagues' Cochrane review, which pooled trials of shared meetings, joint rounds and team checklists, found low-certainty evidence of small benefits and could not establish effects on many outcomes (Reeves et al., 2017). The charter therefore treats collaboration as a means to specific results rather than a goal in itself, and it measures those results.

A team that cannot say who delivers the pen will deliver it late.

Members and Roles

Project lead: the DNP student and unit educator, who coordinates the team, analyzes data and reports to the nursing quality council.

Nurse champions: two night-shift and two day-shift nurses, who coach peers, check the supervised doses and gather staff concerns.

Nurse manager: removes barriers such as staffing for the skills sessions and approves workflow changes.

Hospitalist representative: agrees to enter the discharge insulin prescription by the morning before expected discharge, so that pharmacy has time to fill it.

Inpatient pharmacist: verifies the pen type and dose, flags insurance problems early and oversees bedside delivery.

Pharmacy technician lead: delivers pens and needles to the bedside by noon on the day before expected discharge.

Certified diabetes care and education specialist: trains the champions, reviews materials and makes the 72-hour call.

Informatics nurse: builds the structured return demonstration field and the dashboard.

Case manager: checks coverage for the pen and supplies and connects uninsured patients to assistance programs.

A patient advisor, a former patient who started insulin in the hospital, will review materials and attend monthly meetings.

What this part is doingGiving each member a concrete task and deadline turns the roster into a working plan.

Decision-Making

Decisions about the bundle's clinical content, such as the steps of the return demonstration or when a patient may be discharged without one, are made by the project lead, the diabetes educator and the pharmacist together, with the hospitalist consulted on any change to prescribing. Workflow decisions on the units belong to the nurse manager with the champions. When the core group cannot agree, the question goes to the nursing quality council, whose decision is final for the pilot.

What this part is doingWriting the escalation path into the charter shows the team has planned for conflict before it happens.

Meetings and Communication

The full team meets for 30 minutes every two weeks during the pilot and monthly afterward, with an agenda sent two days ahead and decisions recorded in a shared document. Champions report at shift huddles weekly. A secure message group allows same-day problem solving, for example when a pen is unavailable on the afternoon before discharge.

Handling Disagreement

The team expects disagreement, most likely about time. Nurses may feel supervised self-injection slows medication passes; hospitalists may resist entering prescriptions a day early when discharge is uncertain. The charter commits members to raise concerns in the meeting or directly with the project lead rather than working around the bundle, to bring data where possible, and to test disputed changes on a small scale before deciding. Respect for each profession's constraints is written into the team's ground rules.

Measures and Review

The team will review the return demonstration rate, bedside delivery rate, call completion rate and 30-day returns every two weeks, stratified by language and age group. As a balancing check, the delay between a written discharge order and an empty bed will check that the bundle does not delay discharge. The charter itself will be reviewed after the four-week pilot on 5 West and revised before 6 West begins.

Conclusion

The bundle succeeds only if nine roles connect on time. This charter names each person's part, sets how the team decides and communicates, plans for disagreement and measures the results, so that collaboration serves a clear outcome for patients going home on insulin.

References

Interprofessional Education Collaborative. (2023). IPEC core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice: Version 3. https://www.ipecollaborative.org/ipec-core-competencies

Reeves, S., Pelone, F., Harrison, R., Goldman, J., & Zwarenstein, M. (2017). Interprofessional collaboration to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2017(6), Article CD000072. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000072.pub3

Talevski, J., Wong Shee, A., Rasmussen, B., Kemp, G., & Beauchamp, A. (2020). Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts. PLOS ONE, 15(4), e0231350. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231350

The Purdue Global NU702 Unit 6 instructions

The sixth unit typically asks for a plan to build and run the interprofessional team a practice change needs, often in the form of a team charter. Prompts usually expect the team's aim and measurable goals, members and roles, decision rights, meeting and communication plans, how conflict will be handled and how progress will be reviewed. Instructors look for roles defined as tasks with deadlines rather than job titles, and for decision rules that say who decides what and how disagreements are escalated. Including patients or families on the team is often rewarded. Evidence on interprofessional collaboration should be used honestly, since its effects on outcomes are modest. A charter of a few pages in APA format is typical, citing a competency framework such as IPEC's and at least one review of collaboration's effects, plus any evidence supporting the practice itself.

How the NU 702 Unit 6 example is put together

The charter opens with the team's purpose and three six-month goals, then explains why each profession is needed, drawing on IPEC's competencies and citing Talevski and colleagues for the teaching method. Reeves and colleagues' Cochrane review is presented frankly, and a highlighted line states that a team unable to name who delivers the pen will deliver it late. The members section lists ten roles, each with a task and deadline, which a margin note marks. Decision-making divides clinical content, workflow and escalation to the quality council, flagged by a second margin note. Meetings, huddles and a secure message group are described. The disagreement section predicts disputes over time and sets ground rules for raising and testing them. Measures, stratified by language and age, include a discharge timing balancing measure, and the charter is reviewed after the pilot.

NU702 Unit 6 rubric: what earns full points

Team charters earn marks for a clear aim with measurable goals, specific roles, defined decision rights, communication structures, a conflict plan, measurement and evidence. Goals should be numbers with dates. Role credit depends on tasks and deadlines, so a list of job titles scores poorly. Decision rights must say who decides clinical content, who decides workflow and how disputes are escalated. Graders reward communication plans that match the pace of the work, such as same-day messaging for missing supplies. A conflict plan that anticipates likely disputes and sets ground rules shows leadership maturity. Measurement should include balancing measures that protect other parts of care. Including a patient advisor is often credited. Honest use of the evidence on collaboration, correct citation of the competency framework and a clear layout complete the criteria in most sections.

NU702 Unit 6 help from the desk

Charters lose the most marks when they list team members without saying what each will do or by when. Another frequent gap is leaving decision rights unstated, which invites stalemate the first time professions disagree. Some charters claim that collaboration will transform outcomes, overstating evidence that is actually modest. Others omit the professions that control key resources, such as pharmacy or informatics, and then discover mid-project that nothing can move without them. A charter that ignores conflict is usually unprepared for it. Patients are often absent from teams that are redesigning their care. Begin by tracing your change from start to finish and writing the name of the role responsible at each step. Gaps in that trace show who is missing. Your change and the professions involved are enough to begin a custom charter.

Get an NU702 Unit 6 example written to your instructions

Send the change, the professions involved and the charter instructions with the rubric. A custom charter defines roles, decisions, meetings and how conflict will be handled. It is free the first time and arrives within 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 NU702 papers and DNP samples

NU702 Unit 6 questions, answered

What goes in an interprofessional team charter?

The aim, members and their roles, how decisions are made, meeting rhythm, communication channels, how progress is measured and how disagreement is resolved.

Who should be on the team for a nursing practice change?

Everyone whose work changes or who controls a resource, often including pharmacy, physicians, educators, informatics and frontline staff.

Does the charter need evidence?

Briefly. Evidence that interprofessional collaboration affects outcomes supports the effort, but the charter's value lies in its specifics.

Where can I find a free NU702 Unit 6 sample paper?

This page holds the complete NU702 Unit 6 interprofessional team charter. It defines ten roles, goals, decision rights, communication and a conflict plan for an insulin pen discharge bundle on two composite medical-surgical units.

Why does the NU702 Unit 6 charter include a patient advisor?

The bundle redesigns what patients experience at discharge, and a former patient who started insulin in the hospital can test materials and point out problems staff do not see.