NU806 Unit 7 DNP Project Executive Summary Example

Course	NU806 DNP Project III
Unit	Unit 7
Paper type	Executive summary
Length	About 740 words, 5 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 NU806 Unit 7

Keep It, Measure It, Fix the Cost Gap: A Unit 7 Executive Summary of an Insulin Discharge Project for Hospital Leaders

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

NU806: DNP Project III

Unit 7 Executive Summary

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The hospital, leaders, results and costs are composite and illustrative; the studies cited are real.

What this part is doingPromising recommendations first and method last in the lead matches the order a leader reads in.

Summary

To: Chief Nursing Officer; Chief Medical Officer; Director of Pharmacy; Nursing Quality Committee From: Project lead (DNP student) and the Director of Nursing Quality Re: Ready at Home insulin discharge bundle, final results

Three Recommendations

What this part is doingPutting the three recommendations before any result lets a leader who reads only the first lines still know what to do.

1. Keep the bundle on all eight units as standard care. It is delivered to four in five patients, costs little beyond staff time already paid for and has caused no harm.

2. Keep measuring for at least another year. Returns fell, but not by enough on our numbers to be sure the fall is real. Another year of data will tell us.

3. Close the cost gap for Medicaid and uninsured patients. They received the full bundle less often and came back more than twice as often as other patients. The next improvement should target what they pay for insulin after they leave.

What Happened

Over roughly a year, the bundle went live on eight adult units, two at a time. Now every patient beginning insulin injects with their own pen under a nurse's eye, leaves with a one-page plan and the pen, gets texts that first week and is offered a class. A resource nurse on each unit supports staff.

Results in Plain Numbers

Delivery. All five parts reached 117 of 144 patients on the first four units, 81 percent. Before the project, no single part was documented for even 60 percent of patients on these units.

Returns within 30 days for a glucose problem. 32 of 223 patients before, 14.3 percent; 13 of 144 after, 9.0 percent. That is about one return avoided for every 19 patients. The statistical range for the true change runs from a large benefit to a very small increase, so we cannot yet be certain.

Safety. No slower discharges and no rise in patients returning with low glucose. The safety rule the committee set at approval was never triggered.

Cost. About $74,900 over the project, under the approved budget of $78,400, nearly all of it existing staff time. Ongoing cost is about $51,000 a year.

The bundle works as a way of delivering care; whether it lowers returns is likely but not yet proven.

What this part is doingTranslating the percentage change into one return avoided per 19 patients gives leaders a number they can picture.

Why Keep It Before We Are Certain

Three reasons. The bundle's parts are recommended in national hospital standards and supported by published studies. Healy et al. (2013) linked inpatient diabetes education with fewer readmissions, and Drincic et al. (2017) reported fewer readmissions after a resource nurse program like ours. Our own result points the same way. And the bundle costs little to keep: removing it would save about $51,000 a year in staff time while giving up a likely benefit.

The Cost Gap

The gap is the project's clearest unfinished business.

Medicaid and uninsured patients returned at 14.6 percent, against 6.8 percent for others. The bundle already gives them the pen before they leave, but some cannot afford the next one. Stedge et al. (2023) found that delivering medicines at discharge reduced readmissions most when cost was also covered. We recommend that pharmacy and case management design a refill assistance step for these patients as the next improvement cycle.

One Unexpected Finding

This finding was not part of the aim but may matter beyond our hospital.

A third of patients sent home with a correction scale were unsure how much insulin to take. Teaching the scale as a separate skill helped. Hospitalists are reviewing whether simpler discharge regimens would suit some patients, and pharmacy has offered to check the scale at counseling.

How We Know

The method is simple enough to repeat on any unit that adopts the bundle later.

We set the twelve months before each of the first four units started beside the months that followed, and we counted delivery of every part every month. The full report, written to national standards for improvement reporting, is available from the quality department.

Decisions Requested

Each of the three decisions has an owner ready to act once it is approved.

Approve the bundle as standard care, continue the analyst's four hours a month for measurement and charge pharmacy and case management with the refill assistance cycle.

References

Drincic, A., Pfeffer, E., Luo, J., & Goldner, W. S. (2017). The effect of diabetes case management and Diabetes Resource Nurse program on readmissions of patients with diabetes mellitus. Journal of Clinical & Translational Endocrinology, 8, 29-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcte.2017.03.003

Healy, S. J., Black, D., Harris, C., Lorenz, A., & Dungan, K. M. (2013). Inpatient diabetes education is associated with less frequent hospital readmission among patients with poor glycemic control. Diabetes Care, 36(10), 2960-2967. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-0108

Stedge, B., Xu, J., Kubes, J. N., Han, E., Russie, C., Woods, L., & O'Donnell, C. (2023). Meds to beds at hospital discharge improves medication adherence and readmission rates in select populations. Southern Medical Journal, 116(3), 247-254. https://doi.org/10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001532

NU806 Unit 7 instructions, in plain terms

Unit 7 often asks for an executive summary of the DNP project for leaders at the practice site. Expect to lead with recommendations or the main finding, then give results in plain language with numbers, costs and what leaders should do next. Instructors look for a summary a busy executive could act on after one reading, usually one to two pages. Statistical detail should be translated, for example into returns avoided per patient, without losing accuracy about uncertainty. Method belongs near the end and in brief. Many prompts ask for costs, risks and decisions requested. Tone should be direct and confident without overstating the evidence. Headings that match the questions a leader would ask, such as what happened and what it cost, make the summary easy to scan.

How the NU 806 Unit 7 example is put together

The summary opens with memo headers and three numbered recommendations, each with a one-line reason. A short paragraph describes what happened in everyday terms. Results follow under four labels, delivery, returns, safety and cost, with the change in returns translated into about one avoided for every 19 patients, under a highlighted line that the bundle works as a delivery method while its effect is likely but unproven. A section explains why to keep the bundle before certainty, citing two studies and the low cost of keeping it. The cost gap is described with its figures and a proposed refill step, supported by Stedge and colleagues. One paragraph each covers the correction-scale finding, the method and the decisions requested.

NU806 Unit 7 rubric: what earns full points

Executive summaries are graded on audience fit, clarity and accuracy. Recommendations or the main finding should come first, and a reader should be able to act after the opening section. Results earn credit when they are both plain and accurate, including honest statements of uncertainty. Translating statistics into practical terms is valued, provided the translation is correct. Costs and decisions requested should be explicit. Graders also look for brevity: method and background should be short and placed late. Evidence cited to support recommendations strengthens them, but citations should not crowd the page. Professional tone, consistent figures with the full report and correct APA 7 references for the studies named complete the rubric.

NU806 Unit 7 help: mistakes that cost points

Executive summaries often go wrong by following the structure of the paper, with background and methods first and recommendations last. Another frequent problem is using statistical language a leader will skip, such as confidence intervals with no plain translation. Some students overstate results to make the case for keeping a change, which can backfire when leaders later read the full report. Others leave out costs, which are often the first thing an executive asks about. Recommendations that lack an owner or a decision request tend to stall. Writing two pages when one would do loses readers. Start by writing the three things you want leaders to do, then add only what they need to agree. Send the results and the names of the leaders who will read it, and the summary can be drafted for them.

Get an NU806 Unit 7 example written to your instructions

Send your results, the audience and the summary instructions with the rubric. A custom executive summary tells leaders what happened, what it achieved and what to keep doing. Delivery is within 24-48h, and a first summary is free. 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 NU806 papers and DNP samples

NU806 Unit 7 questions, answered

How long is an executive summary?

Usually one to two pages.

What should it lead with?

The main result and the recommendation, before the background.

Should it include costs?

Yes, if leaders will decide whether to keep or spread the change.

Where can I find a free NU806 Unit 7 sample paper?

The complete NU806 Unit 7 executive summary is available on this page, giving hospital leaders three recommendations and plain-language results from an insulin discharge project.

What does the NU806 Unit 7 sample recommend for the payer gap?

That pharmacy and case management design a refill assistance step for Medicaid and uninsured patients, who returned at 14.6 percent against 6.8 percent for others.