2008 Health Care Baldrige Scoring Guidelines

(Note: 2008 HEALTH CARE Scoring Guidelines versions are shown below with live hyperlinks to the definitions for key terms indicated by words in ALL CAPS.)

Note: The Health Care Scoring Guidelines that show the 2008 changes are shown at the bottom of this page.

SCORE

2008 Baldrige PROCESS Scoring Guidelines (HEALTH CARE Actionable Version)

0% or 5%

§ No SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to Item requirements is evident; information is ANECDOTAL. (A)

§ Little or no DEPLOYMENT of any SYSTEMATIC APPROACH is evident. (D)

§ An improvement orientation is not evident; improvement is achieved through reacting to problems. (L)

§ No organizational ALIGNMENT is evident; individual areas or work units operate independently. (I)

10%, 15%,

20%, or 25%

§ The beginning of a SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is in the early stages of DEPLOYMENT in most areas or work units, inhibiting progress in achieving the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item. (D)

§ Early stages of a transition from reacting to problems to a general improvement orientation are evident. (L)

§ The APPROACH is ALIGNED with other areas or work units largely through joint problem solving. (I)

30%, 35%,

40%, or 45%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is DEPLOYED, although some areas or work units are in early stages of DEPLOYMENT. (D)

§ The beginning of a SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to evaluation and improvement of KEY PROCESSES is evident. (L)

§ The APPROACH is in the early stages of ALIGNMENT with your basic organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

50%, 55%,

60%, or 65%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the OVERALL REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is well DEPLOYED, although DEPLOYMENT may vary in some areas or work units. (D)

§ A fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement PROCESS and some organizational LEARNING, including innovation, are in place for improving the efficiency and EFFECTIVENESS of KEY PROCESSES. (L)

§ The APPROACH is ALIGNED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items(I)

70%, 75%,

80%, or 85%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is well DEPLOYED, with no significant gaps. (D)

§ Fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement and organizational LEARNING, including innovation, are KEY management tools; there is clear evidence of refinement as a result of organizational-level ANALYSIS and sharing. (L)

§ The APPROACH is INTEGRATED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

90%, 95%, or 100%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, fully responsive to the MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is fully DEPLOYED without significant weaknesses or gaps in any areas or work units. (D)

§ Fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement and organizational LEARNING through innovation are KEY organization-wide tools; refinement and INNOVATION, backed by ANALYSIS and sharing, are evident throughout the organization. (L)

§ The APPROACH is well INTEGRATED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

Note: Click on a CAPITALIZED word or letter to go to its definition in the ACTIONABLE version of the Baldrige Health Care Scoring Guidelines. Although the words are the same, it should not be viewed as endorsed by NIST

SCORE

2008 Baldrige RESULTS Scoring Guidelines (HEALTH CARE Actionable Version)

0% or 5%

§ There are no organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS or poor RESULTS in areas reported. (Le)

§ TREND data either are not reported or show mainly adverse TRENDS. (T)

§ Comparative information is not reported. (C)

§ RESULTS are not reported for any areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (I)

10%, 15%,

20%, or 25%

§ A few organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS are reported; and early good PERFORMANCE LEVELS are evident in a few areas. (Le)

§ Some TREND data are reported, with some adverse TRENDS evident. (T)

§ Little or no comparative information is reported. (C)

§ RESULTS are reported for a few areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (I)

30%, 35%,

40%, or 45%

§ Good PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for some areas addressed in the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Some TREND data are reported and a majority of the trends presented are beneficial. (T)

§ Early stages of obtaining comparative information are evident. (C)

§ RESULTS are reported for many areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (I)

50%, 55%,

60%, or 65%

§ Good organizational PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for most areas addressed in Item requirements. (Le)

§ Beneficial TRENDS are reported in areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Some current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or BENCHMARKS and show areas of good relative PERFORMANCE. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS are reported for most KEY CUSTOMER, market, and PROCESS requirements. (I)

70%, 75%,

80%, or 85%

§ Good to excellent PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for in most areas of importance to the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Beneficial TRENDS have been sustained over time in most areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Many to most TRENDS and current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or BENCHMARKS and show areas of leadership and very good relative PERFORMANCE. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS are reported for most KEY CUSTOMER, market, PROCESS, and ACTION PLAN requirements, and they include some projections of your future performance. (I)

90%, 95%, or 100%

§ Excellent organizational PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for most areas of importance to the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Beneficial TRENDS have been sustained over time in all areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Evidence of industry and BENCHMARK leadership is demonstrated in many areas. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS fully address KEY CUSTOMER, market, PROCESS, and ACTION PLAN requirements, and they include PROJECTIONS of your future PERFORMANCE. (I)

Note: 2008 changes (additions) are highlighted in yellow; Deletions are highlighted in gray and shown with strikethrough.

Note: 2008 changes in the Results Scoring Guidelines (additions and deletions) are shown below on this page in a special mark-up version.