WGU D515|PVAHCS Analysis Worksheet (Assignment 1)| 2026
Latest Update with Complete Solution
Instructions:
This worksheet has two parts:
1. A table to analyze each of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) allegations and justify corrective action solutions using
IRAC methodology.
2. A series of questions that will target the issues in the Phoenix Veterans Affairs Health Care System (PVAHCS) case most
relevant in the development of a new enterprise risk management (ERM) plan.
Resources:
Use the following resources located in the course to complete this worksheet:
Review of Alleged Patient Deaths, Patient Wait Times, and Scheduling Practices at the Phoenix VA Health Care
System
Enterprise Risk Management: Issues and Cases
Note: This text investigates ERM case studies, both inside the healthcare industry and out. It also explores the key issues f or
implementing ERM strategies.
Impact Assessment Framework
Perform an internet search for the VHA Publications Index (policies = regulations and directives)
Below are examples of directives. After reviewing the website, you may find more directives applicable to this case.
#1604: Data Entry Requirements for Administrative Data
#2011-002: Office of the Medical Inspector Reports
#1231: Outpatient Clinical Practice Management
#1230: Outpatient Scheduling Process and Procedures
#6300: Records Management
#1128: Timely Scheduling of Surgical Procedures in the Operating Room
#2006-041: Veterans Healthcare Service Standards
#1026: VHA Enterprise Framework for Quality, Safety, and Value
Go to the University of Washington Bioethical Principles site by copying and pasting the following link into your
browser: https://depts.washington.edu/bhdept/ethics-medicine/bioethics-topics/articles/principles-bioethics
Note: The site link above includes the ethical principles found in the C985: Analytical Methods of Health Leaders course.
, Part 1. IRAC Table
Formulate an IRAC (issue, rule, application, and conclusion) response for each of the five OIG violations that includes the
following:
• Issue: Summarize the relevant facts for each violation in the OIG report.
• Rule: Discuss the relevant ethical principles and legal or regulatory requirements for each violation.
• Application: Analyze how the violations deviated from the ethical principles and legal or regulatory requirements
discussed.
• Conclusion: Recommend appropriate ERM corrective actions or solutions for each of the violations.
Clinically significant delays in care
It is expected that patients be seen within 30 days of being added to the electronic wait list.
Since the data is skewed on when patients are being seen there is no idea how long patients are
Summary of relevant waiting to set up primary care. It was reported that 1,138 veterans waited over 200 days for an
facts: appointment. This number is no accurate because out of the 1,138 only 53 of those patients
were actually on the EWL. If these numbers were accurate then we could suspect that veterans
wait times were 170 over the target time of 30 days.
Discussion and It is unethical for patients to wait over 200 days to set up primary care. This goes against “The
analysis of deviation Principle of Beneficence.” Which states, “health care providers have a duty to be of a benefit to
from ethical
the patient, as well as to take positive steps to prevent and to remove harm from the patient.”
principles and legal,
(Principles of Bioethics | UW Department of Bioethics & Humanities (washington.edu) ). By not
or regulatory
requirements or
adding patients into the EWL the scheduler who is also a health care provider is not benefiting the
standards: patient and I putting them in harms way by not addressing their needs to set up primary care.
ERM corrective action
The first step to corrective action is that all veterans must make it onto the EWL in order to ensure that
or solution
the data is correct. To take away all paper routes whenever new patient
recommendation:
Omission of the names of veterans waiting for care from its electronic wait list (EWL)
• 1,400 veterans were identified as waiting to receive care. They were appropriately included on
Summary of relevant the electronic wait list (EWL).
facts:
• 1,700 veterans waiting for care but were not on the EWL.
Latest Update with Complete Solution
Instructions:
This worksheet has two parts:
1. A table to analyze each of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) allegations and justify corrective action solutions using
IRAC methodology.
2. A series of questions that will target the issues in the Phoenix Veterans Affairs Health Care System (PVAHCS) case most
relevant in the development of a new enterprise risk management (ERM) plan.
Resources:
Use the following resources located in the course to complete this worksheet:
Review of Alleged Patient Deaths, Patient Wait Times, and Scheduling Practices at the Phoenix VA Health Care
System
Enterprise Risk Management: Issues and Cases
Note: This text investigates ERM case studies, both inside the healthcare industry and out. It also explores the key issues f or
implementing ERM strategies.
Impact Assessment Framework
Perform an internet search for the VHA Publications Index (policies = regulations and directives)
Below are examples of directives. After reviewing the website, you may find more directives applicable to this case.
#1604: Data Entry Requirements for Administrative Data
#2011-002: Office of the Medical Inspector Reports
#1231: Outpatient Clinical Practice Management
#1230: Outpatient Scheduling Process and Procedures
#6300: Records Management
#1128: Timely Scheduling of Surgical Procedures in the Operating Room
#2006-041: Veterans Healthcare Service Standards
#1026: VHA Enterprise Framework for Quality, Safety, and Value
Go to the University of Washington Bioethical Principles site by copying and pasting the following link into your
browser: https://depts.washington.edu/bhdept/ethics-medicine/bioethics-topics/articles/principles-bioethics
Note: The site link above includes the ethical principles found in the C985: Analytical Methods of Health Leaders course.
, Part 1. IRAC Table
Formulate an IRAC (issue, rule, application, and conclusion) response for each of the five OIG violations that includes the
following:
• Issue: Summarize the relevant facts for each violation in the OIG report.
• Rule: Discuss the relevant ethical principles and legal or regulatory requirements for each violation.
• Application: Analyze how the violations deviated from the ethical principles and legal or regulatory requirements
discussed.
• Conclusion: Recommend appropriate ERM corrective actions or solutions for each of the violations.
Clinically significant delays in care
It is expected that patients be seen within 30 days of being added to the electronic wait list.
Since the data is skewed on when patients are being seen there is no idea how long patients are
Summary of relevant waiting to set up primary care. It was reported that 1,138 veterans waited over 200 days for an
facts: appointment. This number is no accurate because out of the 1,138 only 53 of those patients
were actually on the EWL. If these numbers were accurate then we could suspect that veterans
wait times were 170 over the target time of 30 days.
Discussion and It is unethical for patients to wait over 200 days to set up primary care. This goes against “The
analysis of deviation Principle of Beneficence.” Which states, “health care providers have a duty to be of a benefit to
from ethical
the patient, as well as to take positive steps to prevent and to remove harm from the patient.”
principles and legal,
(Principles of Bioethics | UW Department of Bioethics & Humanities (washington.edu) ). By not
or regulatory
requirements or
adding patients into the EWL the scheduler who is also a health care provider is not benefiting the
standards: patient and I putting them in harms way by not addressing their needs to set up primary care.
ERM corrective action
The first step to corrective action is that all veterans must make it onto the EWL in order to ensure that
or solution
the data is correct. To take away all paper routes whenever new patient
recommendation:
Omission of the names of veterans waiting for care from its electronic wait list (EWL)
• 1,400 veterans were identified as waiting to receive care. They were appropriately included on
Summary of relevant the electronic wait list (EWL).
facts:
• 1,700 veterans waiting for care but were not on the EWL.
