NURS FPX 6020 Assessment 1 FREE DOWNLOAD
NURS FPX 6020 Assessment 1
Risk Assessment
Student name
Capella University
NURS-FPX 6020: Biopsychosocial Concepts for Advanced Nursing Practice 1
Professor Name
Submission Date
Risk Assessment
The health risk evaluation of the presence of a disaster in an occurrence is a vigorous exercise that requires a comprehensive decision-making process, which includes the environmental and human factors. This is critical in terms of identifying the weak areas and eradicating the spread of infections and especially within a short time after an event like floods, hurricanes, or earthquakes. Examples of such factors as water contamination, the overcrowding of shelters, and the ineffectiveness of sanitation can be predicted and responded to before their emergence by the responders.
Scenario
Following the occurrence of Hurricane Katrina in August 2005, the city of New Orleans and the other Gulf Coast communities were devastated, and the levees could not contain the floods, which covered about 80 percent of the city. Thousands of people lost their homes, tens of thousands were trapped in the Superdome and Convention Center in poor conditions without sufficient food, clean water, sanitation and medical care.
Hospitals were flooded, power cuts paralysed communication and emergency response networks, and the vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, chronically ill, and low-income families, were affected out of proportion. The disaster revealed significant weaknesses in disaster preparedness, coordination between federal, state and local agencies and the necessity to have long-term recovery planning.
Decision-Making Approach to Assess Potential Health Problems and Needs
The systematic decision-making process is significant in the event when it is necessary to consider the potential health problems and risk of infection control in case of a disaster. As an illustration, the post-Hurricane Katrina period has resulted in health risks caused by floodwaters that had a health contamination component due to the same water-borne issues, cholera, and hepatitis A (Baars, 2025).
The first part of the process of making decisions is the determination of the physical features of the disaster, such as water contamination, overcrowded houses, and broken sanitation systems, which lead to a situation where diseases are able to spread. The approach then proceeds to test the affected populations in a second step; these are susceptible populations such as the children, the old and even those with already existing health problems who are more vulnerable to the infection either due to their ineffective immune system or just simply due to their inability to access health care.
The decision-making process also involves the biopsychosocial needs of the affected community, including the psychological needs and culturally appropriate communication strategies, in an attempt to disseminate the awareness of infection prevention (Barello, 2025).
It also highlights the importance of fast consumption of resources in the shape of clean water, sanitation supplies, and vaccines to reduce the risk of infection. Applying the rapid decision-making model to the situation during the post-Hurricane Katrina disaster enables the healthcare leaders to promptly evaluate and rank the risk of infection control, e.g., contaminated water sources, overcrowded shelters, insufficient sanitation, and disrupted healthcare provision that predispose outbreaks (e.g., gastrointestinal and respiratory infections).
Distinguishing Features of this Model
Speed, flexibility, and prioritization in conditions of uncertainty are the key features that distinguish the rapid decision-making model among other decision-making frameworks, allowing responders to make timely and evidence-based decisions based on partial data (Bain & Company, 2023). It is especially effective during the high-pressure disaster situation since, unlike more linear or data-intensive models, it is oriented to immediate risk identification, quick intervention planning, and constant re-evaluation.
This is a biopsychosocial model in comparison to the traditional models that were only able to stress the physical health risks, whereas other concerns are at play, therefore, resulting in the infection control outcomes such as mental health and social dynamics (Bolton, 2023). Its other peculiar feature is its focus on preemptive strike, risk analysis, and resource allocation, prior to them getting out of control. This, as opposed to the reactive models, which mostly work based on the outbreak cohort, is an alternative (Watkins et al., 2025). In addition, another advantage of the model is that it considers the inter-disciplinary collaboration between the health officials, healthcare providers, and the community leaders in order to coordinate the response.
Applying Personalized Information in Identifying Healthcare Risks
Individual data, such as availability of demographic requirements and exposures to the environment, is an important component of (disaster) healthcare risk recognition. There are some weaknesses that belong to various demographic groups, which include children, older adults, pregnant women, chronic diseases, etc. Here, it is observed that the children have weak immune systems and are more likely to be affected by water-borne diseases, and the old in overcrowded shelters may be more susceptible to respiratory diseases. The information on environmental exposure (e.g., the presence of dirty water, air pollution, or harmful waste) is also useful in identifying the risk. During Hurricane Katrina, wastewater and industrial effluents were washed into floodwater located in the flood zone and exposing people to the risk of GI and skin infections (Blaskovich & Harris, 2023).
These are demographic needs and specific exposures that are particular to the interventions, and this means that the reaction to them will be more effective. In addition, different groups will require different approaches to reach out to them, including multilingual approaches in case of non-English and/or approachable in case of people with disabilities, to make sure that all people will be provided with infection prevention measures, regardless of their differences.
In case of a disaster, the healthcare risks differ among the population groups: children are the most susceptible to dehydration and infections, whereas older adults and chronic patients are at increased risk because of the limited access to medications and care. Bugs tend to spread communicable diseases because of overcrowding and poor sanitation in shelters, which are common in low-income families and displaced people (Blaskovich and Harris, 2023). Also, the environmental risks like polluted floodwaters, mold and debris increase respiratory and gastrointestinal health risks and require specific interventions for each of the population groups.
Identifying Areas of Potential Uncertainty or Bias
Irrespective of the efforts to personalize the healthcare risk assessment, a lack of clarity and potential bias could arise. The research in the remote communities lacks knowledge on the environmental risk factors, where there is no substantial data available. The system might choose to serve certain groups of the population and abandon those that need it the most. This is the outcome of systolic inequity as it leads to a lack of low-income diversity in formal flexibility planning, but these groups need more security. The problems are that individuals are reporting information on themselves because they can either hide the information that is sensitive, or give it falsely, because they are afraid of being judged or simply because they are not well informed about a topic.
Integrating Epidemiological and System-Level Aggregate Data
The epidemiological and system-level information that was presented with Hurricane Katrina was a vital insight into the population health outcomes and resource requirements. More than 1,200 deaths and a crippling damage of around 170 billion USD were reported in surveillance (Waddell et al., 2021). Norovirus causes about 685 million cases of gastroenteritis annually, 150,000 deaths in adults, and 50,000 deaths in children every year (Capece & Gignac, 2023). These epidemiological findings revealed a risky situation at the shelters, and this formed the basis of infection management and treatment interventions.
The information at the system level showed that the evacuation of inpatients of 360 New Orleans right after the storm, and open hospitals reported shortages of staff, medications, and backup power as critical (Melnychuk et al., 2022). The number of visits to the emergency departments of hospitals increased during the first few weeks following the disaster, and the number of inpatient admissions due to gastrointestinal and respiratory illnesses rose compared to the pre-disaster period. These trends on a systems-wide scale highlight the urgency of mobile health units, redistribution of supplies, and capacity reinforcement of the workforce in healthcare.
Health Trends
The consolidated data revealed that there were definite health trends in relation to the disaster. According to Leppold et al. (2022), exposure to both Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Gustav was associated with poor mental health. Exposure to gasoline increased 283 times after Hurricane Sandy, which was related to respiratory and gastrointestinal illness (Waddell et al., 2021).
The significance of these patterns is that they identify the conditions that are most likely to need intervention in order to ensure that limited resources are directed towards them by the leaders. A system-level monitoring confirmed an abnormally elevated increase in the number of older adults visiting the emergency department, that is, persons over 85 years old (Waddell et al., 2021). These trends are indicative of the dependence of epidemiological trends on the pressure on the healthcare infrastructure.
Relevance of the Data
The results above explain why system-level and epidemiological data are critical in disaster response and preparedness. Epidemiological surveillance provides a way of identifying the who, what, where and when of outbreaks, while system-level indicators reveal shortcomings of healthcare delivery (Ugwu et al., 2024). The significance of such data is that it converts the abstract impact of the disaster into quantifiable, practical policy and clinical decision-making data.
The valid and real-time data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and hospital electronic health records can be used to make decisions. To provide situational awareness, the CDC collects health and needs information during a disaster (CDC, 2024). The National Disaster and Emergency Management University, developed by FEMA, has a vision of establishing a special pipeline of talent and depth of knowledge to actively meet the current and upcoming threats and hazards (FEMA, 2025).
An example is that, according to United States surveillance reports, the rate of norovirus-related gastroenteritis has sharply risen in December 2024, in comparison to a similar time of the previous years (Capece & Gignac, 2023). Federal spending on surge capacity planning, infrastructure hardening, and local preparedness activities was based on long-term data-informed resilience planning, as proposed by post-Katrina reports. Lack of integration has a high likelihood of causing delayed, unjust, and ineffective disaster responses. By utilizing the numeric data of epidemiologic and system-level data, healthcare leaders will be able to implement timely, evidence-based interventions to protect the population and improve disaster resilience in the future.
Explaining the Need for Effective Communication
Those involved in relevant system data and epidemics should strive to take responsive and effective actions in regard to the disaster. The epidemiological data give answers to the who, what, where, and when of the disease outbreaks to identify the population or areas at risk (Bitetto et al., 2021). Moreover, the system-level data is brought to the attention of the shortage of the health infrastructure, e.g., poor medical resources or rebels that may support the fire in the health crisis.
Communication with members of the community is an important matter that needs to be effective so that they become aware of the risks of infections and implement preventive strategies, including proper hand hygiene, safe use of water, and timely medical treatment. Culturally sensitive communication will aid in overcoming misinformation, developing trust, and adhering to the public health recommendations. In the case of Hurricane Katrina, several of the evacuees did not know about the risk of exposure to contaminated floodwater, and thus, specific education was necessary to prevent gastrointestinal and wound infection.
An example is that in an epidemiological disposition of hurricanes, like with Hurricane Katrina, epidemiological data indicated the prevalence of gastrointestinal illness, and data of the system showed overcrowded hospitals, which revealed a decrease in the necessity to create mobile clinics and allocation of resources (Ristaino et al., 2021).
Long-term planning is also based on this type of data since it determines the policy on how to enhance systems of healthcare and disaster preparedness. Failure to integrate this role will lead to the nature of the response that may be ineffective, unsuitable, and unfair and expose the people at risk to more threats. Such statistics are, thus, not only necessary during the period of managing the disaster, but also during the further work to establish a more stable future.
Examples of Why These Needs Are Important
Misinformation has to be addressed by means of effective communication, which can be quick spread during a disaster. Using the example of the COVID-19 pandemic masks and the misinformation about vaccines, the differences between the groups increased the level of infections (Brüssow and Zuber, 2021). This misinformation, in its turn, can be disproven with the help of evidence-based, unambiguous communication that can lead to safer regimes.
The other reason is the possibility of reaching vulnerable groups, i.e., individuals with disabilities or those in remote areas. This can be exemplified by the cases that involve the importance of communication strategy adaptations so that the individuals with functional needs are not sidelined, such as the provision of books in the interpretation of the sign language, and an accessible format. The expectancy of priority health information is not likely to cross people who are at the greatest risk of having been infected and possessing health inequalities.
Conclusion
Such an approach and consideration are required in disaster infection control, which is a complex issue. A good risk management process should take a risk assessment and examine the risks that may arise, such as dirty water or overcrowded shelters, and should also offer solutions to these same risks.
The epidemiologic data, combined with exposure to certain interventions aimed at reducing the dissemination of infections and improving health outcomes, can be introduced by the combination of epidemiologic and the necessity to decrease the demands of the vulnerable population. As it is important that people can communicate effectively to be informed and enabled to take protective actions, such as hygiene or to receive medical care immediately, it is also important to communicate effectively.
Ace your grades with our expert help on NURS FPX 6020 Assessment 2 Disaster Management. Click here to get started!
Instructions To Write NURS FPX 6020 Assessment 1
Instructions to write NURS FPX 6020 Assessment 1
Task: Write a 5-6 page report about the infection control hazards that could happen in your community after a disaster.
Important Parts to Add
1. Select a Disaster Scenario
- Choose a real disaster, like a flood, hurricane, or wildfire, that has recently affected your community.
- For every course assessment, use a similar context.
2. Use a Model for Decision-Making
- To systematically detect infection risks, use a structured method (such as the DECIDE approach or SWOT Analysis).
- Describe your reasoning for selecting this model and how you used it to evaluate risks.
3. Determine the Impacted Groups and the Infection Hazards
- Health Risks: Such as crowded homes, polluted soil, water, and air.
- Targeted Individuals: Discuss how the catastrophe affects various groups such as the elderly, children, homeless individuals, and those who do not speak English as their first language.
- Explain their special weaknesses and heightened vulnerability to infection.
4. Make Use of Data to Back Up Your Analysis
- Combine data from the system (e.g., capacity of hospitals, public health resources) and local epidemiology (such as infections before and after the crisis).
- Explain how your risk priorities are justified by this evidence.
5. Create a Communication Strategy
- Describe how to properly inform various community groups about risks.
- Discuss problems (such as a lack of electricity or language obstacles) and provide fixes (like radio broadcasts or bilingual alerts).
List of Requirements
- Length should be five to six pages long without title pages or references.
- USE at least three academic, peer-reviewed sources.
- Use 12-point Times New Roman or APA 7th Edition formatting.
- Save the file according to your instructor’s recommendation, such as Assessment1_LastName_FirstInitial.pdf.
Instructions File For 6020 Assessment 1
Assessment 1
Risk Assessment
Instructions
In a 5-6 page paper, identify risks of potential health problems related to infection control during a disaster or catastrophic event.
Introduction
Think about a recent or past disaster or catastrophic event that occurred in your local community. Imagine you’ve been invited to participate in your local community taskforce to address future occurrence of this type of disaster. Your first step will be putting together a paper that identifies risks of potential health problems related to infection control during the disaster.
Your team realizes that a couple of key factors come into play when we think about disease and stopping the chain of infection:
Physical elements, such as contaminated water, air, or soil in a disaster.
Impacted populations, especially the different characteristics and needs of people in affected communities that raise or lower risks resulting from the physical impacts.
Part of those person-centered needs will include different communication needs based on different groups of people.
Physical and biopsychosocial elements very much overlap in any kind of infection control crisis. You’ll consider both as you assess risks of infection resulting from the potential disaster you’re looking at.
Preparation
Your choice of what kind of natural or man-made disaster or catastrophic event you want to prepare for and the affected location and communities will carry through all three assessments in the course. So if you haven’t already, spend time gathering information to help you make that choice based on a recent or past disaster that affected your local community. Also spend time researching the decision-making approach you want to use to assess the potential risks and needs.
Instructions
In your 5–6 page paper:
Apply a decision-making approach to assess potential health problems and needs related to infection control risks in a disaster situation.
The heart of your paper will be assessing the potential risks of infection, given the particular kind of potential disaster and location you’ve chosen to focus on—and the populations that would be affected.
You’ll need to articulate not only the risks and potential needs, but the decision-making process you used to arrive at these. So articulate how you’ve applied a decision-making process.
Apply personalized information, such as the needs of different demographic groups and environmental exposure information, in the identification of healthcare risks.
You’ll assess specific needs of the different affected populations of the location you’ve selected.
Integrate epidemiological and system-level aggregate data to determine healthcare outcomes and trends.
Research the most current data about the risks and infection control related to the situation you’ve selected, and incorporate the local data to support why you’ve prioritized those risks the way you have.
Explain needs for communicating effectively with community individuals to help them make informed choices about mitigating risk of infection.
What will be the needs and challenges for communicating effectively with the different affected populations and communities you’ve identified, and why?
Convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly communication standards.
Is your paper clear and persuasive for the different people who make up your professional audience, and does it use APA style?
Additional Requirements
To achieve a successful assessment experience and outcome, you are expected to meet the following requirements.
Written communication: Make sure your writing is succinct and clear, and is free of errors that detract from the overall message.
Resources: Include a minimum of three current scholarly sources (peer-reviewed articles, books, websites, and dissertations) to support your case.
APA formatting: Resources and citations are formatted according to current APA style and formatting guidelines. Refer to the Evidence and APA section of the Writing Center for guidance.
Length: 5–6 double-spaced pages, not including title and reference pages.
Font and font size: Times New Roman, 12 point.
Competencies Measured
By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and scoring guide criteria:
Competency 1: Design person-centered care that integrates biological, psychological, and social factors and considers their complex interactions.
Apply a decision-making approach to assess potential health problems and needs related to infection control risks in a disaster situation.
Apply personalized information, such as the needs of different demographic groups and environmental exposure information, in the identification of healthcare risks.
Competency 2: Propose improvements to system-level interventions to protect populations.
Integrate epidemiological and system-level aggregate data to determine healthcare outcomes and trends.
Competency 4: Propose communication tools and techniques that can improve interprofessional team dynamics and strengthen partnerships to achieve effective outcomes.
Explain needs for communicating effectively with community individuals to help them make informed choices about mitigating risk of infection.
Competency 5: Communicate effectively with diverse audiences, in an appropriate form and style, consistent with organizational, professional, and scholarly standards.
Convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly communication standards.
Scoring Guide for 6020 Assessment 1
Scoring Guide
Use the scoring guide to understand how your assessment will be evaluated.
Collapse All
Criterion 1
Apply a decision-making approach to assess potential health problems and needs related to infection control risks in a disaster situation.
Applications
Applies a decision-making approach to assess potential health problems and needs related to infection control risks in a disaster situation. Identifies what distinguishes the model from other models.
Proficient
Applies a decision-making approach to assess potential health problems and needs related to infection control risks in a disaster situation.
Basic
Applies a decision-making approach to assess potential health problems and needs, though the approach may not be the most appropriate one or the identified problems aren’t the most applicable to the situation.
Non Performance
Does not apply a decision-making approach to assess potential health problems and needs related to infection control risks in a disaster situation.
Criterion 2
Apply personalized information, such as the needs of different demographic groups and environmental exposure information, in the identification of healthcare risks.
Applies personalized information, such as the needs of different demographic groups and environmental exposure information, in the identification of healthcare risks, also identifying any areas of potential uncertainty or bias that might need more exploration.
Proficient
Applies personalized information, such as the needs of different demographic groups and environmental exposure information, in the identification of healthcare risks.
Basic
Applies information in the identification of healthcare risks, though the information may be too generalized or incomplete to identify important risks.
Non Performance
Does not apply personalized information, such as the needs of different demographic groups and environmental exposure information, in the identification of healthcare risks.
Criterion 3
Integrate epidemiological and system-level aggregate data to determine healthcare outcomes and trends.
Integrates epidemiological and system-level aggregate data to determine healthcare outcomes and trends, explaining the relevance of the data.
Proficient
Basic
Integrates epidemiological and system-level aggregate data to determine healthcare outcomes and trends, though the data may not be the most relevant to the situation.
Non Performance
Does not integrate epidemiological and system-level aggregate data to determine healthcare outcomes and trends.
Criterion 4
Explain needs for communicating effectively with community individuals to help them make informed choices about mitigating risk of infection.
Explains needs for communicating effectively with community individuals to help them make informed choices about mitigating risk of infection, including providing examples of reasons for why the needs are important.
Proficient
Explains needs for communicating effectively with community individuals to help them make informed choices about mitigating risk of infection.
Basic
Explains communication needs, though they may not be the most important for the situation, or the reasons they are important may not be clear.
Non Performance
Does not explain needs for communicating effectively with community individuals to help them make informed choices about mitigating risk of infection.
Criterion 5
Convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly communication standards.
Conveys clear purpose, in a tone and style well-suited to the intended audience. Supports assertions, arguments, and conclusions with relevant, credible, and convincing evidence. Exhibits strict and nearly flawless adherence to organizational, professional, and scholarly writing standards, including APA style and formatting.
Proficient
Conveys purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and scholarly communication standards.
Basic
Conveys purpose, in an appropriate tone or style. Clear, effective communication is inhibited by insufficient supporting evidence and/or minimal adherence to applicable writing standards.
Non Performance
Does not convey purpose, in an appropriate tone and style, incorporating supporting evidence and adhering to organizational, professional, and writing scholarly standards.
References For NURS FPX 6020 Assessment 1
Baars, K. (2025). Social determinants of health in post-flood disease outbreaks: Insights for effective disaster mitigation amid climate change. Studenttheses.uu.nl. https://studenttheses.uu.nl/handle/20.500.12932/48663
Bain & Company. (2023, October 13). RAPID® Decision Making. Bain & Company. https://www.bain.com/insights/rapid-decision-making/
Barello, S. (2025). Psychology for addressing global health challenges. Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-88408-5
Bitetto, A., Cerchiello, P., & Mertzanis, C. (2021). A data-driven approach to measuring epidemiological susceptibility risk around the world. Scientific Reports, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-03322-8
Blaskovich, M. A. T., & Harris, P. N. A. (2023). Bugs in floods. Microbiology Australia, 44(4), 176–180. https://doi.org/10.1071/ma23051
Bolton, D. (2023). A revitalized biopsychosocial model: Core theory, research paradigms, and clinical implications. Psychological Medicine, 53(16), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291723002660
Brüssow, H., & Zuber, S. (2021). Can a combination of vaccination and face mask wearing contain the COVID‐19 pandemic? Microbial Biotechnology, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.13997
Capece, G., & Gignac, E. (2023, August 14). Norovirus. Nih.gov; StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513265/
Leppold, C., Gibbs, L., Block, K., Reifels, L., & Quinn, P. (2022). Public health implications of multiple disaster exposures. The Lancet Public Health, 7(3), e274–e286. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2468-2667(21)00255-3
Melnychuk, E., Sallade, T. D., & Kraus, C. K. (2022). Hospitals as disaster victims: Lessons not learned? Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open, 3(1), e12632. https://doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12632
Ristaino, J. B., Anderson, P. K., Bebber, D. P., Brauman, K. A., Cunniffe, N. J., Fedoroff, N. V., Finegold, C., Garrett, K. A., Gilligan, C. A., Jones, C. M., Martin, M. D., MacDonald, G. K., Neenan, P., Records, A., Schmale, D. G., Tateosian, L., & Wei, Q. (2021). The persistent threat of emerging plant disease pandemics to global food security. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(23). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2022239118
Ugwu, O. P.-C., Alum, E. U., Ugwu, J. N., Hyginus, V., Ugwu, C. N., Ogenyi, F. C., & Michael Ben Okon. (2024). Harnessing technology for infectious disease response in conflict zones: Challenges, innovations, and policy implications. Medicine, 103(28). https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000038834
Watkins, R. E., Eagleson, S., Hall, R. G., Dailey, L., & Plant, A. J. (2025). Approaches to the evaluation of outbreak detection methods. Biomed Central, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-263
Waddell, S. L., Jayaweera, D. T., Mirsaeidi, M., Beier, J. C., & Kumar, N. (2021). Perspectives on the health effects of hurricanes: A review and challenges. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052756
Best Professors To Choose From For 6020 Class
Mark Brown, MBA
Walter Chesley, JD
Selina Matis, PhD
Dawn Mueller, PhD
Diana Rodriguez, EdD
(FAQs) related to NURS FPX 6020 Assessment 1
Question 1: From where to download a free sample for NURS FPX 6020 Assessment 1?
Answer 1: Tutors Academy is a platform where you can easily get NURS-FPX6020 Assessment 1.
Question 2: Where can I find the instruction file and scoring guide for the 6020 assessment 1?
Answer 2: You can get the instruction file and scoring guide for the 6020 assessment 1 from Tutors Academy.
Question 3: What is NURS-FPX 6020 Assessment 1: Risk Assessment about?
Answer 3: NURS-FPX 6020 Assessment 1 focuses on identifying health risks in disaster settings.
Do you need a tutor to help with this paper for you with in 24 hours.
- 0% Plagiarised
- 0% AI
- Distinguish grades guarantee
- 24 hour delivery