Course Project: Developing a Strategic PlanTools for Strategic Planning—Balanced Scorecard and Other Tools
Effective leader-managers seek to understand how a proposed strategic change may affect performance and follow up with sound analysis to evaluate progress throughout implementation and assess the costs and benefits.
This week, you examine the use of performance metrics to gauge an organization’s standing and the impact of changes on finances, customer/client satisfaction, internal business processes, and learning and growth within a group, unit, or organization. For your Course Project, you begin to develop a balanced scorecard to measure performance related to your proposed change.Section 3: Balanced Scorecard
Managers, like pilots, need instrumentation about many aspects of their environment and performance to monitor the journey toward excellent future outcomes.—Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton, The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy Into Action
To prepare:As introduced in Week 8,continue to refine your balanced scorecard. (Refer to Week 8 for the preparatory instructions as necessary.) Your balanced scorecard is one tool you can use to evaluate the effects of your planned change on performance.To complete:Section 3: Balanced ScorecardAs you continue to develop your Course Project, it is important to consider how to evaluate the effects of your planned change on performance. Based on the work you have done thus far on your Course Project, this week you create a balanced scorecard.To prepare:
Review your work on the summary of the issue and SWOT analysis from previous weeks.
Review the information about and examples of balanced scorecards presented by Dr. Carol Huston in this week’s media program and in the other Learning Resources. Conduct additional research to see additional examples of balanced scorecards and to deepen your understanding of how balanced scorecards are used in various organizations.
Reflect on the comments related to balanced scorecards exchanged in this week’s Discussion.
Conceptualize a balanced scorecard that could be used to measure and evaluate the impact of your planned change on performance, and determine if the costs are justified in terms of the outcomes. Consider what you would measure in terms of finances, customers, internal process, and learning and growth.
Think about how you would gather valid and reliable data.
Begin to create your balanced scorecard, which will be submitted next week.
Create a balanced scorecard that could be used to measure and evaluate the impact of your planned change on performance, and determine if the costs are justified in terms of the outcomes.
Include what you would measure in terms of finances, customers, internal process, and learning and growth
Learning Resources
Learning Resources
•
Required Readings
Sare, M. V., & Ogilvie, L. (2010). Strategic planning for nurses: Change management in health
care. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
Chapter 8, “Overview of Strategic Planning Theories: Strategic Planning Architecture” (pp.
147–166)
Fields, S. A., & Cohen, D. (2011). Performance enhancement using a balanced scorecard in a
patient-centered medical home. Family Medicine, 43(10), 735–739.
Copyright 2011 by Society of Teachers of Family Medicine. Reprinted by permission
of Society of Teachers of Family Medicine via the Copyright Clearance Center.
The authors discuss using a balanced scorecard for quality improvement in patientcentered medical homes.
Groene, O., Brandt, E., Schmidt, W., & Moeller, J. (Aug 2009). The balanced scorecard of
acute settings: Development process, definition of 20 strategic objectives and
implementation.International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 21(4), 259–271.
Copyright 2009 by Oxford University Press – Journals. Reprinted by permission of Oxford
University Press – Journals via the Copyright Clearance Center.
In this article, the authors discuss the use of a balanced scorecard as a tool for strategic
planning in hospitals. The article includes an example of a strategy map, timeline, and
balanced scorecard.
Jeffs, L., Merkley, J., Richardson, S., Eli, J., & McAllister, M. (2011). Using a nursing balanced
scorecard approach to measure and optimize nursing performance. Nursing Leadership,
24(1), 47–58.
Copyright 2011 by Longwoods Publishing Corporation. Reprinted by permission
of Longwoods Publishing Corporation via the Copyright Clearance Center.
Kollberg, B., & Elg, M. (2011). The practice of the balanced scorecard in health care services.
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 60(5), 427–445.
The authors look at the use of a balanced scorecard for health care performance
management in Sweden.
Lupi, S., Verzola, A., Carandina, G., Salani, M., Antonioli, P., & Gregorio, P. (2011).
Multidimensional evaluation of performance with experimental application of balanced
scorecard: A two year experience. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 9(1), 7.
This article examines the application of a balanced scorecard within a unit in a
hospital to compare performance results and goal achievement.
Balanced Scorecard Institute. (2013). Balanced scorecard basics. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.balancedscorecard.org/BSCResources/AbouttheBalancedScorecard/tabi
d/55/Default.aspx
View the information on this website to learn about balanced scorecards.
Mountain State Group. (n.d.) Balanced scorecards for small rural hospitals: Concept overview
and implementation guidance. Retrieved March 13, 2013,
fromhttp://www.ruralcenter.org/sites/default/files/Final%20BSC%20Manual%2010.18F.
pdf
The Scarborough Hospital. (2013). Balanced scorecard. Retrieved from
http://tsh.to/pages/Balanced-Score-Card
This website provides an example of a balanced scorecard.
Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre. (2013). Balanced scorecard. Retrieved
fromhttp://sunnybrook.ca/scorecard/index.asp#sr
This website provides an example of a balanced scorecard.
Required Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2013a). The balanced scorecard approach [Video
file]. Retrieved from the https://class.waldenu.edu
Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 3 minutes.
Dr. Carol Huston discusses the elements and use of a balanced scorecard as a strategic
planning evaluation tool.
Accessible player
Credit: Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6241_Week_9_Assignment_1_Rubric
Exit
Grid View
List View
Excellent
Points:
Points Range:
27 (27%) – 30
(30%)
Quality of Work
Submitted:
The extent of
which work
meets the
assigned criteria
and work
reflects
graduate level
critical and
analytic
thinking.
%7B%220.27000
Fair
Poor
Points:
Points Range:
24 (24%) – 26
(26%)
%7B%220.24000
Points:
Points:
Points Range:
21 (21%) – 23
(23%)
Points Range:
0 (0%) – 20
(20%)
%7B%220.00000
%7B%220.21000
Assignment
exceeds
expectations.
All topics are
addressed with
a minimum of
75% containing
exceptional
breadth and
depth about
each of the
assignment
topics.
Feedback:
Quality of Work
Submitted:
Good
Points:
Assignment
meets
expectations.
All topics are
addressed with
a minimum of
50% containing
good breadth
and depth
about each of
the assignment
topics.
Assignment
meets most of
the
expectations.
One required
topic is either
not addressed
or inadequately
addressed.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
Assignment
superficially
meets some of
the
expectations.
Two or more
required topics
are either not
addressed or
inadequately
addressed.
Points:
Points:
Excellent
The purpose of
the paper is
clear.
Points Range:
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
%7B%220.05000
Good
Points Range:
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Fair
Poor
Points Range:
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5
(3.5%)
Points Range:
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
%7B%220.00000
%7B%220.04000
%7B%220.03500
A clear and
comprehensive
purpose
statement is
provided
which
delineates all
required
criteria.
Purpose of the
assignment is
stated, yet is
brief and not
descriptive.
Purpose of the
assignment is
vague or off
topic.
Feedback:
Feedback:
No purpose
statement was
provided.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
Assimilation and
Synthesis of
Ideas:
The extend to
which the work
reflects the
student’s ability
to:
Understand and
interpret the
assignment’s
key concepts.
Points Range:
9 (9%) – 10
(10%)
%7B%220.09000
Demonstrates
the ability to
critically
appraise and
intellectually
explore key
concepts.
Points:
Points Range:
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
%7B%220.08000
Demonstrates
a clear
understanding
of key
concepts.
Feedback:
Points:
Points:
Points Range: 7
(7%) – 7 (7%)
Points Range:
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
%7B%220.00000
%7B%220.07000
Shows some
degree of
understanding
of key concepts.
Feedback:
Shows a lack of
understanding
of key
concepts,
deviates from
topics.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Assimilation and
Synthesis of
Ideas:
The extend to
which the work
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points Range:
18 (18%) – 20
(20%)
Points Range:
16 (16%) – 17
(17%)
Points Range:
14 (14%) – 15
(15%)
Points Range:
0 (0%) – 13
(13%)
Excellent
reflects the
student’s ability
to:
Apply and
integrate
material in
course
resources (i.e.
video, required
readings, and
textbook) and
credible outside
resources.
%7B%220.18000
Demonstrates
and applies
exceptional
support of
major points
and integrates
2 or more
credible
outside
sources, in
addition to 2-3
course
resources to
suppport point
of view.
Good
%7B%220.16000
Integrates
specific
information
from 1 credible
outside
resource and
2-3 course
resources to
support major
points and
point of view.
Fair
Poor
%7B%220.14000
Minimally
includes and
integrates
specific
information
from 2-3
resources to
support major
points and
point of view.
%7B%220.00000
Includes and
integrates
specific
information
from 0 to 1
resoruce to
support major
points and
point of view.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Assimilation and
Synthesis of
Ideas:
The extend to
which the work
reflects the
student’s ability
to:
Synthesize
(combines
various
components or
different ideas
into a new
whole) material
in course
resources (i.e.
video, required
readings,
Points:
Points:
Points Range:
18 (18%) – 20
(20%)
Points:
Points Range:
16 (16%) – 17
(17%)
Points Range:
14 (14%) – 15
(15%)
%7B%220.14000
%7B%220.18000
%7B%220.16000
Synthesizes
and justifies
(defends,
explains,
validates,
confirms)
information
gleaned from
sources to
support major
points
presented.
Summarizes
information
gleaned from
sources to
support major
points, but
does not
synthesize.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) – 13
(13%)
%7B%220.00000
Identifies but
does not
interpret or
apply concepts,
and/or
strategies
correctly; ideas
unclear and/or
underdevelope
d.
Feedback:
Rarely or does
not interpret,
apply, and
synthesize
concepts,
and/or
strategies.
Feedback:
Excellent
textbook) and
outside,
credible
resources by
comparing
different points
of view and
highlighting
similarities,
differences, and
connections.
Good
Fair
Poor
Applies
meaning to the
field of
advanced
nursing
practice.
Feedback:
Written
Expression and
Formatting
Paragraph and
Sentence
Structure:
Paragraphs
make clear
points that
support well
developed
ideas, flow
logically, and
demonstrate
continuity of
ideas.
Sentences are
clearly
structured and
carefully
focused-neither long and
rambling nor
short and
lacking
substance.
Points:
Points:
Points Range:
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
%7B%220.05000
Paragraphs
and sentences
follow writing
standards for
structure, flow,
continuity and
clarity
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
%7B%220.04000
Paragraphs
and sentences
follow writing
standards for
structure, flow,
continuity and
clarity 80% of
the time.
Feedback:
Points Range:
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5
(3.5%)
%7B%220.03500
Paragraphs and
sentences
follow writing
standards for
structure, flow,
continuity and
clarity 60%79% of the
time.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
%7B%220.00000
Paragraphs
and sentences
follow writing
standards for
structure, flow,
continuity and
clarity < 60% of the time. Feedback: Excellent Good Fair Poor Points: Written Expression and Formatting Points: Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) %7B%220.05000 English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation %7B%220.04000 Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: Feedback: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margin s, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in -text citations, and reference list. Show Descriptions Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 %7B%220.03500 Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting Points: Contains many (? 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback: Points: Points: Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) %7B%220.05000 %7B%220.04000 Uses correct APA format with no errors. Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Feedback: Feedback: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Contains many (? 5) APA format errors. Feedback: Feedback: Show Feedback Quality of Work Submitted: The extent of which work meets the assigned criteria and work reflects graduate level critical and analytic thinking.-- Levels of Achievement: Excellent 27 (27%) - 30 (30%) %7B%220.27000 Assignment exceeds expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 75% containing exceptional breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics. Good 24 (24%) - 26 (26%) %7B%220.24000 Assignment meets expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 50% containing good breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics. %7B%220.21000 Fair 21 (21%) - 23 (23%) Assignment meets most of the expectations. One required topic is either not addressed or inadequately addressed. %7B%220.00000 Poor 0 (0%) - 20 (20%) Assignment superficially meets some of the expectations. Two or more required topics are either not addressed or inadequately addressed. Feedback: Quality of Work Submitted: The purpose of the paper is clear.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 A clear and comprehensive purpose statement is provided which delineates all required criteria. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Purpose of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Purpose of the assignment is vague or off topic. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 No purpose statement was provided. Feedback: Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extend to which the work reflects the student's ability to: Understand and interpret the assignment's key concepts.-Levels of Achievement: %7B%220.09000 Excellent 9 (9%) - 10 (10%) Demonstrates the ability to critically appraise and intellectually explore key concepts. %7B%220.08000 Good 8 (8%) - 8 (8%) Demonstrates a clear understanding of key concepts. Fair 7 (7%) - 7 (7%) %7B%220.07000 Shows some degree of understanding of key concepts. Poor 0 (0%) - 6 (6%) %7B%220.00000 Shows a lack of understanding of key concepts, deviates from topics. Feedback: Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extend to which the work reflects the student's ability to: Apply and integrate material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, and textbook) and credible outside resources.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) %7B%220.18000 Demonstrates and applies exceptional support of major points and integrates 2 or more credible outside sources, in addition to 2-3 course resources to suppport point of view. Good 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) %7B%220.16000 Integrates specific information from 1 credible outside resource and 2-3 course resources to support major points and point of view. Fair 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) %7B%220.14000 Minimally includes and integrates specific information from 2-3 resources to support major points and point of view. Poor 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) %7B%220.00000 Includes and integrates specific information from 0 to 1 resoruce to support major points and point of view. Feedback: Assimilation and Synthesis of Ideas: The extend to which the work reflects the student's ability to: Synthesize (combines various components or different ideas into a new whole) material in course resources (i.e. video, required readings, textbook) and outside, credible resources by comparing different points of view and highlighting similarities, differences, and connections.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) %7B%220.18000 Synthesizes and justifies (defends, explains, validates, confirms) information gleaned from sources to support major points presented. Applies meaning to the field of advanced nursing practice. Good 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) %7B%220.16000 Summarizes information gleaned from sources to support major points, but does not synthesize. Fair 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) %7B%220.14000 Identifies but does not interpret or apply concepts, and/or strategies correctly; ideas unclear and/or underdeveloped. %7B%220.00000 Poor 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) Rarely or does not interpret, apply, and synthesize concepts, and/or strategies. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting Paragraph and Sentence Structure: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused--neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 80% of the time. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity < 60% of the time. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Contains many (? 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback: Written Expression and Formatting The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.-Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) %7B%220.05000 Uses correct APA format with no errors. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) %7B%220.04000 Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) %7B%220.03500 Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) %7B%220.00000 Contains many (? 5) APA format errors. Feedback: Total Points: 100 Name: NURS_6241_Week_9_Assignment_1_Rubric Exit Running head: IDENTIFYING RESOURCES 1 Identifying Resources Name Tutor Institution Course Date IDENTIFYING RESOURCES 2 My strategic plan that aims at addressing the needs of cancer caregivers will be supported by three resources: financial resources, personnel, and time. Personnel such as stakeholders will be involved in raising money to fund this program. Without finances, this program will not be successful because many requirements will be purchased. New hospital personnel will be hired to provide care for the caregivers. Their role will be to offer therapeutic services for the caregivers and help them to manage strains that arises while at work or even in personal life. The personnel will require salaries and benefits just like other employees of the hospital; therefore, financial resources will be required. The personnel will require new offices, desks, uniforms, office utilities, etc., which will all require to be purchased. Resources that will be useful for providing treatment to caregivers will also be sourced. The caregivers will be using a variety of treatments, both therapeutic and nontherapeutic. Time will also be invested in this plan because specialized personnel have to be recruited and trained to meet the needs of the caregivers. Caregiver groups will also require time to create and manage effectively. These caregiver groups will be resourceful because individuals can share success stories and empower others. Caregivers will be provided with affordable care services to help them curb psychological stress (Wang et al., 2018). The three resources, personnel, time and financial resources will be leveraged to accomplish the strategic plan. Financial resources are beneficial for funding the program; to purchase all the resources needed. Personnel will implement the strategic plans to accomplish the strategic goals. Investing time will be beneficial to ensure that strategies are well planned and implemented (Lennick et al., 2018) IDENTIFYING RESOURCES 3 References Lennick, D., Geer, R., & Goulart, R. (2018). Leveraging your financial intelligence: At the intersection of money, health, and happiness Wang, T., Molassiotis, A., Chung, B. P. M., & Tan, J. Y. (2018). Unmet care needs of advanced cancer patients and their informal caregivers: a systematic review. Retrieved from: BMC palliative care, 17(1), 96. STRATEGIC PLAN Strategic Plan Courtney Pribonic Walden University 4/17/2020 STRATEGIC PLAN 2 SWOT Analysis Strengths a) There is a wide pool of experts e.g. psychologists who can render their services in support of cancer caregivers b) The National Cancer of Institute is willing to support cancer caregivers Weakness a) Lack of active education content to assist caregivers overcome psychological strain b) Cancer treatment is heavily inclined to patients and largely ignores caregivers c) There is limited research so far on the psychological and emotional strain of cancer caregivers with focus mainly being on patients Opportunities a) There is a wide range of treatment options to handle psychological strain b) Caregiver groups where individuals can share success stories and empower others c) Many cancer stakeholders who are available to support e.g. in terms of fundraising for caregivers cause Threats a) Lack of unified education policies relating to cancer patients caregivers b) The cost of accessing healthcare by cancer caregivers c) A wide range of factors may result to psychological and emotional strain of caregivers making it difficult for experts to treat STRATEGIC PLAN 3 Unmet Needs of Cancer Caregivers Unmet needs are perhaps most rampant when handling terminal diseases and, in particular, cancer. According to the World Health Organization, cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, with the terminal illness claiming up to 9.6 million in 2018 (World Health Organization, 2018). Despite the high number of casualties claimed by the disease, the most intriguing bit about the illness is the physical and psychological impacts that it has not only on the patient but on family members. It is along these lines that cancer records the highest number of unmet needs compared to other diseases. An unmet needs list published by the Belgian Institute for Health and Disability Insurance in 2018 was dominated by cancer ailments that comprised 54.7% of the 64 diseases that were reviewed (Anticancer Fund, 2018). One of the most significant unmet needs related to cancer patients relates to caregivers in hospices and other clinical settings that give care to these patients. Most of the focus is usually given to patients, but mostly, the caregivers go through a lot of physical, psychological, and emotional stress in their line of duty. Caregivers, especially those of advanced cancer patients, may find it difficult taking in the suffering of the patients and have been referred in many quarters to be fellow sufferers alongside the terminally ill patients. Informal caregivers are worst affected, and some of the challenges are summarized below. STRATEGIC PLAN 4 Requested help in endof-life decisions 25% Requested for help to manage physical and emotional stress 27% High emotional stress Financial strain Chart 1: Issues arising from cancer caregivers. Source: National Cancer Institute (2020) What has Been Attempted in the Past Previously, focus on the wellbeing of caregivers was not given adequate importance in hindsight of the immense psychological pressure they experience when working. The neglect of the emotional health of the caregivers is what perhaps has resulted in the main challenges such as financial strain, physical and emotional stress faced by this group of persons (Wang et al., 2018). The strategic plan reinforces the need to evaluate the psychological wellbeing of caregivers in tandem with cancer patients, and to support them amicably as this is the only way that they will be able to provide adequate care to the patients. Stakeholder to be Included in the Strategic Planning Process Key stakeholders that should be involved include psychologists, especially those who have related to cancer patients, the National Cancer Institute, families of the caregivers, cancer lobby STRATEGIC PLAN 5 groups, caregiver associations, and welfare groups. These are the people who are most concerned about the entire process of cancer treatment and hence are most likely to understand the plight of caregivers who play a frontline role in caring for cancer patients. The Initial Vision for Addressing the Need An essential goal of the strategy is to ensure that caregivers can easily and freely seek emotional and psychological support or treatment should the need to arise. Many caregivers may have a challenge sharing out their feelings with their colleagues or specialists e.g., for fear of being viewed as a weak person or only due to self-denial. A critical success measure of the strategic plan, therefore, relates to how easy it is for caregivers to seek out help from psychologists and other experts for their emotional and psychological wellbeing. Broader Issues to Analyze Broader issues to be considered include how the psychological strain arising from the care of cancer patients will be differentiated from other sources of stress e.g., the case of a caregiver who is in a troublesome marriage. Another vital aspect to be analyzed relates to the cost of providing psychological support to caregivers and who is responsible for its provision. STRATEGIC PLAN 6 References Anticancer Fund. (2018). Addressing unmet needs. Retrieved from: https://www.anticancerfund.org/en/addressing-unmet-needs National Cancer Institute. (2020). Informal Caregivers in Cancer: Roles, Burden, and Support. NIH. Retrieved from: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/coping/familyfriends/family-caregivers-hp-pdq Wang, T., Molassiotis, A., Chung, B. P. M., & Tan, J. Y. (2018). Unmet care needs of advanced cancer patients and their informal caregivers: a systematic review. Retrieved from: BMC palliative care, 17(1), 96. World Health Organization. (2018). Cancer. Retrieved from: https://www.who.int/newsroom/fact-sheets/detail/cancer Purchase answer to see full attachment