DNP 852B Module 5 A One-Page Executive Summary for Leaders Example

The Decision First: A One-Page Executive Summary of a Pediatric Asthma Program for Health System Leaders

Student Name

Doctor of Nursing Practice Program, Aspen University

DNP 852B: Project Dissemination

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

The Decision First: A One-Page Executive Summary of a Pediatric Asthma Program for Health System Leaders

Health system leaders will not read a DNP manuscript, but they decide whether the program it describes spreads. They need a single page that tells them what is being asked, why, what it will cost and how sure the evidence is. This paper presents that page for my project, a nurse asthma visit at one of the system's pediatric clinics, and then explains each choice: the order, the numbers, the treatment of cost and uncertainty, and how the page will be delivered. It was written last.

The Executive Summary

Decision requested: Approve a planned start of the nurse asthma visit at the second pediatric clinic, with measurement at both sites for six months.

The gap: Before the program, fewer than one in three children with persistent asthma at the first clinic had an up-to-date action plan, and over one in four had needed emergency or urgent care in the past year. National guidelines recommend a written plan and inhaler technique checks for every patient with asthma.

What we did: Registered nurses held a 40-minute visit with each child and family: a written plan translated where needed, hands-on inhaler and spacer teaching, a copy for the school nurse when parents agreed, and a follow-up phone call at two weeks. 104 children took part over eight weeks.

What happened: 57% of children had well-controlled asthma at 12 weeks, against 21% before. Those who needed urgent or emergency care dropped from 18% to 8%. Across all 640 children on the clinic's asthma list, current plan coverage rose from 31% to 47%. Results were similar for Spanish- and English-speaking families.

Cost: Roughly 118 hours of nurse time across the 104 children, and the spacers they took home. The first clinic still offers the visit, now in two half-day blocks each week.

How sure are we: These are one clinic's results over 12 weeks, with no comparison group, so the true effect is probably smaller than shown. Starting the second clinic on a set date would let us compare the two.

Contact: Nurse lead, first pediatric clinic.

Why the Decision Comes First

Leaders read the top of a page and may not read further. Putting the request first means that even a reader who stops after one sentence knows what is being asked. The request is also narrow and testable: a planned start at one more clinic with measurement, not a system-wide rollout. A modest request fits the strength of the evidence and is easier to approve.

It also sets up a natural review point six months later, when both clinics' measures can be compared.

Choosing the Numbers

The summary carries six numbers, each chosen because it answers a leader's question. The gap figures show why action was needed. The three result figures show what changed for children and for the clinic. The cost figure shows what it takes. Left out were p values, mean scores and implementation details, which matter to a committee but not to a decision about spread. The single line on national guidelines anchors the program in accepted practice (National Asthma Education and Prevention Program, 2007) without adding a citation list leaders will not read.

Framing Cost and Uncertainty

Cost is stated in nurse hours rather than dollars because hours are what the second clinic's manager will have to find, and because salary figures vary. Uncertainty gets its own short heading, in plain words, so that leaders cannot later say they were not told. A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to the use of evidence by policy makers found poor access to relevant, good quality research and lack of timely output among the most common barriers, and collaboration and relationships among the most common facilitators (Oliver et al., 2014). A timely, honest page delivered in person addresses both.

What the Page Leaves Out

Much of what the committee cared about is absent from the page. There is no framework, no literature review, no methods detail and no statistics beyond percentages. The implementation story, with its six adaptations and the failed test of change, is reduced to nothing, although it is the part most useful to the second clinic's staff; it will go to them separately in the handoff kit. The equity finding is kept in one sentence because leaders asked about language access during the project, and a reader who wants more can ask the nurse lead, whose name ends the page. Leaving things out is what makes the page readable in the two minutes a leader will give it.

Delivery

The page will not be sent cold. It will be handed to the senior nursing and ambulatory care executives at a 15-minute meeting arranged by the site mentor, in line with evidence that short briefs and face-to-face meetings reach decision makers more reliably than academic channels (Brownson et al., 2018). The first five minutes will cover the page; the rest will be questions. The nurse lead from the first clinic will attend, because leaders are more persuaded by the people who do the work than by the student who evaluated it.

Testing the Page

A draft was read by the site mentor and the clinic manager, who were asked to say in one sentence what the page wanted. Both named the decision correctly. The manager asked for the ongoing cost at the first clinic to be added, which led to the line on two half-day sessions a week. The mentor suggested removing a sentence on the theoretical framework, which leaders would not need, and it was cut.

Both readers finished the page in under two minutes.

Conclusion

The executive summary puts the decision first, carries six numbers that answer leaders' questions, frames cost in the terms the next clinic will face, states the evidence's limits in one plain heading and will be delivered in person with the nurse lead present. It is designed to lead to one decision: a measured start at the second clinic.

If leaders decline, the page will be revised with their questions in mind.

References

Brownson, R. C., Eyler, A. A., Harris, J. K., Moore, J. B., & Tabak, R. G. (2018). Getting the word out: New approaches for disseminating public health science. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 24(2), 102-111. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000000673

National Asthma Education and Prevention Program. (2007). Expert panel report 3: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma (NIH Publication No. 07-4051). National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Oliver, K., Innvar, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J., & Thomas, J. (2014). A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Services Research, 14, Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-2