Discussion: Certification and Licensure Plan

week 1: Nurse Practitioner Professional Issues
Psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners are committed to the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of psychiatric disorders in individuals and groups through psychotherapy and medication. Since the role of the PMHNP carries such responsibility, it is no surprise that there is a rigorous path to obtain and maintain your PMHNP certification and licensure.
PMHNPs currently have only one choice for certification, which is through the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC). The ANCC offers the “psychiatric/mental-health nurse practitioner (across the lifespan)” board certification (PMHNP-BC). In many states, board certification is a necessary prerequisite to receiving an NP license. Even if board certification is not a requirement for state licensure, it may be a requirement to receive privileges in various hospitals and other health care facilities. Malpractice insurance providers may also require board certification prior to issuing coverage to NPs. 
This week, you will review your state specific PMHNP certification and licensure requirements and scope of practice, as well as prescriptive authority issues. 
Learning Objectives
Students will:
Summarize nurse practitioner certification and licensure processes
Explain state-specific scope of practice for psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners
Explain state-specific restrictions or limitations for practice
Explain nurse practitioner prescriptive authority and DEA registration processes 
 
Discussion: Certification and Licensure Plan
Now that you are in the final course in your program, it is time to turn in earnest to preparing for certification and licensure. You will need to take and pass the national PMHNP certification exam. Once certified, you will then be eligible to apply for licensure as an advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) in the state desired. It will be up to you to ensure you are knowledgeable about the practice agreements, scope of practice, and prescriptive authority in your state. 
 
Although a movement called the APRN Consensus Model is attempting to standardize NP regulations nationally, it is still the case that requirements vary state to state. In some states, NPs may establish an independent practice without the supervision of an MD. Additionally, states are currently categorized as either allowing full practice, reduced practice, or restricted practice. Full practice states allow NPs to evaluate, order diagnostics, diagnose, and treat patients. They are licensed under the exclusive authority of the state board of nursing for the appropriate state. Many states may require prescriptive authority protocols in addition to collaborative agreement. 
 
In this Discussion, you will locate and review the practice agreements in the state in which you plan to practice, identify potential collaboration requirements in your state, and understand the certification and licensing process that you will need to follow.
To Prepare:

Review practice agreements in your state.
Identify whether your state requires physician collaboration or supervision for nurse practitioners, and if so, what those requirements are.
Research the following:

How do you get certified and licensed as an Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) in your state?
What is the application process for certification in your state?
What is your state’s board of nursing website?
How does your state define the scope of practice of a nurse practitioner?
What is included in your state practice agreement?
How do you get a DEA license?
Does your state have a prescription monitoring program (PMP)?
How does your state describe a nurse practitioner’s controlled-substance prescriptive authority, and what nurse practitioner drug schedules are nurse practitioners authorized to prescribe?

By Day 3 of Week 1
Post a summary of your findings on your state based on the questions listed above. Explain the types of regulations that exist and the barriers that may impact nurse practitioner independent practice in your state. Be specific. Also, describe what surprised you from your research.
 
Rubric Detail
 
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
 
Name: NRNP_6675_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

 
Excellent 90%–100%
Good 80%–89%
Fair 70%–79%
Poor 0%–69%
Main Posting: Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s) Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth Supported by at least three current credible sources
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the Discussion question(s) Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth Supported by at least three credible references
31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the Discussion question(s) One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module Post is supported by fewer than two credible references
0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the Discussion question(s) Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module Contains only one or no credible references
Main Posting: Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely Contains no grammatical or spelling errors Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style with minor errors
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors Contains some APA formatting errors
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style
Main Posting: Timely and full participation
9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation Posts main Discussion by due date
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Posts main Discussion by due date Meets requirements for full participation
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main Discussion by due date
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation Does not post main Discussion by due date
First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings Responds to questions posed by faculty The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
First Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources Response is written in standard, edited English.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
First Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation Posts by due date
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation Posts by due date
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation Does not post by due date
Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources Response is written in standard, edited English.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation Posts by due date
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation Posts by due date
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation Does not post by due date
 
Total Points: 100
Name: NRNP_6675_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
 

 

“? “

 Original Papers - Experience you can Trust

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more