Explore the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Quality Forum and explain each organization’s key focus and its mission vision and values
Three bodies with three different functions, and the final question asks which reaches your shift. Getting the functions right is what makes that answer honest.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 23, 2026
Three organisations, three different jobs
The three bodies are frequently treated as interchangeable quality organisations and they are not, so getting their functions right is the substance of the post. The Health and Medicine Division, formerly the Institute of Medicine, is an advisory body within the National Academies that produces consensus reports; it has no regulatory authority at all, and its influence is entirely a matter of agenda-setting, which is why reports such as To Err Is Human and The Future of Nursing changed the conversation without changing any rule. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is a federal agency that funds research, produces tools and runs national data collections. The National Quality Forum is a private, multi-stakeholder consensus body that endorses measures, which matters because endorsed measures are what payers then adopt. Reading each body's own about page rather than a summary is worth ten minutes here, because the differences are stated plainly and are easy to get backwards from memory.
Get the chain right and the final question answers itself. The advisory body identifies a problem, the federal agency funds the research and builds the toolkit, the consensus body endorses a measure to capture it, and a payer adopts the measure into a payment programme, at which point it reaches a nurse as a documentation field, an audit or a bundle to comply with. That is the honest answer to what impact these organisations have on your daily work: the influence is real but indirect, and it arrives disguised as a workflow requirement rather than as a policy. Naming a specific example makes the post concrete, so pick one measure your unit reports on and trace it back up the chain. Note also that the discussion has a participation structure, three posts across two days with a reference each, so plan for that rather than writing one long post.
Likely learning objectives
- Distinguish advisory, federal agency and consensus-body functions.
- Trace how a quality concern becomes a bedside requirement.
- Recognise that influence without regulatory authority is still influence.
- Connect a national measure to a specific local workflow.
Assignment instructions
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Wk 4 Health and Medicine Division Discussion Change in health care is often related to quality. This discussion introduces you to the three major driving forces of the current emphasis on quality. Explore the Health and Medicine Division*, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the National Quality Forum, and explain each organization’s key focus and its mission, vision, and values. What impact will these organizations have on your daily work? NSG/451: Professional Nursing Leadership Perspectives Wk 4 Discussion – Driving Forces for Change [due Thurs] Discussion Topic Post a total of 3 substantive responses over 2 separate days for full participation. This includes your initial post and 2 replies to other students or to your instructor. This also includes an academic reference with each response as well as a minimum of 175 words. Due Thursday Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words: Change in health care is often related to quality. This discussion introduces you to the three major driving forces of the current emphasis on quality. Explore the Health and Medicine Division*, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the National Quality Forum, and explain each organization’s key focus and its mission, vision, and values. What impact will these organizations have on your daily work? Due Monday Reply to at least 2 of your classmates or to your instructor. Be constructive and professional in your responses. Please remember to include an academic reference and 175 words with each posting. Post a total of 3 substantive responses over 2 separate days for full participation. This includes your initial post and 2 replies to other students or your instructor. Copyright 2019 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved. NSG/451: Professional Nursing Leadership Perspectives • Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 • Leadership in Quality and Risk Management • • • • • Anbari, A.B., (2015). The RN to BSN transition: A qualitative systematic review. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 2, n/a Costa, V.T., Meirelles, B.H.S., & Erdmann, A.L., (2013). Best practice of nurse managers in risk management. Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem, 21(5), Doria, H., (2015). Sucessful transition from staff nurse to nurse manager. Nurse Leader, 13(1), 78-81. Jacobs, L., & Madrid, P., (2010). Herding CATs: A nurse manager’s dream to increase quality of care. Critical Care Nurse, 30(1), 63-64. Storch, J., Makaroff, K.S., Pauly, B., & Newton, L., (2013). Take me to my leader: The importance of ethical leadership among formal nurse leaders. Nursing Ethics, 20(2), 150-157. Journals • Nurse Leader Note: We do our best to ensure these citations are correct within our system’s constraints. We suggest checking your citations to make sure they meet current APA standards.
What NSG/451 Week 4 asks for
- 01An explanation of each organization's key focus.
- 02Each organization's mission, vision and values.
- 03An account of the impact these organizations will have on your daily work.
- 04A minimum of 175 words with an academic reference per response.
- 05Three substantive responses posted over two separate days.
Each body, then the route to your shift
The advisory body
Describe the consensus report function and its lack of regulatory power.
What the assessor is likely looking for
Influence explained without confusing it with authority.
The federal research agency
Describe research funding, tool production and national data collection.
What the assessor is likely looking for
Concrete outputs named rather than a mission statement quoted.
The measure endorsement body
Explain multi-stakeholder endorsement and why endorsement matters to payers.
What the assessor is likely looking for
The link from endorsement to payment adoption.
Missions, visions and values
Report each organisation's stated purpose from its own source.
What the assessor is likely looking for
Sourced statements rather than paraphrase.
The chain to the bedside
Trace a single measure from report through endorsement to your unit.
What the assessor is likely looking for
One worked example followed all the way down.
What it looks like on shift
Say how the requirement actually appears in daily work.
What the assessor is likely looking for
A documentation field, audit or bundle named.
Where each organisation states its own mission
Recommended databases
- AHRQ
- CMS
- NCBI Bookshelf
- University Library
Search sequence
- 1.Read each organisation's own about page for its stated mission.
- 2.Check which quality measures your own unit reports before choosing an example.
- 3.Trace one measure back to the endorsement body that approved it.
- 4.Find an academic source on measure adoption rather than citing only the websites.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
TeamSTEPPS 3.0
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality · 2024
An example of the federal agency's tool production reaching clinical teams.
Value-Based Programs
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services · 2025
Where endorsed measures become payment programmes.
The Future of Nursing
Institute of Medicine, NCBI Bookshelf · 2011
A consensus report from the advisory body, for its agenda-setting function.
HCAHPS: Patients' Perspectives of Care Survey
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services · 2026
A specific measure that reaches nurses as a workflow requirement.
The impact of hospital pay-for-performance on hospital and Medicare costs
Health Services Research · 2012
Evidence on what happens once measures drive payment.
Before you post to the Week 4 forum
Common mistakes
- Treating all three organisations as interchangeable quality bodies.
- Assuming the advisory body has regulatory power.
- Answering the daily work question with a general statement about quality mattering.
- Copying mission statements without saying what the organisation actually does.
- Posting once instead of meeting the participation requirement.
Submission checklist
- Are the three functions distinguished correctly?
- Have you noted which body has and lacks regulatory authority?
- Is the chain from report to bedside requirement traced?
- Does your daily-work answer name a specific measure?
- Have you met the three-post, two-day requirement?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read Brinevia's academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Maren Caldwell
MSN, RN, CNE
Medical-surgical nursing, pharmacology and NCLEX preparation
Maren is a registered nurse with over 15 years of clinical and educational experience in medical-surgical nursing. She writes on NCLEX preparation, patient care fundamentals, pharmacology and evidence-based practice.
Reviewed by
Dr. Tessa Redmond
DNP, RN, CNE
Evidence-based practice and clinical education
Tessa is a doctorally-prepared nurse educator. She reviews Brinevia content for clinical accuracy and alignment with current evidence-based guidelines.