SCORE

0% or 5%

§ No SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to Item requirements is evident; information is ANECDOTAL. (A)

§ Little or no DEPLOYMENT of any SYSTEMATIC APPROACH is evident. (D)

§ An improvement orientation is not evident; improvement is achieved through reacting to problems. (L)

§ No organizational ALIGNMENT ALIGN is evident; individual areas or work units operate independently. (I)

10%, 15%,

20%, or 25%

§ The beginning of a SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH APPROACHES is in the early stages of DEPLOYMENT in most areas or work units, inhibiting progress in achieving the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item. (D)

§ Early stages of a transition from reacting to problems to a general improvement orientation are evident. (L)

§ The APPROACH is ALIGNED with other areas or work units largely through joint problem solving. (I)

30%, 35%,

40%, or 45%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is DEPLOYED, although some areas or work units are in early stages of DEPLOYMENT.

§ The beginning of a SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to evaluation and improvement of KEY PROCESSES is evident. (L)

§ The APPROACH is in the early stages of ALIGNMENT with your basic organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

50%, 55%,

60%, or 65%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the OVERALL REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is well DEPLOYED, although DEPLOYMENT may vary in some areas or work units.

§ A fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement PROCESS and some organizational LEARNING, including innovation, are in place for improving the efficiency and EFFECTIVENESS of KEY PROCESSES. (L)

§ The APPROACH is ALIGNED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items(I)

70%, 75%,

80%, or 85%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is well DEPLOYED, with no significant gaps. (D)

§ Fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement and organizational LEARNING, including innovation, are KEY management tools; there is clear evidence of refinement and INNOVATION as a result of organizational-level ANALYSIS and sharing. (L)

§ The APPROACH is INTEGRATED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

90%, 95%, or 100%

SCORE

0% or 5%

§ There are no organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS or poor RESULTS in areas reported. (Le)

§ TREND data either are not reported or show mainly adverse TRENDS. (T)

§ Comparative information is not reported. (C)

§ RESULTS are not reported for any areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

10%, 15%,

20%, or 25%

§ A few organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS are reported; and there are some improvements /or early good PERFORMANCE LEVELS are evident in a few areas. (Le)

§ Little or no Some TREND data are reported, with some adverse or many of the TRENDS evident shown are. (T)

§ Little or no comparative information is reported. (C)

§ RESULTS are reported for a few areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

30%, 35%,

40%, or 45%

§ Improvements and/or Good PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported in many for some areas addressed in the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Early stages of developing Some TREND data are evident reported and a majority of the trends presented are beneficial. (T)

§ Early stages of obtaining comparative information are evident. (C)

§ RESULTS are reported for many areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

50%, 55%,

60%, or 65%

§ Improvement TRENDS and/or Good organizational PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for most areas addressed in Item requirements. (Le)

§ No pattern of adverse Beneficial TRENDS and no poor PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported evident in areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (T)

§ Some TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or BENCHMARKS and show areas of good to very good relative PERFORMANCE. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS address are reported for most KEY CUSTOMER, market, and PROCESS requirements. (I)

70%, 75%,

80%, or 85%

§ Current are Good to excellent PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for in most areas of importance to the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Most improvement Beneficial TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been sustained over time in most areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Many to most reported TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or BENCHMARKS and show areas of leadership and very good relative PERFORMANCE. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS address are reported for most KEY CUSTOMER, market, PROCESS, and ACTION PLAN requirements, and they include some projections of your future performance. (I)

90%, 95%, or 100%

§ Current Excellent organizational PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported in for most areas of importance to the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Excellent improvement Beneficial TRENDS and/or consistently excellent PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported have been sustained over time in most all areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Evidence of industry and BENCHMARK leadership is demonstrated in many areas. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS fully address KEY CUSTOMER, market, PROCESS, and ACTION PLAN requirements, and they include PROJECTIONS of your future PERFORMANCE. (I)

SCORE

2008 Baldrige PROCESS Scoring Guidelines (HEALTH CARE Actionable Version)

0% or 5%

§ No SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to Item requirements is evident; information is ANECDOTAL. (A)

§ Little or no DEPLOYMENT of any SYSTEMATIC APPROACH is evident. (D)

§ An improvement orientation is not evident; improvement is achieved through reacting to problems. (L)

§ No organizational ALIGNMENT is evident; individual areas or work units operate independently. (I)

10%, 15%,

20%, or 25%

§ The beginning of a SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is in the early stages of DEPLOYMENT in most areas or work units, inhibiting progress in achieving the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item. (D)

§ Early stages of a transition from reacting to problems to a general improvement orientation are evident. (L)

§ The APPROACH is ALIGNED with other areas or work units largely through joint problem solving. (I)

30%, 35%,

40%, or 45%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is DEPLOYED, although some areas or work units are in early stages of DEPLOYMENT. (D)

§ The beginning of a SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to evaluation and improvement of KEY PROCESSES is evident. (L)

§ The APPROACH is in the early stages of ALIGNMENT with your basic organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

50%, 55%,

60%, or 65%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the OVERALL REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is well DEPLOYED, although DEPLOYMENT may vary in some areas or work units. (D)

§ A fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement PROCESS and some organizational LEARNING, including innovation, are in place for improving the efficiency and EFFECTIVENESS of KEY PROCESSES. (L)

§ The APPROACH is ALIGNED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items(I)

70%, 75%,

80%, or 85%

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is well DEPLOYED, with no significant gaps. (D)

§ Fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement and organizational LEARNING, including innovation, are KEY management tools; there is clear evidence of refinement and INNOVATION as a result of organizational-level ANALYSIS and sharing. (L)

§ The APPROACH is INTEGRATED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

90%, 95%, or 100%

SCORE

2008 Baldrige RESULTS Scoring Guidelines (HEALTH CARE Actionable Version)

0% or 5%

§ There are no organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS or poor RESULTS in areas reported. (Le)

§ TREND data either are not reported or show mainly adverse TRENDS. (T)

§ Comparative information is not reported. (C)

§ RESULTS are not reported for any areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

10%, 15%,

20%, or 25%

§ A few organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS are reported; and there are some improvements /or early good PERFORMANCE LEVELS are evident in a few areas. (Le)

§ Little or no Some TREND data are reported, with some adverse or many of the TRENDS evident shown are. (T)

§ Little or no comparative information is reported. (C)

§ RESULTS are reported for a few areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

30%, 35%,

40%, or 45%

§ Improvements and/or Good PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported in many for some areas addressed in the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Early stages of developing Some TREND data are evident reported and a majority of the trends presented are beneficial. (T)

§ Early stages of obtaining comparative information are evident. (C)

§ RESULTS are reported for many areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

50%, 55%,

60%, or 65%

§ Improvement TRENDS and/or Good organizational PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for most areas addressed in Item requirements. (Le)

§ No pattern of adverse Beneficial TRENDS and no poor PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported evident in areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (T)

§ Some TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or BENCHMARKS and show areas of good to very good relative PERFORMANCE. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS address are reported for most KEY CUSTOMER, market, and PROCESS requirements. (I)

70%, 75%,

80%, or 85%

§ Current are Good to excellent PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for in most areas of importance to the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Most improvement Beneficial TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been sustained over time in most areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Many to most reported TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or BENCHMARKS and show areas of leadership and very good relative PERFORMANCE. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS address are reported for most KEY CUSTOMER, market, PROCESS, and ACTION PLAN requirements, and they include some projections of your future performance. (I)

90%, 95%, or 100%

§ Current Excellent organizational PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported in for most areas of importance to the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Excellent improvement Beneficial TRENDS and/or consistently excellent PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported have been sustained over time in most all areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Evidence of industry and BENCHMARK leadership is demonstrated in many areas. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS fully address KEY CUSTOMER, market, PROCESS, and ACTION PLAN requirements, and they include PROJECTIONS of your future PERFORMANCE. (I)

§ No SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to Item requirements is evident; information is ANECDOTAL. (A)

§ Little or no DEPLOYMENT of any SYSTEMATIC APPROACH is evident. (D)

§ An improvement orientation is not evident; improvement is achieved through reacting to problems. (L)

§ No organizational ALIGNMENT is evident; individual areas or work units operate independently. (I)

§ The beginning of a SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is in the early stages of DEPLOYMENT in most areas or work units, inhibiting progress in achieving the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item. (D)

§ Early stages of a transition from reacting to problems to a general improvement orientation are evident. (L)

§ The APPROACH is ALIGNED with other areas or work units largely through joint problem solving. (I)

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is DEPLOYED, although some areas or work units are in early stages of DEPLOYMENT. (D)

§ The beginning of a SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to evaluation and improvement of KEY PROCESSES is evident. (L)

§ The APPROACH is in the early stages of ALIGNMENT with your basic organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the OVERALL REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is well DEPLOYED, although DEPLOYMENT may vary in some areas or work units. (D)

§ A fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement PROCESS and some organizational LEARNING, including innovation, are in place for improving the efficiency and EFFECTIVENESS of KEY PROCESSES. (L)

§ The APPROACH is ALIGNED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items(I)

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, responsive to the MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is well DEPLOYED, with no significant gaps. (D)

§ Fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement and organizational LEARNING, including innovation, are KEY management tools; there is clear evidence of refinement as a result of organizational-level ANALYSIS and sharing. (L)

§ The APPROACH is INTEGRATED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

§ An EFFECTIVE, SYSTEMATIC APPROACH, fully responsive to the MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident. (A)

§ The APPROACH is fully DEPLOYED without significant weaknesses or gaps in any areas or work units. (D)

§ Fact-based, SYSTEMATIC evaluation and improvement and organizational LEARNING through innovation are KEY organization-wide tools; refinement and INNOVATION, backed by ANALYSIS and sharing, are evident throughout the organization. (L)

§ The APPROACH is well INTEGRATED with your organizational needs identified in response to the Organizational Profile and other Process Items. (I)

§ There are no organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS or poor RESULTS in areas reported. (Le)

§ TREND data either are not reported or show mainly adverse TRENDS. (T)

§ Comparative information is not reported. (C)

§ RESULTS are not reported for any areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

§ A few organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS are reported; and there are some improvements /or early good PERFORMANCE LEVELS are evident in a few areas. (Le)

§ Little or no Some TREND data are reported, with some adverse or many of the TRENDS evident shown are. (T)

§ Little or no comparative information is reported. (C)

§ RESULTS are reported for a few areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

§ Improvements and/or Good PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported in many for some areas addressed in the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Early stages of developing Some TREND data are evident reported and a majority of the trends presented are beneficial. (T)

§ Early stages of obtaining comparative information are evident. (C)

§ RESULTS are reported for many areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (I)

§ Improvement TRENDS and/or Good organizational PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for most areas addressed in Item requirements. (Le)

§ No pattern of adverse Beneficial TRENDS and no poor PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported evident in areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s KEY MISSION or business requirements. (T)

§ Some TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or BENCHMARKS and show areas of good to very good relative PERFORMANCE. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS address are reported for most KEY CUSTOMER, market, and PROCESS requirements. (I)

§ Current are Good to excellent PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported for in most areas of importance to the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Most improvement Beneficial TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been sustained over time in most areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Many to most reported TRENDS and/or current PERFORMANCE LEVELS have been evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or BENCHMARKS and show areas of leadership and very good relative PERFORMANCE. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS address are reported for most KEY CUSTOMER, market, PROCESS, and ACTION PLAN requirements, and they include some projections of your future performance. (I)

§ Current Excellent organizational PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported in for most areas of importance to the Item requirements. (Le)

§ Excellent improvement Beneficial TRENDS and/or consistently excellent PERFORMANCE LEVELS are reported have been sustained over time in most all areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION. (T)

§ Evidence of industry and BENCHMARK leadership is demonstrated in many areas. (C)

§ Organizational PERFORMANCE RESULTS fully address KEY CUSTOMER, market, PROCESS, and ACTION PLAN requirements, and they include PROJECTIONS of your future PERFORMANCE. (I)