| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn the E/M patient case scenario provided:• Assign DSM-5 and ICD-10 codes to services based upon the patient case scenario. | | 20 to >17.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% DSM-5 and ICD-10 codes assigned to the scenario are correct, with no more than a minor error. | 17 to >15.0 pts Good 80%–89% DSM-5 and ICD-10 codes assigned to the scenario are mostly correct, with a few minor errors. | 15 to >13.0 pts Fair 70%–79% DSM-5 and ICD-10 codes assigned to the scenario contain several errors. | 13 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% DSM-5 and ICD-10 codes assigned to the scenario contain significant errors, or response is missing. |
| 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn 1–2 pages, address the following: • Explain what pertinent information, generally, is required in documentation to support DSM-5 and ICD-10 coding. | | 25 to >22.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response accurately and concisely explains what pertinent documentation information is required to support DSM-5 and ICD-10 coding. | 22 to >19.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response accurately explains what pertinent documentation information is required to support DSM-5 and ICD-10 coding. | 19 to >17.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The response somewhat vaguely or inaccurately explains what pertinent documentation information is required to support DSM-5 and ICD-10 coding. | 17 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The response vaguely or inaccurately explains what pertinent documentation information is required to support DSM-5 and ICD-10 coding, or the explanation is incomplete or missing. |
| 25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Explain what pertinent documentation is missing from the case scenario, and what other information would be helpful to narrow your coding and billing options. | | 25 to >22.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response accurately and concisely identifies the pertinent misssing information from the case scenario and clearly identifies what additional information would narrow coding and billing options. | 22 to >19.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response accurately identifies the pertinent misssing information from the case scenario and identifies what additional information would narrow coding and billing options. | 19 to >17.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The response somewhat vaguely or inaccurately identifies the pertinent misssing information from the case scenario and identifies what additional information would narrow coding and billing options. | 17 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the pertinent misssing information from the case scenario or partially identifies what additional information would narrow coding and billing options, or this information is incomplete or missing. |
| 25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Finally, explain how to improve documentation to support coding and billing for maximum reimbursement. | | 15 to >13.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response accurately and concisely explains how to improve documentation to support coding and billing for maximum reimbursement. | 13 to >11.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response accurately explains how to improve documentation to support coding and billing for maximum reimbursement. | 11 to >10.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The response somewhat vaguely or inaccurately explains how to improve documentation to support coding and billing for maximum reimbursement. | 10 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The response vaguely or inaccurately explains how to improve documentation to support coding and billing for maximum reimbursement, or response may be incomplete or missing. |
| 15 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting - Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria. | | 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.... A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. | 4 to >3.5 pts Good 80%–89% Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.... Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive. | 3.5 to >3.0 pts Fair 70%–79% Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.... Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. | 3 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity <60% of the time.... Purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion were not provided. |
| 5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting - English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation | | 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors | 4 to >3.5 pts Good 80%–89% Contains 1-2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors | 3.5 to >3.0 pts Fair 70%–79% Contains 3-4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors | 3 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% Contains five or more grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding |
| 5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting - The paper follows correct APA format for parenthetical/in-text citations and reference list. | | 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% Uses correct APA format with no errors | 4 to >3.5 pts Good 80%–89% Contains 1-2 APA format errors | 3.5 to >3.0 pts Fair 70%–79% Contains 3-4 APA format errors | 3 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% Contains five or more APA format errors |
| 5 pts |
| Total Points: 100 |
