| Course | NU 730 Systems-Based Practice |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 6 |
| Paper type | Budget impact analysis |
| Length | About 830 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Herzing University |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU 730 Unit 6
Budget Impact Analysis of a Mobility Technician Program on Two Adult Medical Units
Student Name
Department of Nursing, Herzing University
NU 730: Systems-Based Practice
Instructor Name
February 18, 2026
Budget Impact Analysis of a Mobility Technician Program on Two Adult Medical Units
The Proposed Change and the Problem It Addresses
The proposal is to add mobility technicians, unlicensed staff trained to walk and mobilize patients three times daily under nursing direction, to two adult medical units, 30 beds each, in a composite community hospital. Hospitalized older adults spend most of their time in bed, and low mobility during a hospital stay is associated with functional decline, new nursing home placement, and death (Brown et al., 2004). On these units, a one-week observation found that fewer than one in four patients able to walk were walked twice a day, largely because nurses and nursing assistants lacked time. A quality improvement project at an academic hospital that set daily mobility goals and supported them with staff found increased patient mobility and a shorter length of stay on general medicine units (Hoyer et al., 2016).
This analysis follows the principles of good practice for budget impact analysis, which call for a clear perspective, a defined time horizon, explicit assumptions, and scenario analysis (Mauskopf et al., 2007). Perspective: the hospital's operating budget. Time horizon: three years.
Costs, by Category, With Assumptions
Salaried hours: two full-time-equivalent mobility technicians covering 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., seven days a week, as a rotating team of three part-time staff. Assumption: hourly wage of $19, based on the hospital's current nursing assistant scale, with benefits at 30%; annual cost $19 x 2,080 hours x 2 FTE x 1.30 = $102,752.
Replacement coverage: none budgeted, because the program is additional to current staffing; absences are covered by flexing within the three part-time staff. Assumption: absence rate of 8% absorbed without overtime.
Supervision: physical therapy oversight at 0.1 FTE of a physical therapist for competency checks and protocol questions. Assumption: therapist cost of $95,000 including benefits; annual cost $9,500.
Training: a two-day orientation for technicians and a 20-minute session for 70 nurses and nursing assistants. Assumption: $4,200 in year one only.
Supplies and equipment: gait belts, two additional walkers per unit, and hallway seating. Assumption: $3,000 in year one, $600 per year thereafter.
One-time implementation: 40 hours of nurse manager and educator time to write the protocol and schedules, about $2,400.
Totals: year one, $121,852; years two and three, $112,852 each; three-year total, $347,556.
What the Organization Already Pays for the Problem
The current situation is not free. The two units discharge about 3,600 patients a year with an average length of stay of 4.6 days. Under Medicare's prospective payment and most commercial contracts, the hospital receives a fixed amount per admission, so each additional day costs the hospital its variable cost for that day. Assumption: variable cost per inpatient day of $450, from the hospital's cost accounting system, excluding fixed overhead. The units also recorded 38 falls last year, 9 with injury, and 21 patients discharged to skilled nursing facilities who had been walking independently before admission.
What the Program Releases if It Works
The primary release is shorter stays. Scenario A, conservative: length of stay falls by 0.1 day, releasing 360 bed-days a year, worth $162,000 in variable cost. Scenario B, moderate: a reduction of 0.3 day, releasing 1,080 bed-days, worth $486,000. Scenario C, no effect on length of stay: $0 released. Freed bed-days also create capacity: the emergency department currently boards admitted patients for a median of five hours, and each bed-day released is a bed available sooner.
Secondary releases are not included in the totals because the evidence for them in this setting is weaker: fewer falls with injury, fewer discharges to skilled nursing facilities, and possible reductions in delirium. They are noted as potential upside.
Net Impact and Break-Even
Annual net impact in the steady state, years two and three: Scenario A, $162,000 minus $112,852, a net saving of $49,148; Scenario B, a net saving of $373,148; Scenario C, a net cost of $112,852. Break-even: the program pays for itself if length of stay falls by $112,852 divided by ($450 x 3,600), or about 0.07 day, roughly an hour and forty minutes per patient. That threshold is well below the reduction reported in the academic project cited above, but that project was in a different hospital, so the analysis does not assume it will transfer.
Sensitivity and Recommendation
The result is most sensitive to two assumptions: the variable cost per day and the effect on length of stay. If the variable cost were $300 rather than $450, the break-even reduction would rise to about 0.1 day. If technician wages rose to $22, the annual cost would rise by about $16,000 and the break-even to about 0.08 day. The recommendation is a one-year pilot on both units with monthly measurement of length of stay, falls, and discharge destination against the previous year, with a decision at 12 months. Even under the conservative scenario the program roughly pays for itself, and the principal risk, no effect on length of stay, would be visible within the pilot.
References
Brown, C. J., Friedkin, R. J., & Inouye, S. K. (2004). Prevalence and outcomes of low mobility in hospitalized older patients. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52(8), 1263-1270. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52354.x
Hoyer, E. H., Friedman, M., Lavezza, A., Wagner-Kosmakos, K., Lewis-Cherry, R., Skolnik, J. L., Byers, S. P., Atanelov, L., Colantuoni, E., Brotman, D. J., & Needham, D. M. (2016). Promoting mobility and reducing length of stay in hospitalized general medicine patients: A quality-improvement project. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 11(5), 341-347. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.2546
Mauskopf, J. A., Sullivan, S. D., Annemans, L., Caro, J., Mullins, C. D., Nuijten, M., Orlewska, E., Watkins, J., & Trueman, P. (2007). Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices: Budget impact analysis. Value in Health, 10(5), 336-347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00187.x
Reading the NU 730 Unit 6 instructions
Unit 6 has you build a budget impact or cost analysis for a proposed change in your organization. Expect to describe the change and the problem it addresses, itemize costs with assumptions, estimate the costs of the current situation, project savings or revenue, calculate net impact or return on investment, and show how the answer shifts when the main assumptions change. Many versions ask for a recommendation. Check whether your section requires a particular format or time horizon. Numbers should come from published sources, public wage data or clearly stated assumptions; you do not need access to your employer's finance data. Showing your arithmetic step by step lets the grader follow and verify the result. Scenarios are often stronger than a single estimate.
How this NU 730 Unit 6 example is built
The analysis begins with the change and its purpose, linking mobility to the hospital-acquired functional decline Brown and colleagues described. Costs are broken into salaried hours, benefits, training, equipment and supervision, each with its assumption stated next to the number. The section on current costs shows what the problem already costs, which prevents the program from looking like pure expense. Savings are projected as three scenarios with released bed-days valued at a variable cost per day. Net impact is calculated for each scenario, and break-even is expressed as the length of stay reduction needed to cover costs. The sensitivity section tests the two assumptions that move the result most. The recommendation is qualified, proposing a pilot on one unit with a review point.
NU 730 Unit 6 rubric: what full points look like
The Herzing rubric for a cost analysis typically assigns points to the description of the initiative, cost identification, benefit or savings estimation, the financial calculation, sensitivity or risk analysis, the recommendation and writing. Cost criteria reward complete, categorized costs with sourced assumptions. Benefit points require realistic, evidence-supported estimates, such as Hoyer and colleagues' mobility program results. The calculation criterion gives full credit for correct arithmetic shown clearly. Sensitivity analysis is often what separates strong papers, because it shows the student understands uncertainty. The recommendation should follow from the numbers and be appropriately cautious. Writing points include tables where they help, clear labels on every figure and APA 7 citations for data sources and the method.
NU 730 Unit 6 help: mistakes that cost points
Unit 6 papers usually stumble on costs listed as a single total with no breakdown or assumptions. Another frequent problem is savings taken from a vendor or a single optimistic study without testing a conservative case. Students often forget benefits, training and supervision costs. Leaving out the cost of the current problem makes any program look expensive. Arithmetic errors cost points, so check every multiplication. Using total cost per day instead of variable cost overstates savings, since fixed costs do not fall when a bed is empty. A recommendation that ignores the sensitivity results reads as advocacy. Finally, label every figure with its source or assumption, because graders cannot credit numbers they cannot trace.
Get a NU 730 Unit 6 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 6 instructions and the rubric from your NU 730 classroom, plus the change you are pricing and any rates or utilization figures you are permitted to share. We write a custom example with categories, stated assumptions and a sensitivity check, and return it in 24 to 48 hours. The first custom sample is free.
More NU 730 papers and MSN samples
- NU 730 Unit 1: Systems analysis
- NU 730 Unit 2: Care coordination plan
- NU 730 Unit 3: Handoff failure analysis
- NU 730 Unit 4: Quality improvement proposal
- NU 730 Unit 5: Discussion post
- NU 730 Unit 7: Policy analysis
- NU 730 Unit 8: Outcome evaluation plan
- NU 726 Unit 6: Interprofessional collaboration analysis
- NU 760 Unit 6: Dissemination plan
- NU 780 Unit 6: Coalition and partnership plan
- NU 480 Unit 6: Ethical decision walkthrough
NU 730 Unit 6 questions, answered
Where do I get numbers I can actually cite?
Published wage data, professional association reports, agency utilization figures and the literature behind the change itself will carry most of an academic analysis. For anything local, state it as an assumption in the text rather than presenting it as fact. A paper that labels its estimates and shows the arithmetic is stronger than one with borrowed precision it cannot defend.
Can I use figures from my employer?
Only what you are permitted to share, and usually better expressed as a rounded assumption than as an internal figure reproduced in a submitted file. Say that the analysis assumes a given volume or rate and note that it reflects a facility of that size. This protects the organization and keeps the reasoning transparent, which is what the criterion is grading.
Do I need a formal return on investment calculation?
Check the instructions, since some sections ask for one and others want a cost picture with offsets discussed. Where a calculation is expected, show the inputs and the period rather than only the result, and keep the offsets conservative. A modest defensible return reads far better than a large one built on savings the organization would never actually recover.
Where can I find a free NU 730 Unit 6 sample paper?
You can read the whole NU 730 Unit 6 mobility program analysis here for free, with costs, scenarios, break-even and sensitivity. A custom budget impact analysis can be prepared for your own proposed change and setting.
How do I find cost numbers for a nursing budget analysis?
Use public wage data such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics, published cost studies and clearly stated assumptions. This sample states each assumption, including wage, benefits rate and variable cost per bed-day, so a reader can adjust any figure and redo the calculation.