| 7003NRS Leading Strategic Change for Service Improvement |
7003NRS Assignment Brief
Module Name: Leading Strategic Change for Service Improvement
Module Code: 7003NRS
Assignment Title: A Service Improvement Plan Proposal with an Executive Summary
Assignment Due: Thursday 23rd April 2026 18.00 UK Time
Assignment Credit: 30 credits
Word Count (or equivalent): 3000-words and 1000-words executive summary (+/- 10%).
Assignment Type: Applied Core Assessment. You will be provided with an overall grade between 0% and 100%. To pass the assignment you must achieve a grade of 40% or above.
Assignment Task
Choosing a subject
Reflecting on your experience in health and social care, either as a professional, volunteer, patient, service user or through any other involvement, identify an element of health or social care provision which could be improved as part of the organisation’s strategic priorities. Perhaps there are failures in quality of patient care; simple issues that could be improved or problems in the way that care is organised and delivered.
Critically, analyse the underlying causes of this issue and what works or does not work effectively. Consider the whole system of care, making sure you examine it from the perspectives of policy, community, management, staff practice team(s), and patient/service user. It is expected that you would include the drivers for change, the complexities of leading strategic change and the challenges of managing change in the organisation.
Propose some clear and achievable strategies for change that could improve the quality of care, clearly outlining how this would be implemented, the challenges and how it could be monitored and evaluated. Take into account the approach to leadership to deliver the strategy of change and what the impact is on teams of practitioners and stakeholders.
Your plan should be structured through clearly identified and logically organised sections, an example of which is given below:
Expected Structure Executive Summary (1,000 words)
The summary must be clear, standalone, and avoid introducing new information.
Purpose of the SIP (120–150 words) – Outline the issue and why it matters.
Summary of evidence & strategic drivers (200–250 words) Highlight policy/system drivers, priorities and problem framing.
Summary of proposed improvement (300–350 words) Describe the intervention, leadership and strategic justification.
Implementation overview (200–220 words) Outline key actions, timelines, stakeholders and feasibility.
Evaluation overview (120–150 words) Summarise success measures and evaluation approach.
Expected Structure Service Improvement Plan (3000 words)
Introduction & Background (400–500 words)
The introduction should give the reader a clear understanding of what the issue is, why it matters, and why you have chosen to focus on it. In this section, aim to:
Explain the problem clearly Describe the service issue you have identified in a straightforward way. Make sure the reader understands the nature of the problem and what aspect of care or service delivery it affects.
Provide brief background context Outline the relevant organisational, regional, or national context. This may include policies, population or service pressures, or important system features that help frame the issue. You may also include a short example or a patient/service-user journey if it helps illustrate the problem.
Explain why the issue is important – Make clear why the problem is significant for service quality, safety, experience, efficiency, or outcomes. Explain why this issue requires attention now and how it relates to strategic priorities or system challenges.
State the purpose and focus of your paper – Briefly outline what your Service Improvement Proposal will address. This sets the direction for the rest of the assignment and helps orient the reader.
Critical Analysis of the Problem (900–1,000 words)
In this section, you should demonstrate a clear and critical understanding of the issue you have chosen.
Your analysis should show:
Understanding of the issue and its scope – A clear explanation of what the problem is, who it affects, and why it matters within your service or system.
Awareness of the wider context and drivers for change – Consider policy, organisational priorities, resource pressures, and stakeholder or service‑user needs that shape the issue.
Use of relevant theories and concepts – Apply service‑improvement, leadership, change, or systems‑thinking concepts to help explain what is happening and why, rather than just describing them.
Critical analysis rather than description – Your writing should compare perspectives, question assumptions, and explain the significance of the evidence. Critical analysis involves examining the issue in depth and making reasoned judgements, not just reporting what sources say.
Evidence‑informed argument – Use a range of credible literature to support your points. Show that you have engaged with current debates, problems, or new insights in the field.
Plan for Service Improvement (900–1,000 words)
This section should outline a feasible and well-justified plan for improving the service issue you identified. It should explain what will change, why the proposed approach is appropriate, and how it will be delivered in practice. You should aim to:
Set out clear goals and intended outcomes – Briefly explain what your plan is trying to achieve. Identify the improvements you expect to see for patients/service users, staff, teams, or the organisation. These outcomes should link directly to the problem you analysed and be achievable within the context.
Explain your leadership approach and strategic reasoning – Describe how leadership will support the change. This may include how decisions will be made, how stakeholders will be engaged, and how your approach aligns with organisational priorities. Briefly explain why your chosen leadership and change approach makes sense for this context.
Outline the key actions and implementation steps – Provide a clear summary of what needs to happen to deliver the improvement, including:
- main actions
- who is responsible for each step
- expected timelines
- required resources (people, time, equipment, training, data, etc.)
Explain these concisely so the reader can see the practical shape of the plan.
Consider risks, challenges and feasibility – Briefly identify any risks, barriers, or potential unintended consequences. Explain how your approach, leadership style, or chosen tools help address these challenges. Show that the plan is realistic within the constraints of the system.
Justify your choices using appropriate theories or tools – You do not need to include every possible model, but you should use relevant change, leadership or project-management theories to support your decisions. The focus is on showing why your plan is appropriate and how theory informs the practical actions you propose.
Evaluation Strategy (400–500 words)
This section should explain how you will measure whether your service improvement has worked and how learning will be used to support ongoing improvement. Aim to:
Explain how success will be measured – Identify the key outcomes or indicators (e.g., quality, safety, experience, efficiency) that will show whether the improvement is having the intended effect. These may include KPIs, audit measures, performance indicators, or outcome metrics relevant to your setting.
Describe the evaluation approach you will use – Outline the method(s) you will use to collect evidence, such as:
- audits
- feedback from staff or service users
- observation
- measurement tools
- data routinely collected in your service
Keep this concise but clear enough for the reader to understand how the evaluation will take place.
Justify why this approach is appropriate
Briefly explain why your chosen evaluation method fits the context of your improvement. For example, it may be proportionate, feasible, aligned to organisational priorities, or suitable for measuring the specific outcomes you have identified.
Consider risks, challenges and limitations Acknowledge any factors that could influence the evaluation (e.g., data availability, staff capacity, timing, or system pressures). Explain how you will account for or mitigate these where possible.
Show how learning will be used to support improvement Explain how the findings will be shared, how they will inform next steps, and how you will monitor ongoing progress or sustainability. This may include review points, feedback loops, or adjustments to the implementation journey as the plan evolves.
Conclusion (150–200 words)
The conclusion should provide a clear and concise summary of the overall argument you have made throughout the Service Improvement Proposal. Aim to:
Bring the key points together – Briefly remind the reader of the problem you addressed, why it matters, and the strategic relevance of the improvement. Keep this high-level rather than detailed.
Summarise your proposed improvement and its value – Offer a short, coherent overview of the approach you have proposed and its intended impact for patients/service users, staff, or the organisation.
Reinforce the overall strategic argument – Highlight how your plan aligns with organisational priorities, service-improvement principles, and the context you analysed. This shows the reader that your proposal is both evidence-informed and feasible.
Avoid adding new information – A conclusion should not introduce new literature, new actions, or new arguments. It should simply draw the assignment together and give a sense of clarity and purpose
References
The APA 7th edition style should be used in this work.
Appendices
Appendices are not included in the 3000 words count but are a useful way of including information that you wish to refer to in your assignment for example, graphs, tables and timelines.
We recommend, however, that you do not put in your appendices content such as critical thinking or conclusions from literature reviews as that should be in the body of your assignment.
How the SIP structure maps to the Learning Outcomes:
| SIP Section | Primary LO links | What markers look for |
| Introduction &
Background |
LO1 | Strategic relevance; clarity of problem; link to priorities/policy/system context |
| Critical
Analysis of the Problem |
LO1, LO2, LO4 | Depth of critique; drivers/constraints; apt use of theories/models; systems/complexity awareness |
| Plan for
Service Improvement |
LO2, LO3 | Coherent, feasible plan; justified change approach/tools; leadership & strategy in action |
| Evaluation
Strategy |
LO2, LO4 | Appropriate KPIs/metrics; credible evaluation design; risk/uncertainty/learning loops |
| Conclusion (and coherence throughout) | LO3 | Joined-up strategic argument; alignment with organisational priorities |
Submission Instructions
Presentation & Submission
The deadline is Thursday 23rd April 2026. The submission link will be available approximately 2 weeks before the submission deadline.
All work must be submitted by the deadline given through the TURNITIN link on the AULA site for this
Module. University regulations for late submission state that work submitted late will receive a mark of 0%.
Each piece of work uploaded will overwrite the previous and the version remaining at the assignment deadline will be deemed as your final submission and marked accordingly.
DO NOT attempt to modify or resubmit your work after the strict assignment deadline as doing so will result in your work being marked as late and will therefore receive a mark of 0%.
All work should be presented in Microsoft Word or a compatible format, one and half or double spaced, in a minimum font size of 12 and the surround (margins) should be at least 2.5cm (1 inch).
You must provide a title page (template Appendix1), which includes:
- The module title and code
- The course you are studying
- The title of the assignment
- The date of submission
- The word count
- Your student number (Not Name)
- Your artificial declaration table
You have a 10% margin either side of this word count therefore: 2750-3250 words for the main work and 900-1100 words for the executive summary. A penalty of 10% of the mark for this work will be applied to submissions that exceed or are below the requirement by 10% or more. This coursework assesses all learning outcomes of this module.
Words contained within tables and figures in the main body of the assignment are NOT counted as part of the final word count, nor are references and appendices.
Use of AI Tools for this Assessment (Amber Category)
This assessment falls within the Amber category for AI use. AI tools may or may not be used to support the development of your work.
For this assessment, AI use is limited to checking purposes only. This includes using AI tools to proofread or check your work, to generate prompts for proofreading or checking, or to receive suggestions for improvements.
If you choose to use AI tools, you must clearly declare how AI was used on the front page of your submission. Your declaration should specify that AI was used for checking and briefly state which tool was used. Failure to declare AI use, or using AI beyond the permitted scope, will be treated as a breach of assessment regulations. Recommended template in Appendix 1.
Marking and Feedback
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked by the module team.
How will I receive my grades and feedback?
Provisional marks will be released once internally moderated. It is important to recognise that these marks are provisional until ratified by the Exam Board, after which marks will be released on SOLAR.
Feedback will be provided by the module team alongside grades release. The feedback can be accessed through the same submission link on the Aula page.
Your provisional marks and feedback should be available within 2 weeks (10working days).
What will I be marked against?
The pass requirement for this module is a minimum mark of 40%.
The mark given to an assignment depends on:
- The extent to which the assignment addresses the learning outcomes (see below).
- How well the assignment meets the criteria in the marking grid as shown at the bottom of this assignment brief.
Am I eligible for a resit assessment?
If you are not successful at the first attempt of any module, you are offered an automatic resit opportunity, you may focus on the same topic. If you pass the second attempt, the module mark will be ‘capped’ at 40%. If you fail the second attempt, a third attempt will be awarded. If you pass the third attempt, the module mark will be ‘capped’ at 40%.
Assessed Module Learning Outcomes
The Learning Outcomes for this module align to the marking criteria which can be found at the end of this brief. Ensure you understand the marking criteria to ensure successful achievement of the assessment task. The following module learning outcomes are assessed in this task:
- Critically evaluate factors which drive the development of organisation strategy.
- Critically evaluate the application of theories of change and project management to promote service improvement in health and social care delivery.
- Demonstrate critical application of theories of leadership and strategy to a service improvement plan in health and social care.
- Critically evaluate challenges in leading organisational change in complex systems
The following learning outcomes align with the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) Level 7 Strategic Management and Leadership Practice qualification (2024), units 704 and 705 and are assessed within this module to ensure students meet professional accreditation standards.
On successful completion of this module a student should be able to:
- Unit 704 CMI 1 Understand how to develop strategy
- Unit 704 CMI 2 Know how to develop strategy
- Unit 705 CMI 3 Understand the scope and context of strategic change
- Unit 705 CMI 4 Know how to propose a strategy for leading strategic change
All learning outcomes will be assessed by the Service Improvement Plan and the Executive Summary.
Assignment Support and Academic Integrity
If you have any questions about this assignment please see the Student Guidance on Coursework for more information.
Spelling, Punctuation, and Grammar:
You are expected to use effective, accurate, and appropriate language within this assessment task.
Academic Integrity:
The work you submit must be your own, or in the case of groupwork, that of your group. All sources of information need to be acknowledged and attributed; therefore, you must provide references for all sources of information and acknowledge any tools used in the production of your work. We use detection software and make routine checks for evidence of academic misconduct. All writers borrow material from other sources at some time, including ideas, information, images, charts, graphs, and statistics. Whenever you use information from other sources you must document the source in two ways:
- provide an in-text citation of the source in the main body of your writing.
- enter the source in the List of References at the end of your document. You must cite and reference every piece of information that you borrow from another source because it is the intellectual property of the individuals or groups of people who have produced it. All statements, opinions, conclusions, images, etc. which you have taken from someone
else’s work (books, journals, lectures, videos, TV programmes, newspapers, internet pages, etc.) should be acknowledged, whether the work is mentioned, described, reproduced, summarised, paraphrased or directly quoted by you. If the source is produced by an organisation or an official body instead of authors, this is known as a ‘corporate author’ and must be treated in the same way. For example, most websites are produced by a corporate author. This also applies to such organisations that write essays, devise IT coding etc. For further information please see the Postgraduate Student Handbook, see link here:
https://livecoventryac.sharepoint.com/:w:/s/externalstudentdocuments/EXmWKOGDRHZHgVR7vPkar
UkBRm4xA_IIIzBL-cBsPlmxyg?e=AbZvZP
It is very important that you review the TURNITIN/originality report for your work carefully to ensure accuracy in your use and referencing of sources.
It is your responsibility to keep a record of how your thinking has developed as you progress through to submission. Appropriate evidence could include: version controlled documents, developmental sketchbooks, or journals. This evidence can be called upon if we suspect academic misconduct.
If using Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the development of your assignment, you must reference which tools you have used and for what purposes you have used them. This information must be acknowledged in your final submission.
Please read the University Student Guides to Academic Integrity and Artificial Intelligence on the
Student Portal carefully: https://share.coventry.ac.uk/students/Registry/Pages/Academic-Integrity-andArtificial- Intelligence-.aspx
Definitions of academic misconduct, including plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and collusion can be found on the Student Portal. All cases of suspected academic misconduct are referred for investigation, the outcomes of which can have profound consequences to your studies. For more information on academic integrity please visit the Academic and Research Integrity section of the Student Portal.
Support for Students with Disabilities or Additional Needs:
If you have a disability, long-term health condition, specific learning difference, mental health diagnosis or symptoms and have discussed your support needs with health and wellbeing you may be able to access support that will help with your studies.
If you feel you may benefit from additional support, but have not disclosed a disability to the University, or have disclosed but are yet to discuss your support needs it is important to let us know so we can provide the right support for your circumstances. Visit the Student Portal to find out more.
Unable to Submit on Time?
The University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events happen which mean that you cannot submit your assessment by the deadline or sit a scheduled exam. If you think this might be the case, guidance on understanding what counts as an extenuating circumstance, and how to apply is available on the Student Portal.