HCR 262 Module 2 Writing Assignment 2: Professional Misconduct Mock Investigation Example

Reviewed by Emmett Rockwell, MBA Arizona State University Updated October 2026

This HCR 262 Module 2 sample is the second writing assignment of ASU's licensure and professional practice course, taken by students in the Health Care Compliance and Regulations bachelor's at ASU. In this assignment, ASU HCR 262 places students in the role of a compliance investigator, analyzing a professional misconduct scenario and carrying out a mock investigation. With the course scenario held in Canvas, the composite student uses a realistic case: automated dispensing cabinet reports show a night-shift nurse with far more opioid waste and overrides than her peers. She writes the investigation as a report, from intake and immediate patient protections through evidence gathering, the interview and findings to the reports owed to the state board of nursing.

CourseHCR 262 Health Care Licensure, Professional Development and Practice
ModuleModule 2
Paper typeMock compliance investigation report
LengthAbout 498 words, 4 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolArizona State University
ProgramBS in Health Care Compliance and Regulations
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for HCR 262 Module 2

1

Investigation Report: Suspected Controlled Substance Diversion on a Night Shift

Student Name

BS in Health Care Compliance and Regulations, Arizona State University

HCR 262: Health Care Licensure, Professional Development and Practice

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title takes the form of a real investigation report heading, which is the voice the assignment asks the student to adopt.
2

Investigation Report: Suspected Controlled Substance Diversion on a Night Shift

Allegation and Intake

On March 4, the pharmacy diversion analyst reported that automated dispensing cabinet data for the past 60 days showed Registered Nurse J. D., assigned to night shifts on a surgical unit, with hydromorphone withdrawals 3.2 times the unit average, frequent waste documented without a second witness and several withdrawals for patients who had been discharged. The report was logged as Case 24-017 and assigned to me as compliance investigator.

Immediate Actions

Patient safety comes first. Drug diversion harms not only the person diverting but also patients, who may go without pain relief or be exposed to infection from tampered medications, and coworkers and employers (Berge et al., 2012). The nurse manager reassigned J. D. to duties without controlled substance access pending the investigation, consistent with policy, and the investigation was kept confidential to protect her rights.

Investigation Plan

StepEvidence or actionPurpose
1Pull 90 days of dispensing cabinet transactions for J. D. and unit peersConfirm the pattern and compare
2Match withdrawals to orders, administration records and pain scoresFind doses not given or not ordered
3Review waste records and witness signaturesIdentify unwitnessed or late waste
4Interview witnesses named on waste recordsConfirm whether they observed waste
5Interview J. D. with a union or employee representative if requestedHear her explanation
6Request testing of returned waste if policy allowsDetect substitution
What this page is doingEach step names its purpose, which shows that the investigator is testing the allegation rather than assuming it.
3

Findings

Transaction review confirmed withdrawals well above peers. In 14 instances, hydromorphone was withdrawn with no corresponding administration documented; in 9 instances, waste was recorded with a witness who stated in interview that she had not observed it. Pain scores for several patients did not change after documented doses. In her interview, J. D. attributed the gaps to short staffing and late charting; she did not explain the discharged-patient withdrawals. The evidence supports a finding that controlled substance handling policies were violated and that diversion is likely.

Reporting Obligations

Licensure boards exist to protect the public by setting and enforcing standards of practice (Shi & Singh, 2021). Hospitals must report such conduct as required by state law, and the state board of nursing will conduct its own investigation and decide on discipline. The findings must also be reported to the pharmacy department for Drug Enforcement Administration loss reporting as required, and, if J. D. is terminated or resigns during the investigation, to the National Practitioner Data Bank where federal rules require. National Practitioner Data Bank reports are also a source investigators use to study patterns of misconduct (AbuDagga et al., 2016).

Fairness and Support

An investigation must be fair as well as thorough: J. D. was told of the concerns, given the chance to respond and offered referral to an employee assistance or professional health program, since diversion often signals substance use disorder that can be treated.

Recommendations

Require real-time witness verification for waste, review discrepancy reports weekly and train staff to recognize signs of diversion.

References

AbuDagga, A., Wolfe, S. M., Carome, M., & Oshel, R. E. (2016). Cross-sectional analysis of the 1039 U.S. physicians reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank for sexual misconduct, 2003-2013. PLOS ONE, 11(2), e0147800. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147800

Berge, K. H., Dillon, K. R., Sikkink, K. M., Taylor, T. K., & Lanier, W. L. (2012). Diversion of drugs within health care facilities, a multiple-victim crime: Patterns of diversion, scope, consequences, detection, and prevention. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 87(7), 674-682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.03.013

Shi, L., & Singh, D. A. (2021). Delivering health care in America: A systems approach (8th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

HCR 262 Module 2 instructions, in plain terms

Writing Assignment 2 is HCR 262's second applied writing task, built around a professional misconduct scenario that the student must analyze and perform a mock investigation, engaging with the scenario in the role of a compliance investigator. Write in that role: an investigation report is factual, organized and neutral, and it documents what was done, what was found and what happens next. The scenario and rubric are in Canvas. The course's readings on noncompliance and the role of licensure boards in protecting the public are the right frame, and real cases from the course reading list show how misconduct reaches boards. Keep the report free of speculation beyond what the evidence supports. Use initials or role titles instead of names to model the confidentiality a real investigation requires.

Inside the HCR 262 Module 2 example

Written as an investigation report, the sample moves through intake, immediate protective actions, an investigation plan in a table, findings, reporting obligations, fairness to the nurse and recommendations. Each plan step names its purpose. Findings are stated as facts with counts, then a measured conclusion that policy was violated and diversion is likely. The reporting section separates the hospital's duty to report from the board's own process. Two peer-reviewed sources and the course text support it, one on diversion as a multiple-victim problem and one on national misconduct reporting. Every claim in the findings is tied to a record or interview, as a real report would require. Its tone stays neutral.

HCR 262 Module 2 rubric: what earns full marks

Writing assignments are graded on their Canvas rubrics. Mock investigations are typically credited for staying in the investigator's role, prompt protective action, a logical investigation plan tied to evidence, findings that follow from evidence without overstating it, correct identification of reporting obligations, fairness to the person investigated and clear, professional writing. Reports lose credit when they assume guilt from the start, when they skip interviews or documentation, when reporting duties are missing or wrong and when the tone becomes accusatory. Clear separation of findings from recommendations is another common criterion.

HCR 262 Module 2 help from the desk

Structure the report the way real investigators do: allegation, actions, plan, evidence, findings, reporting and recommendations. Keep facts and conclusions separate. Name the agencies that must be notified and why, checking your state's rules. Protect privacy by using initials. Show fairness by recording the employee's response. If your scenario involves a profession whose board you do not know, the desk can help you identify its reporting rules. Use a neutral tone throughout; words such as appears, documented and stated keep the report factual. A short timeline of the investigation's steps, with dates, also helps readers follow it. End with recommendations that would prevent the problem, since compliance work looks forward as well as back.

Write yours, or have the desk draft it

This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.

Request this one custom, free All HCR 262 module samples

More HCR 262 and BS in Health Care Compliance and Regulations sample papers

HCR 262 Module 2 questions, answered

Where can I find a free HCR 262 Module 2 sample paper?

The full HCR 262 Module 2 sample is above: a mock investigation report into suspected controlled substance diversion by a nurse.

What is drug diversion in health care?

The transfer of a controlled medication from its intended patient or purpose to unauthorized use, such as by a clinician who takes it for personal use.

Who must be notified of nurse misconduct?

Typically the state board of nursing as state law requires, and for controlled substance losses the pharmacy's DEA reporting; some actions also go to the National Practitioner Data Bank.

What role does HCR 262 Writing Assignment 2 use?

The student acts as a compliance investigator conducting a mock investigation of a professional misconduct scenario.

Why remove a nurse from medication access during an investigation?

To protect patients while the facts are gathered, without deciding the outcome in advance.