Blog
WGU KMM1 Task 2: Service Line Development Guide and Example
You know what the assignment says. You still don’t know exactly what you’re supposed to write. That gap is normal, and it’s the reason most students lose time on KMM1 Task 2, not because the healthcare content is hard, but because the rubric asks for three different kinds of thinking and it’s easy to blur them together.
KMM1 Task 2 asks you to analyze the community health needs assessment in the Service Line Development Case Study, decide whether the healthcare facility is actually responding to those needs, and then write a health planning summary recommending what should happen next. The fastest way through it is to work directly from the case study and the rubric, not from general healthcare knowledge.
If you get through the case study and still feel stuck, a real WGU MBA grad can walk through it with you. Message Dan Palmer on WhatsApp at +1 564-544-6924.
WGU KMM1 Task 2: Service Line Development Assignment
Introduction
A community health assessment is a developmental process that is added to and amended over time. It is not an end in itself, but a way of using information to plan healthcare and public health programs. In the “Service Line Development Case Study,” there is a community health needs assessment that describes the state of local individuals’ health. This assessment allows the major risk factors, the causes of ill health, and the actions required to address these health risks to be identified.
Requirements
Your submission must represent your original work and understanding of the course material. Most performance assessment submissions are automatically scanned through the WGU similarity checker. Students are strongly encouraged to wait for the similarity report to generate after uploading their work and then review it to ensure Academic Authenticity guidelines are met before submitting the file for evaluation. See Understanding Similarity Reports for more information.
Grammarly Note:
Professional Communication will be automatically assessed through Grammarly for Education in most performance assessments before a student submits work for evaluation. Students are strongly encouraged to review the Grammarly for Education feedback prior to submitting work for evaluation, as the overall submission will not pass without this aspect passing. See Use Grammarly for Education Effectively for more information.
Microsoft Files Note:
Write your paper in Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx) unless another Microsoft product, or pdf, is specified in the task directions. Tasks may notbe submitted as cloud links, such as links to Google Docs, Google Slides, OneDrive, etc. All supporting documentation, such as screenshots and proof of experience, should be collected in a pdf file and submitted separately from the main file. For more information, please see Computer System and Technology Requirements.
You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.
A. Analyze the community health needs assessment in the case study by doing the following:
- Discuss major risk factors identified in the
- Discuss whether the healthcare facility in the case study is addressing the needs identified in the
B. Develop a health planning summary outlining recommendations of how to resolve any outstanding community health
C. Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or
D. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission
What Is WGU KMM1 Task 2 Asking You to Do?
Strip the academic language away and the task comes down to three questions:
- What major health risks does the community have?
- Is the healthcare facility already addressing those needs?
- What should the facility do about the needs that remain unresolved?
That’s it. Everything in the rubric maps back to one of these three questions, and answering them in order is what makes the assignment manageable.
Assessment → Risk Factors → Facility Response → Outstanding Needs → Recommendations
- Assessment: The community health needs assessment inside your case study is your source of truth. Read it before you write anything.
- Risk Factors: What the assessment says is actually harming this population’s health. This is A1.
- Facility Response: What the healthcare facility is currently doing about those risks, and whether it’s enough. This is A2.
- Outstanding Needs: Whatever is left over after you’ve credited the facility for what it already does.
- Recommendations: What the facility should do about those leftover needs. This is B.
Once you see the assignment as this five-step chain, A1 stops feeling like a random list and starts feeling like the first domino.
KMM1 Task 2 at a Glance
| Requirement | What You Need to Do | Evidence to Look For | What a Strong Response Does |
|---|---|---|---|
| A1. Major Risk Factors | Identify and discuss the major risk factors in the community health needs assessment | Named health conditions, behavioral risks, demographic patterns, environmental or socioeconomic contributors | Explains why each risk factor matters and connects it to a specific population, not just a definition |
| A2. Facility Response | Determine whether the healthcare facility is addressing the identified needs | Existing services, programs, outreach efforts, stated gaps or limitations in the case | Evaluates adequacy, not just describes services, and names the population or need still underserved |
| B. Health Planning Summary | Develop recommendations for resolving outstanding community health needs | The gaps you identified in A2 | Every recommendation traces back to a specific, named gap from A2 |
| C. Sources | Cite quoted, paraphrased, or summarized information | In-text citations, matching reference list | Every outside claim is attributed and every reference is actually used in the paper |
| D. Professional Communication | Write clearly, correctly, and professionally | Grammar, organization, tone, formatting | Reads like a document a healthcare administrator would actually receive and act on |
Before You Start Writing: Read the Case Study Strategically
Don’t open a blank document and start drafting paragraphs. Read the kmm1 task 2 case study strategically first, so every paragraph you write later is backed by something specific instead of general healthcare knowledge.
Give yourself 10 to 15 minutes to pull out:
- Major health conditions mentioned in the assessment
- Behavioral or lifestyle risk factors
- Demographic or population-specific concerns
- Access-to-care issues (insurance, transportation, provider shortages)
- Environmental or socioeconomic contributors
- Existing healthcare services at the facility
- Existing programs or interventions already in place
- Gaps in services the case study points to, directly or indirectly
- Any evidence that needs are or are not being addressed
Turn this into a simple notes table before you draft anything:
| Community Need/Risk | Evidence From Case | Existing Facility Response | Remaining Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| (fill in from your case study) | (quote or paraphrase the specific evidence) | (what the facility already does) | (what’s left unaddressed) |
Every fact in that table needs to come from your assigned case study. Nothing here should be invented, generalized, or borrowed from a different case.
How to Complete A1: Discuss Major Risk Factors
“Major risk factors” is more specific than it sounds. Before you write, make sure you’re clear on the difference between these terms, because mixing them up is one of the fastest ways to weaken A1:
- Risk factor: A condition or behavior that increases the likelihood of poor health outcomes (for example, low physical activity, limited access to care, food insecurity).
- Health condition: A diagnosed or prevalent disease itself (for example, diabetes, hypertension).
- Cause: The underlying driver behind a risk factor or condition.
- Symptom: An observable effect of a condition, not the condition itself.
- Community need: The broader gap that risk factors and conditions point toward, which is what your health planning summary will eventually respond to.
A1 is not a list of diseases. It’s an analysis of what’s driving poor health in this specific community.
Repeatable method: Identify → Support → Explain → Connect
For every major risk factor:
- Identify the risk factor by name.
- Cite the case-study evidence that shows it’s present.
- Explain why it matters to community health.
- Connect it to the specific population or health outcome the case study describes.
Weak vs. stronger
Weak: “Physical inactivity is a major risk factor.”
This is a fact without analysis. It doesn’t reference the case study, doesn’t explain why it matters here, and doesn’t connect to a specific population.
Stronger (illustrative structure, not a factual claim about any real case): “The assessment identifies low rates of physical activity among adults in the service area. This matters because inactivity is closely linked to chronic conditions like cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, both of which increase long-term demand on the facility’s services. Because the assessment ties this risk factor to the working-age adult population specifically, it directly affects the group the facility’s proposed service line is meant to serve.”
Notice the difference: the stronger version names where the evidence comes from, explains the health mechanism, and ties it to a specific population, exactly the depth A1 is asking for. Build your own version from what your case study actually says, not from this example.
How Many Risk Factors Should You Discuss?
There’s no arbitrary number to hit here unless your specific task instructions say otherwise. What matters is that the risk factors you choose are genuinely major, not just present.
Use these criteria to decide what counts as “major”:
- How prominently the assessment discusses it
- Its likely impact on community health outcomes
- Its frequency or prevalence, when the case provides that information
- Its relationship to significant health outcomes
- How much evidence the case actually gives you to work with
- Its relevance to the healthcare facility’s services or proposed service line
Listing every minor issue mentioned in the assessment dilutes your analysis. Three well-supported risk factors will outperform seven shallow ones every time.
How to Complete A2: Determine Whether the Facility Is Addressing the Needs
A2 asks for more than a description of what the healthcare facility does. It asks you to evaluate whether that response is actually adequate.
The comparison to make:
Identified community need → existing facility response → adequacy or gap
For each need, ask:
- What need did the assessment identify?
- What is the facility currently doing about it?
- Who does that existing service actually reach?
- Is the response sufficient, given the scope of the need?
- Does the case provide evidence of a gap?
- What population or need remains underserved?
The difference that matters
Description only: “The facility provides diabetes screening services.”
Evaluation (what A2 actually requires): “The facility provides diabetes screening services, which addresses part of the identified need. However, the case evidence suggests these services are only offered during limited weekday hours, which creates a gap for the working-age population identified as most at risk in the assessment.”
The first sentence describes. The second sentence evaluates, and it’s the second sentence that earns credit under A2. Base your actual evaluation on what your case study says, not on this illustrative pattern.
A1 vs. A2: Don’t Confuse These Two Sections
| A1 | A2 |
|---|---|
| Identifies and discusses major risk factors | Evaluates the facility’s response to those risks |
| Focuses on community health risks | Focuses on services and interventions |
| Answers “What are the major risks?” | Answers “Is the facility addressing them?” |
The most common way students blur these together is repeating A1 content in A2 without adding evaluation. If a paragraph in A2 only describes a risk factor again, it hasn’t done A2’s job yet.
How to Complete B: Develop the Health Planning Summary
B is where you move from analysis into recommendations. This is also where a lot of otherwise strong papers fall apart, because recommendations that don’t trace back to A2 read as generic advice rather than case-specific planning.
Framework: Problem → Evidence → Gap → Recommendation → Expected Benefit
Good recommendations are:
- Specific
- Relevant to the identified need
- Feasible for the facility described in the case
- Evidence-informed
- Connected to a named gap from A2
- Appropriate in scope for the healthcare facility
- Focused on measurable improvement where the case allows for it
Weak vs. stronger
Weak: “The facility should improve community health.”
This isn’t a recommendation. It’s a wish. It doesn’t say what the facility should do, who it affects, or which gap it addresses.
Stronger: “The facility could expand community-based preventive services targeting the population identified in the assessment, supported by outreach, education, and referral mechanisms to close the access gap identified in A2.”
The stronger version names an action, a population, and a mechanism, and it points directly back to a gap you already established. That’s the level of specificity to aim for once you plug in your own case study’s facts.
How to Make Your Recommendations Connect to A1 and A2
Every recommendation in B should be traceable back through a chain:
Risk factor → health need → existing response → gap → recommendation
Build this as a table before you draft your prose:
| Finding | Existing Response | Gap | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| (risk factor or need from A1/A2) | (what the facility does now) | (what’s missing) | (what should happen next) |
If you can’t fill in every column for a recommendation, that recommendation probably isn’t supported by your case study yet. Don’t include healthcare recommendations that sound reasonable in general but aren’t actually tied to something your case study identifies.
Illustrative Example of a Strong KMM1 Task 2 Approach
This is a fictional, illustrative example, not a template for submission. It exists to show you the reasoning pattern, not to give you sentences to copy. Your actual paper needs to come from your assigned case study.
A1 example
“The assessment identifies elevated rates of hypertension among adults over 45 in the service area, along with limited access to fresh food outlets in the surrounding zip codes. Both risk factors matter because they compound one another: dietary limitations make hypertension harder to manage, and unmanaged hypertension increases the likelihood of cardiovascular events, driving future demand for the facility’s cardiac services.”
A2 example
“The facility currently offers blood pressure screenings during annual wellness visits, which addresses detection but not ongoing management. The assessment notes limited enrollment in the facility’s existing nutrition counseling program, suggesting the current response reaches only a portion of the at-risk population identified.”
B example
“To close the gap between screening and ongoing management, the facility could pair blood pressure screenings with an automatic referral to its nutrition counseling program, rather than requiring patients to self-enroll. This directly targets the enrollment gap identified in A2 and could improve long-term hypertension management for the population most affected.”
C example
Any outside claim, such as a statistic about hypertension prevalence or the health effects of limited food access, would need an in-text citation pointing to a credible source (for example, the CDC or a peer-reviewed source), with a matching entry in the reference list.
D example
Notice the structure above: named findings, short paragraphs, a clear line from evidence to recommendation, and no filler language. That’s what professional communication looks like in practice, not just correct grammar, but a document that’s easy for an evaluator to follow section by section.
Why this works: each piece stays in its lane. A1 identifies and explains, A2 evaluates rather than just describing, and B builds a specific recommendation directly off the gap A2 identified. Reproduce that reasoning chain with your own case study’s actual facts.
What an Ideal KMM1 Task 2 Submission Structure Could Look Like
- Title
- Introduction/overview
- A1. Major risk factors
- Risk factor 1: analysis and evidence
- Risk factor 2: analysis and evidence
- Risk factor 3: analysis and evidence
- A2. Healthcare facility response
- Need 1 → facility response → evaluation
- Need 2 → facility response → evaluation
- B. Health planning summary
- Outstanding need 1 → recommendation
- Outstanding need 2 → recommendation
- Implementation considerations or expected outcomes, where appropriate
- References
This is a recommended organizational approach, not a mandatory heading structure, unless your actual task instructions say otherwise. Use the rubric as your controlling checklist.
How to Use Sources and Citations for KMM1 Task 2
Requirement C covers any content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized from an outside source. That includes:
- Direct quotations
- Paraphrased ideas
- Summarized findings or statistics
- Claims that rely on evidence you didn’t generate yourself
Every in-text citation needs a matching entry in your reference list, and every reference should actually be cited somewhere in your paper. Case-study information and outside sources should each be cited according to your course’s expectations and your task instructions.
Credible sources worth starting with:
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
- National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- Healthy People
- Peer-reviewed healthcare research
- Government health agencies
- Reputable healthcare organizations
Never invent an article title, author, date, DOI, URL, or statistic. If you can’t verify it, leave it out or keep researching.
Professional Communication: How to Satisfy D
Requirement D is checking whether your document reads like something a healthcare administrator would actually receive and take seriously. That means:
- Clear headings that make the document easy to navigate
- Logical organization that follows the rubric
- Concise paragraphs, not padded ones
- A professional, non-conversational tone
- Correct grammar and punctuation
- Appropriate transitions between ideas
- Accurate, consistent citations
- Consistent formatting throughout
Grammarly for Education is a useful tool for catching grammar and clarity issues before submission, but running it isn’t a substitute for actually checking your work against the rubric. Use it as one step in your editing process, not the whole process.
Common KMM1 Task 2 Mistakes That Can Hurt Your Submission
| Mistake | Why It’s a Problem | What to Do Instead |
|---|---|---|
| Listing risk factors without analyzing them | A1 looks unanswered even if the words are there | Use the identify, support, explain, connect method for every risk factor |
| Discussing diseases instead of risk factors | Misses what A1 is actually asking for | Focus on the behaviors, conditions, and contributors driving poor health, not just diagnoses |
| Describing facility services without evaluating them | A2 needs judgment, not just description | Explicitly state whether the response is adequate and why |
| Making recommendations unrelated to the case | Reads as generic advice, not case-specific planning | Trace every recommendation back to a gap identified in A2 |
| Repeating A1 content in A2 without new analysis | Fails to move the argument forward | Add evaluation: is the response enough, and for whom? |
| Giving recommendations without explaining the gap | Recommendation looks arbitrary | State the gap explicitly before proposing the fix |
| Using unsupported statistics or claims | Undermines credibility and may violate C | Cite everything that isn’t your own original analysis |
| Adding sources that aren’t actually used in the paper | Creates a mismatched reference list | Only include references tied to an actual in-text citation |
| Relying on generic healthcare recommendations | Doesn’t demonstrate real engagement with the case | Ground every recommendation in specific case-study evidence |
| Writing an unnecessarily long response | Obscures whether the rubric is actually addressed | Cut anything that doesn’t directly answer A1, A2, B, C, or D |
| Copying wording from examples or online sources | Academic authenticity risk | Rewrite every idea in your own words, using your own case-study facts |
| Treating an illustrative example as your case study | Produces a paper based on facts that aren’t real | Replace every illustrative detail with your assigned case study’s actual evidence |
A Fast KMM1 Task 2 Workflow for Busy WGU Students
- Read the rubric. Identify exactly what A1, A2, B, C, and D require before you touch the case study.
- Extract evidence. Pull only what’s relevant into your notes table.
- Build the analysis table. Risk → evidence → facility response → gap.
- Draft A1. Analyze the major risk factors.
- Draft A2. Evaluate the facility’s response.
- Identify outstanding needs. Only include needs your analysis actually supports.
- Draft B. Build recommendations tied directly to those gaps.
- Add citations. Verify every external claim.
- Edit for professional communication. Run Grammarly, then proofread manually.
- Perform a rubric audit. Check every requirement before you submit.
If step 3 or step 6 is where you’re getting stuck, that’s usually a sign you need a second set of eyes on your case-study interpretation, not more time staring at the same paragraph.
KMM1 Task 2 Final Submission Checklist
A1
- Major risk factors are clearly identified.
- Each risk factor is discussed, not just listed.
- Relevant case-study evidence is used.
- The analysis explains why the risk factor matters.
A2
- Facility responses are identified.
- The responses are evaluated, not just described.
- Outstanding gaps are clearly identified.
- Conclusions are supported by case evidence.
B
- Recommendations address outstanding needs.
- Each recommendation connects to an identified gap.
- Recommendations are realistic and relevant.
- Recommendations are specific enough to act on.
C
- Sources are acknowledged.
- In-text citations are used where appropriate.
- References correspond with citations.
- No sources or statistics have been fabricated.
D
- Writing is professional.
- Headings make the document easy to navigate.
- Grammar and punctuation have been checked.
- Formatting is consistent.
- The document has been reviewed for clarity.
Academic authenticity
- The final submission is written in your own words.
- Examples from this guide were not copied.
- Similarity results have been reviewed before final submission.
- The final work reflects your own understanding of the case study.
Rerlated WGU Content
WGU KMM1 Task 3: Service Line Development Guide and Example
WGU C200 Task 1: Personal Leadership Evaluation, Complete Guide + Example
WGU C203 Task 1 (MAM1): Personal Leadership Assessment and Profile – Complete Guide
How to Do an Ethical Lens for Performance Task 1: WGU C206 Guide
Frequently Asked Questions
What is KMM1 Task 2? It’s the WGU performance assessment task that asks you to analyze the community health needs assessment in the Service Line Development Case Study, evaluate whether the healthcare facility is addressing those needs, and develop a health planning summary with recommendations.
What does A1 mean in KMM1 Task 2? A1 asks you to discuss the major risk factors identified in the community health needs assessment, with analysis and case-study evidence, not just a list.
What is considered a major risk factor? A condition or behavior the assessment identifies as significantly contributing to poor health outcomes in the community, judged by its prominence, impact, and relevance to the facility’s services rather than a fixed number.
How do I know which risk factors to discuss? Prioritize risk factors that are prominent in the assessment, tied to significant health outcomes, and relevant to the facility’s existing or proposed services.
What does A2 require? A2 asks you to evaluate, not just describe, whether the healthcare facility’s current services and programs adequately address the risk factors and needs identified in A1.
How do I determine whether the healthcare facility is addressing the community’s needs? Compare each identified need against what the facility currently offers, then look for case-study evidence showing whether that response reaches the affected population sufficiently.
What is a health planning summary? It’s Requirement B: a set of recommendations, grounded in your A1 and A2 analysis, for resolving the community health needs that remain unaddressed.
How do I develop recommendations for B? Trace each recommendation back to a specific gap you identified in A2, and describe an action that’s specific, feasible, and appropriate for the facility described in your case.
Do my recommendations need to come from the case study? Yes. Recommendations should respond to gaps your case study actually supports, not general healthcare best practices unconnected to the assessment.
Do I need outside sources? You need citations for any information that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized from outside your case study, per Requirement C. Check your specific task instructions for any additional expectations.
How should I use citations? Cite paraphrased, summarized, and quoted material with in-text citations, and make sure every citation has a matching entry in your reference list.
How can I avoid making my KMM1 Task 2 response too generic? Name specific populations, specific facility services, and specific gaps from your case study in every section, rather than writing about community health in the abstract.
How can I check my work before submitting KMM1 Task 2? Run through the final submission checklist above, section by section, and confirm every rubric requirement is answered with case-specific evidence.
A Note on Academic Integrity
This guide and its illustrative examples are teaching tools meant to show you the reasoning pattern KMM1 Task 2 rewards. They aren’t meant to be copied into your submission. Your task instructions require that your work represent your own original understanding, and WGU applies a similarity checker and Academic Authenticity guidelines to verify that. Use the frameworks here to build your own analysis from your own assigned case study, in your own words.
If you’re also working through kmm1 task 3, the same case-study extraction habits and rubric-first approach carry over directly, since both tasks are built on the same Service Line Development Case Study.
Still Stuck on KMM1 Task 2? Get One-on-One Coaching
A guide can get you organized. It can’t sit with you and tell you whether your specific gap analysis actually holds up. If you want someone to check your A1 and A2 reasoning against your real case study, tighten your health planning summary, or just get unstuck before a deadline, that’s exactly what coaching is for.
📲 Message Dan Palmer, MBA on WhatsApp: +1 564-544-6924
Real WGU MBA graduate. Real rubric expertise. Coaching that works around your job, not a classroom schedule.