Description
The purpose of this assignment is to discuss considerations when developing the budget for a business plan.
Create a presentation for your stakeholders regarding your funding needs in order to compete for budgetary allowance. In 12-15 slides (not including title and reference slides), address the following information:
Analyze the funding requirements needed to implement your business plan. Address both known expenses and potential hidden expenses.
Discuss ethical financial practices and describe why your budgetary needs are sustainable based on principles of corporate responsibility.
Discuss the impact finances have on structural and organizational models of health care. Explain how this directly relates to your business plan.
Describe how your business plan will directly benefit the organization’s strategic plan.
Include comprehensive speakers’ notes on each slide with substantive information.
Consult a minimum of three peer-reviewed resources.
Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” located in the Student Success Center, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.
Benchmark Information
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:
MS Health Administration – Health Care Quality and Patient Safety; MS Health Administration
3.2 Describe financial impacts on comprehensive structural and organizational models of health care.
5.4 Demonstrate sustainable and ethical financial practices based on principles of corporate responsibility.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Collapse All
Benchmark – Budget Presentation – Rubric
Funding Requirements
16.5 points
Criteria Description
Funding Requirements
5. 5: Excellent
16.5 points
An analysis of the funding requirements needed for both known and
hidden expenses to execute the business plan is thoroughly explored
and clearly explained with relevant details and support.
4. 4: Good
14.36 points
An analysis of the funding requirements needed for both known and
hidden expenses to execute the business plan is provided with
appropriate details and support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
13.04 points
An analysis of the funding requirements needed for both known and
hidden expenses to execute the business plan is present, but only
minimal detail or support is provided.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
12.21 points
An analysis of the funding requirements needed for both known and
hidden expenses to execute the business plan is incomplete or
otherwise deficient.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
An analysis of the funding requirements needed for both known and
hidden expenses to execute the business plan is not included.
about:srcdoc
Page 1 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Sustainable Budgetary Needs (B)
16.5 points
Criteria Description
Sustainable Budgetary Needs (C5.4)
5. 5: Excellent
16.5 points
A discussion of how the budgetary needs of the plan are sustainable and
ethical based on principles of corporate responsibility is thoroughly
explored and clearly explained with relevant details and support.
4. 4: Good
14.36 points
A discussion of how the budgetary needs of the plan are sustainable and
ethical based on principles of corporate responsibility is provided with
appropriate details and support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
13.04 points
A discussion of how the budgetary needs of the plan are sustainable and
ethical based on principles of corporate responsibility is present, but
only minimal detail or support is provided.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
12.21 points
A discussion of how the budgetary needs of the plan are sustainable and
ethical based on principles of corporate responsibility is incomplete or
otherwise deficient.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A discussion of how the budgetary needs of the plan are sustainable and
ethical based on principles of corporate responsibility is not included.
about:srcdoc
Page 2 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Financial Impact on Structural and Organizational Health
Care Models (B)
16.5 points
Criteria Description
Financial Impact on Structural and Organizational Health Care Models (C3.2)
5. 5: Excellent
16.5 points
A discussion of how finances impact structural and organizational health
care models in relation to the business plan is thoroughly explored and
clearly explained with relevant details and support.
4. 4: Good
14.36 points
A discussion of how finances impact structural and organizational health
care models in relation to the business plan is provided with appropriate
details and support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
13.04 points
discussion of how finances impact structural and organizational health
care models in relation to the business plan is present, but only minimal
detail or support is provided.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
12.21 points
A discussion of how finances impact structural and organizational health
care models in relation to the business plan is incomplete or otherwise
deficient.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A discussion of how finances impact structural and organizational health
care models in relation to the business plan is not included.
about:srcdoc
Page 3 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Benefit of Business Plan on Organizational Strategic Plan
16.5 points
Criteria Description
Benefit of Business Plan on Organizational Strategic Plan
5. 5: Excellent
16.5 points
A description of how the business plan will benefit the strategic plan of
the organization is thoroughly explored and clearly explained with
relevant details and support.
4. 4: Good
14.36 points
A description of how the business plan will benefit the strategic plan of
the organization is provided with appropriate details and support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
13.04 points
A description of how the business plan will benefit the strategic plan of
the organization is present, but only minimal detail or support is
provided.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
12.21 points
A description of how the business plan will benefit the strategic plan of
the organization is incomplete or otherwise deficient.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A description of how the business plan will benefit the strategic plan of
the organization is not included.
about:srcdoc
Page 4 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Presentation of Content
11 points
Criteria Description
Presentation of Content
5. 5: Excellent
11 points
The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress
and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and
advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the
main idea.
4. 4: Good
9.57 points
The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting
information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes
persuasive information from reliable sources.
3. 3: Satisfactory
8.69 points
The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show
some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each
other.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
8.14 points
The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a
strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of
information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas
is unclear.
about:srcdoc
Page 5 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Layout
11 points
Criteria Description
Layout
5. 5: Excellent
11 points
The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message
with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is
appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The
background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
4. 4: Good
9.57 points
The layout background and text complement each other and enable the
content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies
appropriately for headings and text.
3. 3: Satisfactory
8.69 points
The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately.
Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of
fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts
and does not enhance readability.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
8.14 points
The layout shows some structure but appears cluttered and busy or
distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background.
Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many
different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of
appropriate indentations of text.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings,
and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely
difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and
about:srcdoc
Page 6 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings,
indentations, or bold formatting is evident.
about:srcdoc
Page 7 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence
construction, word choice, etc.)
11 points
Criteria Description
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction,
word choice, etc.)
5. 5: Excellent
11 points
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech,
and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to
purpose, discipline, and scope.
4. 4: Good
9.57 points
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate
vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to
communicate clearly.
3. 3: Satisfactory
8.69 points
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
8.14 points
Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word
choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using
figures of speech appropriately.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are
evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose
indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them
inappropriately.
about:srcdoc
Page 8 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation,
grammar, language use)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language
use)
5. 5: Excellent
5.5 points
Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
4.79 points
Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be
present.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.35 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.07 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning.
about:srcdoc
Page 9 of 10
3/4/24, 4:48 PM
Documentation of Sources
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography,
etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. 5: Excellent
5.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. 4: Good
4.79 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and
format is mostly correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.35 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style,
although some formatting errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.07 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 110 points
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
about:srcdoc
Page 10 of 10
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
