Description
Scenario:
You are a junior analyst at a 500-bed nonprofit hospital in a competitive metropolitan market. You have been asked by the CFO to work on the financial operating plan for the upcoming fiscal year. The finance department has stated that the hospital’s anticipated revenue is $60,000,000, with a 6% operating margin. The hospital administration is only allowing you to recommend up to a maximum of two projects to the CFO.
You have been asked to consider making a proposal for the following service line requests:
- A new EMR system, 10-year payback with $1,000,000 outlay. The system will update current the platform to meet new regulations and, according to the vendor, provide better clinical outcomes.
- Overhaul of the cardiovascular lab, rooms 2 and 3. Costs of $900,000 a room are estimated. The updates will generate a 3% return above what the hospital has historically seen due to advances in operational efficiencies.
- New parking garage with an estimated cost of $3,600,000 (can be amortized over 5 years). The garage will add an additional 125 covered parking spots on the campus.
- Purchase a 50-physician practice at a cost of $2,800,000. The group is also considering a similar offer at a competing hospital. The practice presently has a strong utilization in your facility.
Proposal:
In a 750-1,000 word proposal, answer the following questions:
- Name and describe three components of the health care finance system that are present in the assignment.
- Describe how the components you selected interact with one another and how this interaction informs your decision-making process.
- Explain the steps and information you would need to make your recommendations.
- Describe which two projects you would recommend and provide rationale.
- Explain why you would not recommend the other two projects and provide rationale.
- What if this hospital was a for-profit system, would your answer change? Why or why not?
Cite a minimum of three references to support your rationale.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
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 required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
This assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:
MPA: 4.3: Analyze how components of the health care finance system interact with each other.
HCA: 3.6: Develop and apply skills necessary to manage finances, evaluate financial performance, and develop financial plans at the departmental/organization level.
MBA: 5.1: Develop financial plans to support the viability of health care organizations.
Course Code
HCA-530
Class Code
HCA-530-O500
Criteria
Content
Percentage
70.0%
Three Components of the Health Care Finance
System
5.0%
Impact of Components on Decision-Making
Process (MPA: 4.3)
20.0%
Steps and Information Needed to Make a
Recommendation (HCA: 3.6)
15.0%
Project Recommendation (MBA: 5.1)
15.0%
Projects Not Recommended
10.0%
Hospital For-Profit System Recommendation
5.0%
Organization and Effectiveness
20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose
7.0%
Argument Logic and Construction
8.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0%
Format
10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
5.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
5.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Benchmark – Financial Operating Plan Analysis
Unsatisfactory (0.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is not included.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is not included.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is not included.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is not
included.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is not
included.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is not included.
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The
conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is
incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is used.
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format
is rarely followed correctly.
Sources are not documented.
Total Points
130.0
Less than Satisfactory (74.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is incomplete or
incorrect.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is incomplete or incorrect.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is incomplete or incorrect.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is
incomplete or incorrect.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is
incomplete or incorrect.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is incomplete or incorrect.
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not
clear.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some
sources have questionable credibility.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word
choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not
varied.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing
or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
Satisfactory (79.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is included but lacks
supporting detail.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is included but lacks supporting detail.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is included but lacks supporting detail.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is
included but lacks supporting detail.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is
included but lacks supporting detail.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is included but lacks supporting detail.
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The
argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument
logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources
used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the
thesis.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are
not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied
sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are
employed.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although
some minor errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Good (87.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is complete and
includes supporting detail.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is complete and includes supporting detail.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is complete and includes supporting
detail.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is
complete and includes supporting detail.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is
complete and includes supporting detail.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is complete and includes supporting detail.
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper.
Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and
appropriate to the purpose.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of
argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of
claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are
authoritative.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may
be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence
structures and figures of speech.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no
errors in formatting style.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
Excellent (100.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is extremely thorough
and includes substantial supporting detail.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is extremely thorough and includes
substantial supporting detail.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is extremely thorough and includes
substantial supporting detail.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is
extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting
detail.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is
extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting
detail.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is extremely thorough and includes substantial
supporting detail.
Comments
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the
paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper
clear.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
All format elements are correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Points Earned
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
HCA-530
Class Code
HCA-530-O500
Criteria
Content
Percentage
70.0%
Three Components of the Health Care Finance
System
5.0%
Impact of Components on Decision-Making
Process (MPA: 4.3)
20.0%
Steps and Information Needed to Make a
Recommendation (HCA: 3.6)
15.0%
Project Recommendation (MBA: 5.1)
15.0%
Projects Not Recommended
10.0%
Hospital For-Profit System Recommendation
5.0%
Organization and Effectiveness
20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose
7.0%
Argument Logic and Construction
8.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0%
Format
10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
5.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
5.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Benchmark – Financial Operating Plan Analysis
Unsatisfactory (0.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is not included.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is not included.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is not included.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is not
included.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is not
included.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is not included.
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The
conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is
incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is used.
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format
is rarely followed correctly.
Sources are not documented.
Total Points
130.0
Less than Satisfactory (74.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is incomplete or
incorrect.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is incomplete or incorrect.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is incomplete or incorrect.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is
incomplete or incorrect.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is
incomplete or incorrect.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is incomplete or incorrect.
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not
clear.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some
sources have questionable credibility.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word
choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not
varied.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing
or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
Satisfactory (79.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is included but lacks
supporting detail.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is included but lacks supporting detail.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is included but lacks supporting detail.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is
included but lacks supporting detail.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is
included but lacks supporting detail.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is included but lacks supporting detail.
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The
argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument
logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources
used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the
thesis.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are
not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied
sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are
employed.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although
some minor errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Good (87.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is complete and
includes supporting detail.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is complete and includes supporting detail.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is complete and includes supporting
detail.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is
complete and includes supporting detail.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is
complete and includes supporting detail.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is complete and includes supporting detail.
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper.
Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and
appropriate to the purpose.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of
argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of
claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are
authoritative.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may
be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence
structures and figures of speech.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no
errors in formatting style.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
Excellent (100.00%)
A description of the three components of the health care
finance system present in the scenario is extremely thorough
and includes substantial supporting detail.
A description of how the selected components interact with
one another and how this interaction informs the decisionmaking process is extremely thorough and includes
substantial supporting detail.
An explanation of the steps and information needed to make
a recommendation is extremely thorough and includes
substantial supporting detail.
A description of the selected projects and rationale is
extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting
detail.
A description of the projects not selected and rationale is
extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting
detail.
A rationale for changing the recommendation for a for-profit
hospital is extremely thorough and includes substantial
supporting detail.
Comments
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the
paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper
clear.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
All format elements are correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Points Earned
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Categories: