| Course Code |
Class Code |
Assignment Title |
Total Points |
| HCA-530 |
HCA-530-O500 |
Benchmark – Capital Needs Essay |
100.0 |
| Criteria |
Percentage |
Unsatisfactory (0.00%) |
Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) |
Satisfactory (79.00%) |
Good (87.00%) |
Excellent (100.00%) |
Comments |
Points Earned |
| Content |
70.0% |
| In an essay (1,000-1,250 words) address the following prompts, citing four to six scholarly sources to support your claims: Explain the difference between the two and which financing would be appropriate and why, considering that this is a private, not-for-profit hospital. (C: 3.6) |
30.0% |
Essay fails to explain the difference between equity or debt financing and which financing would be appropriate considering that this is a private, not-for-profit hospital. |
Essay explains the difference between equity or debt financing and which financing would be appropriate considering that this is a private, not-for-profit hospital in a less than satisfactory way. Explanation is vague, illogical, and lacks relevant evidence to support claims. |
Essay explains the difference between equity or debt financing and which financing would be appropriate considering that this is a private, not-for-profit hospital in a basic way, but some reasoning doesn’t make sense. Some relevant evidence is provided. |
Essay adequately explains the difference between equity or debt financing and which financing would be appropriate considering that this is a private, not-for-profit hospital using sound reasoning supported by some relevant evidence. |
Essay thoroughly explains the difference between equity or debt financing and which financing would be appropriate considering that this is a private, not-for-profit hospital, using logical reasoning and strong details supported by relevant evidence. |
| Explain the term working capital and how it is related to debt financing for capital expenditures. |
|
| 20.0% |
Essay fails to explain the term working capital and how it is related to debt financing for capital expenditures |
Essay explains the term working capital and how it is related to debt financing for capital expenditures in a less than satisfactory way. Explanation is vague, inaccurate, or lacks relevant evidence to support claims. Reasoning doesn’t flow logically. |
Essay explains the term working capital and how it is related to debt financing for capital expenditures in a basic way, supported with some relevant evidence to support claims, but some reasoning doesn’t make sense. |
Essay adequately explains the term working capital and how it is related to debt financing for capital expenditures using reasoning supported with strong relevant evidence to support claims. |
Essay thoroughly explains the term working capital and how it is related to debt financing for capital expenditures using strong logical reasoning supported with relevant evidence to support claims. |
| Discuss the importance of a cash budget and how it can be used to assess the financial viability of this capital expenditure. |
20.0%
Essay fails to discuss the importance of a cash budget and how it can be used to assess the financial viability of this capital expenditure |
Essay discusses the importance of a cash budget in a less than satisfactory way and fails to address how it can be used to assess the financial viability of this capital expenditure Lacks relevant evidence. Reasoning doesn’t flow logically. |
Essay discusses the importance of a cash budget and explains how it can be used to assess the financial viability of this capital expenditure on a basic level, some reasoning doesn’t make sense. Lacks some relevant evidence. |
Essay adequately discusses the importance of a cash budget and explains how it can be used to assess the financial viability of this capital expenditure, using logical reasoning supported with some relevant evidence. |
Essay thoroughly discusses the importance of a cash budget and comprehensively explains how it can be used to assess the financial viability of this capital expenditure, using logical reasoning supported with relevant evidence. |
| Organization and Effectiveness |
20.0%
| Thesis Development and Purpose |
7.0% |
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. |
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. |
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. |
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. |
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Argument Logic and Construction |
8.0% |
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. |
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. |
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. |
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. |
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) |
|
| 5.0% |
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. |
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. |
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. |
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. |
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
Format
| 10.0% |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) |
5.0%
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. |
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. |
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. |
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. |
All format elements are correct. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) |
5.0%
Sources are not documented. |
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. |
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. |
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. |
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
| Total Weightage |
100% |
