Case study

Exceeds Expectations

Meets Expectations

Needs Some Revisions

Needs Significant Revisions

Missing

Introduction

Case summary and problem definition

The report clearly summarizes the case and identifies the problems that Patton must solve

(6 points)

The report summarizes the case but misses some minor points

(5 points)

The report either misses some important points in the case summary or misses important points regarding the problems that Patton must solve

(4 points)

The report misses the summary of the case and some important points regarding the problems that Patton must solve

(2 points)

Missing many or all of the important points

(0 points)

Identification of key actors and their roles/positions

The report identifies all key actors and their roles/positions

(6 points)

The report identifies almost all of the actors and their positions but misses a few minor actors or their roles/positions

(5 points)

The report does not identify some important actors or their roles/positions

(4 points)

The report does not identify several important actors and their roles/positions

(2 points)

The report does not identify most or all of the actors and their roles/positions

(0 points)

Explanation of the political and administrative environment

&

Politics of the Administrative Structure

The report explains the political and administrative environment clearly and completely.

&

It discusses the politics of the administrative structure.

(7 points)

The report explains the political and administrative environment & the politics of the administrative structure well; however, it misses some minor points and leaves some points unclear.

(6 points)

The report explains the political and administrative environment and the politics of the administrative structure somewhat incompletely.

(4 points)

The report misses several important points while explaining the political and administrative environment and politics of the admin structure.

(2 points)

No explanation of the political and admin environment and the politics of the admin structure

(0 points)

Evaluation of the reorganization decision

- The report discusses whether the reorganization decision was based on political or technical rationality

- Identifies accountability issues before and after the reorganization

- Evaluates the impact of the reorganization decision on street level bureaucrats

(6 points)

The report does a good job in evaluating the reorganization decision (see the Exceeds Expectations cell) but has some flaws

(5 points)

The report misses a major point (e.g. political vs technical rationality, accountability issues, or street level bureaucrats) while evaluating the reorganization decision.

(4 points)

The report misses several important points while evaluating the reorganization decision (2 points)

The report does not evaluate the reorganization decision

(0 points)

Recommendations

Making recommendations to Patton regarding the problems identified

The report makes recommendations to Patton to address the problem it identified in the introduction. The recommendation takes the political environment and the administrative conditions into account.

The recommendation is successfully linked to the evaluation of the reorganization decision (part 2)

(6 points)

The report makes recommendations to Patton to address the problem it identified in the introduction.

The recommendation is linked to the evaluation of the reorganization decision but misses some points.

(5 points)

The report makes recommendations to Patton.

&

The recommendation is weakly linked to the evaluation of the reorganization decision (4 points)

The report does not adequately address a problem.

&

The recommendation

is not linked to the evaluation of the reorganization decision.

(2 points)

No meaningful recommendation

Or the recommendation does not make sense.

(0 points)

Mechanics

The report is professionally prepared. It is free of grammatical errors and typos. Formatting is good.

(4 points)

The report is professionally prepared.

It has some grammatical errors or typos. Formatting is good.

(3 points)

The report is professionally prepared.

It has major errors in grammar, spelling, or formatting.

(2 points)

The report fails to meet professional writing standards.

(0 points)