| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| HCA-530 | HCA-530-O500 | Vendor Information Sheet Analysis Presentation | 90.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 100.0% |
| After comparing vendors, create a presentation for the capital purchase to your vice president. Address the following: Why would this be a good investment for the hospital? | 15.0% | Presentation does not explain why this would be a good investment for the hospital. | Presentation less than satisfactorily explains why this would be a good investment for the hospital. Reasoning is vague or illogical. Lacks support for claims. | Presentation explains why this would be a good investment for the hospital. Explanation is mostly clear and logical with some support for claims. | Presentation adequately explains why this would be a good investment for the hospital. Explanation is clear and logical with support for claims. | Presentation thoroughly explains why this would be a good investment for the hospital. Explanation is comprehensive and fully logical with relevant support for claims. |
| What are the operating costs you took into consideration? Explain. | 15.0% | Presentation does not explain what the operating costs are that were taken into consideration. Demonstrates no understanding of the topic. | Presentation less than satisfactorily explains what the operating costs are that were taken into consideration, lacks information. Explanation doesn’t make sense. | Presentation explains what the operating costs are that were taken into consideration. Explanation is mostly clear and accurate. | Presentation adequately explains what the operating costs are that were taken into consideration. Explanation is clear and accurate. | Presentation thoroughly explains what the operating costs are that were taken into consideration. Explanation is comprehensive and accurate. |
| What facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment? Explain. | 15.0% | Presentation does not explain what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment. Demonstrates no understanding of the facility considerations. | Presentation explains what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment in a less than satisfactory way. Lacks details that make sense. | Presentation explains what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment but lacks some clarity or details. | Presentation adequately explains what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment with strong details and clarity. | Presentation thoroughly explains what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment with relevant details that demonstrate an excellent understanding of the facility considerations. |
| What is a reasonable ROI? What are the minimum quality standards? | 15.0% | Presentation does not explain what a reasonable ROI is and what the minimum quality standards are. Demonstrates no understanding of the topics of ROI and quality standards. | Presentation explains what a reasonable ROI is and what the minimum quality standards are in a less than satisfactory way. Explanation is vague, inaccurate, or lacks evidence to support claims. | Presentation explains what a reasonable ROI is and what the minimum quality standards are but needs more clarity and relevant evidence to support claims. | Presentation adequately explains what a reasonable ROI is and what the minimum quality standards are with strong clarity and accuracy. | Presentation thoroughly explains what a reasonable ROI is and what the minimum quality standards are by providing relevant evidence to support meaningful claims. Explanation is comprehensive and accurate. |
| What training options would need to occur? | 15.0% | Presentation does not explain what training options would need to occur. Demonstrates no understanding of training options. | Presentation explains what training options would need to occur in a less than satisfactory way. Explanation is vague, illogical, or lacks evidence to support claims. | Presentation explains what training options would need to occur but lacks some clarity, logical reasoning, or relevant evidence to support claims. | Presentation adequately explains what training options would need to occur with strong details, clarity, and evidence to support logical claims. | Presentation thoroughly explains what training options would need to occur in detail with relevant evidence to support logical claims. |
| Layout | 10.0% | 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 inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident. | 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. | 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. | 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. | 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. |
| Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.) | 5.0% | 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. | 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. | Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part. | 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. | 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. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. | Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. | Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English. |
| 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% |
Sam 13
Rubric_Print_Format3.xlsx
