Determining Financial Viability

In about (900-1,100 words) that describe the following points:

  1. Explain the differences between finance, accounting, and financial reporting structures.
  2. Explain how they work together towards meeting the objectives of a strategic plan to meet financial viability.
  3. Explain how finance and accounting meet the auditing requirement of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), state regulatory bodies, and any other necessary accrediting bodies.

Include references to your textbook and two additional scholarly sources.

CLC – Productivity Measurement – Rubric

Benchmarking Data 16 points

Criteria Description

Benchmarking Data

5. Excellent 16 points

The presentation comprehensively explains how the benchmarking data was

collected and how the information could be used for an employee review.

4. Good 13.6 points

The presentation thoroughly explains how the benchmarking data was collected

and how the information could be used for an employee review.

3. Satisfactory 12 points

The presentation clearly explains how the benchmarking data was collected and

how the information could be used for an employee review.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 10.4 points

The presentation does not clearly explain how the benchmarking data was collected

and how the information could be used for an employee review.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The presentation does not adequately explain how the benchmarking data was

collected and how the information could be used for an employee review.

Educational Requirements 8 points

Criteria Description

Educational Requirements

5. Excellent 8 points

The presentation concisely explains the minimal educational requirements.

4. Good 6.8 points

The presentation thoroughly explains the minimal educational requirements.

Collapse All

3. Satisfactory 6 points

The presentation clearly explains the minimal educational requirements.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 points

The presentation does not clearly explain the minimal educational requirements.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The presentation does not adequately explain the minimal educational

requirements.

Licensing or Certi�cation 8 points

Criteria Description

Licensing or Certification

5. Excellent 8 points

The presentation comprehensively explains the licensing or certification process in

the selected state.

4. Good 6.8 points

The presentation thoroughly explains the licensing or certification process in the

selected state.

3. Satisfactory 6 points

The presentation clearly explains the licensing or certification process in the

selected state.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 points

The presentation does not clearly explain the licensing or certification process in

the selected state.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The presentation does not adequately explain the licensing or certification process

in the selected state.

Advancement Opportunities 8 points

Criteria Description

Advancement Opportunities

5. Excellent 8 points

The presentation comprehensively examines what career advancement

opportunities exist such as additional certifications or board certifications.

4. Good 6.8 points

The presentation thoroughly examines what career advancement opportunities

exist such as additional certifications or board certifications.

3. Satisfactory 6 points

The presentation clearly examines what career advancement opportunities exist

such as additional certifications or board certifications.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 points

The presentation does not clearly examine what career advancement opportunities

exist such as additional certifications or board certifications.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The presentation does not adequately examine what career advancement

opportunities exist such as additional certifications or board certifications.

Productivity Measurements and Evaluations 16 points

Criteria Description

Productivity Measurements and Evaluations

5. Excellent 16 points

The presentation succinctly and thoroughly describes the criteria used to meet

productivity measurements and evaluations to improve efficiency.

4. Good 13.6 points

The presentation thoroughly describes the criteria used to meet productivity

measurements and evaluations to improve efficiency.

3. Satisfactory 12 points

The presentation clearly describes the criteria used to meet productivity

measurements and evaluations to improve efficiency.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 10.4 points

The presentation does not clearly describe the criteria used to meet productivity

measurements and evaluations to improve efficiency.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The presentation does not adequately describe the criteria used to meet

productivity measurements and evaluations to improve efficiency.

Presentation of Content 8 points

Criteria Description

Presentation of Content

5. Excellent 8 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. Good 6.8 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. Satisfactory 6 points

The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some

inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 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. 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.

Layout 4 points

Criteria Description

Layout

5. Excellent 4 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. Good 3.4 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. Satisfactory 3 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. Less Than Satisfactory 2.6 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. 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 inappropriate contrasting colors.

Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.

Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction,

word choice, etc.) 4 points

Criteria Description

Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice,

etc.)

5. Excellent 4 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. Good 3.4 points

The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for

the target audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.

3. Satisfactory 3 points

Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 2.6 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. 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.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language

use) 4 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. Excellent 4 points

Writer is clearly in control of standard, written academic English.

4. Good 3.4 points

Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.

3. Satisfactory 3 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to

the reader.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 2.6 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Documentation of Sources 4 points

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as

appropriate to assignment and style)

5. Excellent 4 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment

and style, and format is free of error.

4. Good 3.4 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is

mostly correct.

3. Satisfactory 3 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some

formatting errors may be present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory 2.6 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to

assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 80 points

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.