Business Plan

Executive Summary

(40 points possible)

The Executive Summary shows depth, breadth, and clarity in critical thinking when summarizing the key points of the Business Plan.

(36–40 points)

The Executive Summary fully summarizes the key points of the Business Plan.

(32–35 points)

The Executive Summary lacks depth, breadth, or clarity in critical thinking when summarizing the key points of the Business Plan.

(28–31 points)

The Executive Summary does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses key points related to the Business Plan.

(0–27 points)

Market Analysis

(85 points possible)

The Market Analysis shows depth, breadth, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing the key points related to the macro and micro implications of market competition, ACO payment incentives to the organization, and how the addition of the Rural Urgent Care will impact economic efficiency.

(78–85 points)

The Market Analysis fully addresses the key points related to the macro and micro implications of market competition, ACO payment incentives to the organization, and how the addition of the Rural Urgent Care will impact economic efficiency.

(68–77 points)

The Market Analysis lacks depth, breadth, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing the key points related to the macro and micro implications of market competition, ACO payment incentives to the organization, and how the addition of the Rural Urgent Care will impact economic efficiency.

(59–67 points)

The Market Analysis does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the key points related to the macro and micro implications of market competition, ACO payment incentives to the organization, and how the addition of the Rural Urgent Care will impact economic efficiency.

(0–58 points)

Financial Analysis

(85 points possible)

The Financial Analysis is correct and appropriately and accurately shows how the responses were determined.

(78–85 points)

The Financial Analysis is correct, but fails to appropriately and accurately show how the responses were determined.

(68–77 points)

Parts of the Financial Analysis are incorrect but appropriately show how the responses were determined.

(59–67 points)

The Financial Analysis is not accurate (zero points) or is mostly inaccurate and fails to show how the responses were determined.

(0–58 points)

Writing

(40 points possible)

The paper is well organized, uses scholarly tone, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, follows APA style, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate-level writing style.

Paper uses proper citations, and references are complete and properly written.

(36–40 points)

The paper is mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style and may have some spelling, APA, and writing errors.

Paper uses proper citations, and references are complete and properly written.

(32–35 points)

The paper is somewhat consistent with graduate-level writing style and may have some spelling, APA, and writing errors.

Paper uses few citations, or references were not complete and properly written.

(28–31 points)

The paper is well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting.

Paper was not supported by citations, or references were not completed.

(0–27 points)

Instructor comments:      

Total Score (250 possible points):

      points