Overview
For this assignment, you will be provided with a spreadsheet containing projected numbers for two different patient services programs. You will need to download the Program Projections [XLSX] Download Program Projections [XLSX]spreadsheet and use it to conduct your analysis.
Instructions
You are a member of the financial services department at Benson Regional Medical Center. The chief financial officer and chair of the capital budgeting committee, Dana Foster, has requested that you perform some capital analysis of two proposed patient service programs.
You have been provided with a spreadsheet that covers much of the projected financials for each of the proposed programs. Your task is to perform an analysis of that information and provide your recommendation to the capital budgeting committee as to which program they should pursue.
You have been asked to create a presentation to present your findings to the capital budgeting committee.
Using the provided spreadsheet, complete a capital budgeting analysis on the information provided in the spreadsheet. Specifically, you will need to identify a net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), and a discounted payback period for proposed Program #1 and Program #2. You will present your finding in a presentation.
- Design a PowerPoint presentation for the capital budgeting committee that includes all of the following:
- Create a brief 1-2 slide description of the proposed programs.
- Develop a comparison between the cash flow projects of each program from Year 0 to Year 5. Highlight the differences.
- Compare the results and interpretation of the discounted payback period between both programs.
- Compare the net present value (NPV) for each program.
- Compare the Internal rate of return (IRR) for each program.
- Develop a recommendation for which program the capital budgeting committee should take into consideration. Include supporting rationale.
Formatting Requirements
The presentation should be 8-10 slides in length and include speaker notes with each slide.
Resources
The Payback Period in Microsoft ExcelLinks to an external site. video walks you through computing a payback period in Microsoft Excel for a proposed capital investment.
The Solution 6: Choose a Project Based on NPV, IRR, and Payback PeriodLinks to an external site. video walks you through choosing a project based on NPV, IRR, and payback period.
The specific course learning outcome associated with this assignment is:
- Analyze a capital budget for a program within a healthcare organization.
| Week 8 Assignment – Capital Budget Analysis | ||
|---|---|---|
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
|
Create a brief description of the proposed programs.
|
15 to >13.49 pts
Exemplary
Created a brief description of each of the proposed programs based on the information in the provided spreadsheet. 13.49 to >11.99 pts
Competent
Created a description of each of the proposed programs based on the provided spreadsheet, but the description was lengthy (exceeds two slides). 11.99 to >10.49 pts
Needs Improvement
Created a description of each of the proposed programs, but the information was not based on the provided spreadsheet. 10.49 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not provide any description of the proposed programs. |
/ 15 pts
|
|
Develop a comparison between the cash flow projects of each program from Year 0 to Year 5. Highlight the differences.
|
22.5 to >20.24 pts
Exemplary
Developed a comparison between the cash flow projects of each program from Year 0 to Year 5 and highlighted the specific differences between the two. 20.24 to >17.99 pts
Competent
Developed a comparison between the cash flow projects of each program from Year 0 to Year 5, but did not highlight specific differences between the two. 17.99 to >15.74 pts
Needs Improvement
Developed a slide discussing the cash flow projects of each program from Year 0 to Year 5 but no comparison or highlighting of differences was made. 15.74 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not develop a comparison between the cash flow projects of each program. |
/ 22.5 pts
|
|
Compare the results and interpretation of the discounted payback period between both programs.
|
22.5 to >20.24 pts
Exemplary
Compared the results and interpretation of the discounted payback period between both programs. Identified specific differences and what those differences may indicate. 20.24 to >17.99 pts
Competent
Compared the results and interpretation of the discounted payback period between both programs. Identified specific differences but did not include what those differences may indicate. 17.99 to >15.74 pts
Needs Improvement
Compared the results and interpretation of the discounted payback period between both programs, but did not identify specific differences. 15.74 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not compare the results and interpretation of the discounted payback period between programs. |
/ 22.5 pts
|
|
Compare net present value (NPV) for each program.
|
22.5 to >20.24 pts
Exemplary
Compared the net present value (NPV) for each program and briefly described what those numbers indicate. 20.24 to >17.99 pts
Competent
Compared the net present value (NPV) for each program and but did not describe what those numbers indicate. 17.99 to >15.74 pts
Needs Improvement
Discussed the net present values (NPV) but did not make a comparison between the two programs. 15.74 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not compare net present value (NPV). |
/ 22.5 pts
|
|
Compare the Internal rate of return (IRR) for each program.
|
22.5 to >20.24 pts
Exemplary
Compared the Internal rate of return (IRR) for each program and briefly described what those numbers indicate. 20.24 to >17.99 pts
Competent
Compared the Internal rate of return (IRR) for each program but did not describe what those numbers indicate. 17.99 to >15.74 pts
Needs Improvement
Discussed the Internal rate of return (IRR) but did not make a comparison between the two programs. 15.74 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not compare the internal rate of return (IRR). |
/ 22.5 pts
|
|
Develop a recommendation for which program the capital budgeting committee should take into consideration. Include supporting rationale.
|
30 to >26.99 pts
Exemplary
Developed a clear recommendation for which program the capital budgeting committee should take into consideration. Included supporting rationale based on analysis of the provided spreadsheet. 26.99 to >23.99 pts
Competent
Developed a recommendation for which program the capital budgeting committee should take into consideration but did not include supporting rationale. 23.99 to >20.99 pts
Needs Improvement
Discussed the considerations for choosing a program but did not make a clear recommendation for the capital budgeting committee. 20.99 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not provide a recommendation. |
/ 30 pts
|
|
SWS formatting requirements.
|
15 to >13.49 pts
Exemplary
Presentation was 8–10 slides in length and included detailed speaker notes for each slide indicating what would be said during the presentation to the capital budgeting committee. 13.49 to >11.99 pts
Competent
Presentation was 8–10 slides in length and included some speaker notes for each slide, but the notes were not detailed and may or may not have indicated what would be said during the presentation to the capital budgeting committee. 11.99 to >10.49 pts
Needs Improvement
Presentation was less than eight slides or more than 10 slides in length and/ or included very few speaker notes. 10.49 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Presentation was less than eight slides and included no speaker notes. |
/ 15 pts
|