Organizational Goals

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
HLT-313V HLT-313V-O500 Benchmark Assignment – Performance Management Plan Proposal 200.0
Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (65.00%) Satisfactory (75.00%) Good (85.00%) Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points Earned
Content 70.0%
Organizational Goals 10.0% Proposal does not include a discussion of organizational goals. Proposal includes a discussion with specific organizational goals, but elements are missing or the submission is otherwise incomplete. Proposal includes a basic discussion with specific organizational goals. Minimal detail and/or support are provided. Proposal includes a complete discussion with specific organizational goals. Proposal incorporates most essential details and provides appropriate support. Proposal includes a clear and thorough discussion with specific organizational goals. Proposal analyzes supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.
Outline of Organizational Objectives 10.0% Proposal does not include an outline of organizational objectives. Proposal includes an outline of organizational objectives, but elements are missing or the submission is otherwise incomplete. Proposal includes an outline and brief evaluation of organizational objectives. Minimal detail and/or support are provided. Proposal includes an outline and brief evaluation of organizational objectives. Proposal incorporates most essential details and provides appropriate support. Proposal includes an outline and brief evaluation of organizational objectives. Proposal analyzes supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.
Rationale (C1.4) 10.0% Proposal does not include an evaluation of the use of the interdisciplinary approach. Proposal includes an evaluation of the use of the interdisciplinary approach, but elements are missing or the submission is otherwise incomplete. Proposal includes an evaluation of the use of the interdisciplinary approach. Minimal detail and/or support are provided. Proposal includes an evaluation of the use of the interdisciplinary approach. Proposal incorporates most essential details and provides appropriate support. Proposal includes an evaluation of the use of the interdisciplinary approach. Proposal analyzes supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.
Quality and Process Outcomes (C5.3) 10.0% Proposal does not include a description of the importance of quality and process outcomes within the scope of practice. Proposal includes a description of the importance of quality and process outcomes within the scope of practice, but elements are missing or the submission is otherwise incomplete. Proposal includes a description of the importance of quality and process outcomes within the scope of practice. Minimal detail and/or support are provided. Proposal includes a description of the importance of quality and process outcomes within the scope of practice. Proposal incorporates most essential details and provides appropriate support. Proposal includes a description of the importance of quality and process outcomes within the scope of practice. Proposal analyzes supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.
Summary of Relevant Performance Measures 8.0% Proposal does not include a summary of relevant performance measures. Proposal includes a summary of relevant performance measures, but elements are missing or the submission is otherwise incomplete. Proposal includes a summary of relevant performance measures. Minimal detail and/or support are provided. Proposal includes a complete summary of relevant performance measures. Proposal incorporates most essential details and provides appropriate support. Proposal includes a clear and thorough summary of relevant performance measures. Proposal analyzes supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.
Performance Baseline 7.0% Proposal does not identify or include a performance baseline. Proposal identifies a performance baseline, but elements are missing or the submission is otherwise incomplete. Proposal identifies and includes a performance baseline. Minimal detail and/or support are provided. Proposal identifies and includes a performance baseline. Proposal incorporates most essential details and provides appropriate support. Proposal identifies and includes a performance baseline. Proposal analyzes supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.
Performance Evaluation 8.0% Proposal does not include a discussion of a method of performance evaluation. Proposal includes a discussion of a method of performance evaluation, but elements are missing or the submission is otherwise incomplete. Proposal includes a basic discussion of a method of performance evaluation. Minimal detail and/or support are provided. Proposal includes a complete discussion of a method of performance evaluation. Proposal incorporates most essential details and provides appropriate support. Proposal includes a clear and thorough discussion of a method of performance evaluation. Proposal analyzes supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.
Definition and Discussion of Success 7.0% Proposal does not include define or include a discussion of success for the organization. Proposal includes a definition and/or a discussion of success for the organization, but elements are missing or the submission is otherwise incomplete. Proposal includes a basic definition and discussion of success for the organization. Minimal detail and/or support are provided. Proposal includes a complete definition and discussion of success for the organization. Proposal incorporates most essential details and provides appropriate support. Proposal includes a clear and thorough definition and discussion of success for the organization. Proposal analyzes supporting evidence insightfully and provides specific examples with relevance. Level of detail is appropriate.
Organization and Effectiveness 20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose 7.0% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction 8.0% Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format 10.0%
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% Appropriate template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Appropriate template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Appropriate template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
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%