Faith and Learning

Workshop Four

Faith and Learning

In the Parable of the Talents which begins in Matthew 25, Jesus likens the kingdom of heaven to a lord of great financial substance who was going away and he put his servants in charge of his goods, which he refers to as “talents.”  The Lord was drawing an analogy of what He Who is Lord of all has given us to work with until His return and He cites three recipients to typify various possible responses.  One way to view this parable is to examine the type of financial risk each of the three servants was willing to take.  Each received a sum directly relevant to his own ability.  The one who received five traded and made five more; the one with two also doubled his; but the one with only one buried his to make sure he didn’t lose it.  The two who took the risk and put their talents to work in the marketplace were rewarded handsomely for their faithfulness, but the one who took the “sure” way so as not to lose not only lost it, but was severely reprimanded and put out.

Those who took risks didn’t just stick their necks out, but had regard for the talents their lord had invested in them and they followed his example and invested them wisely, as well, for they also had respect for the lord.  Enemies and distracters surely confronted them, but they persevered in the plan their lord had entrusted to them.  Nehemiah had great distracters, one of whom was a man named Sanballat.

But it so happened, when Sanballat heard that we were rebuilding the wall, that he was furious and very indignant, and mocked the Jews. 2 And he spoke before his brethren and the army of Samaria, and said, “What are these feeble Jews doing? Will they fortify themselves? Will they offer sacrifices? Will they complete it in a day? Will they revive the stones from the heaps of rubbish—stones that are burned?”                                      Nehemiah 4:1-2

The Maxwell Leadership Bible says “Nehemiah had to contend with the same kind of pest that plagues most true leaders today - distracters who torment and do everything possible to interfere in the work of the kingdom.”  Then, Maxwell wrote when Sanballat’s first effort to stop the work by ridicule failed, he changed his game plan and targeted the wall-builders with tactics like fear, entrapment, and political maneuvering.  He suggested, “Expect distracters.  Don’t give them the time of day.  Trust God to protect you and your reputation.  Keep your hands to the plow and don’t look back.”  That’s what Nehemiah did with the talents God gave him.  He began with God in every detail and continued with God in every detail.  Nehemiah told his team:

“The work is great and extensive, and we are separated far from one another on the wall. Wherever you hear the sound of the trumpet, rally to us there. Our God will fight for us.” 

Nehemiah 4:9-10

Dear Lord, it is exciting to know that You not only want us to take risks, but that You also expect and command that we do so.  Of course, not foolishly sticking our necks out without the wherewithal to accomplish our goals, but prayerfully stepping outin faith with plans and provisions to succeed.In Jesus’ name, Amen!

Food for Thought from Jeremiah 15:13

Your wealth and your treasures I will give as plunder without price, Because of all your sins, Throughout your territories.

1. Click Here To Get More on This Topic......

Workshop FourObjectives

After completingWorkshop Four, you should be able to:  

1.      Review aspects of the capital budgeting process including the use of project classifications and post-audits.

2.      Discuss the uniqueness that occurs in capital budgeting for health services.

3.      Explain key elements in the cash flow estimation, breakeven analysis, and profitability analysis.

4.      Demonstrate a working knowledge of the capital budgeting process.

5.      Summarize the types of risks related to capital budgeting decisions and how it is incorporated into the budgeting process.

6.      Discuss techniques used in a project risk assessment.

7.      Conduct a project risk assessment.

8.      Discuss several types of real options and their impact on a project’s value.

Assignments

Activity 4.1: Read and Review

Gapenski, L. (2010).Understanding Healthcare Financial Management.(6^thed.). Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press.

1.      Read the following in the Understanding Healthcare Financial Management:

a.       Chapter 11 – The Basics of Capital Budgeting

b.      Chapter 12 – Project Risk Analysis

c.       Chapter 16 – Business Valuation, Mergers, and Acquisitions

Activity 4.2:Submission - Chapter Problems (25 points)

Chapter problem assignments allow you to demonstrate your understanding of how to formulate and solve various types of financial management problems used in the decision making process.

Each assigned chapter problem is worth five points and requires you to present your solutions using Microsoft Excel.

1. Complete the following problems located on the text book’s companion web site http://www.ache.org/pubs/hap_companion/book.cfm?pc=WWW1-2164:
   Note: You may want to save the Excel Spreadsheet from the website to your desktop before you start to work on the problems.

a.       Chapter 11

                                                              i.      Explore the Spreadsheet Model

                                                            ii.      Solve End-of-Chapter Problems 1 and 2

b.      Chapter 12

                                                              i.      Explore the Spreadsheet Model

                                                            ii.      Solve End-of-Chapter Problems 1 and 2

c.       Chapter 16

                                                              i.      Explore the Spreadsheet Model

                                                            ii.      Solve End-of-Chapter Problem 1

2.      Save your work in the website Excel document. Title your saved document WS4 A2 along with your name.

3.      Submit the assignment via the WS4 Chapter Problems -Submit Assignments in the Workshop Four folder by the end of the workshop.

Reminder:If you need assistance in solving any of this Workshop’s problems, you may post your questions in the Chapter Problems Helpdiscussion forum under the Workshop Four thread. You and your classmates can discuss possible solutions. Your instructor will review your comments and help to guide you in your solutions. This forum is an opportunity for you to collaborate, as a class, in solving health care problems.

1. Click Here To Get More on This Topic......

Activity 4.3:  Discussion - Annual Report #4 (40 points)

Approach this assignment from the perspective of a financial manager working in a healthcare facility.

1. Locate a healthcare organization’s annual report online. You might find the following resource particularly helpful:  http://www.annualreports.com.
2. Post your selected organization in the WS4 Annual Reportdiscussion forum in the Workshop Four folder.  Organizations will be assigned on a first come, first serve basis.  Duplicate organizations must be approved by the facilitator.
3. In the WS4 Annual Report discussionforumpost the following:
1. The URL of your organization’s annual report
2. A list of three questions inferred from the report that are relevant to material presented in Workshop Four (i.e., capital budgeting and project risks analysis).
4. Approach each annual report from the perspective of a financial manager working in a health care facility.
5. Ask questions that have objective answers as well as some that require more thought and consideration (i.e., are subjective in nature).
6. Post your work byDay 3.
7. Participation:  Respond to at least 2 other postings and attempt to answer at least one of their questions regarding the report presented.
8. Refer to the Annual Report Grading Rubric located below for additional details regarding grading and expectations.

 

Annual Report Grading Rubric

Evaluation Criteria	Possible points
Presented at least three (3) questions inferred from the report that are relevant to materials presented during the active week.	10
Presented an annual report that is less than 12 months old and related to the topics and objectives for the active week.	5
Included a URL and correctly formatted APA reference for the source of the annual report.	5
Participation (Refer to the Day 3Discussion Grading Rubric below)	20
Total	40

Day 3 Discussion Grading Rubric
Quality Criteria	Student’s contributions: ·  Are well-developed (at least a full paragraph). ·  Provide clear evidence of critical thinking (analysis, synthesis, evaluation, or application). ·  Introduce new ideas.	Student’s contributions: ·  Show some thought development. ·  Provide evidence of some critical thinking. ·  Expands on the ideas of others.	Student’s contributions: · Show nominal thought development. · Provide only the beginnings of critical thinking. · Do not add to the discussion.	Student’s contributions: · Show no thought development. · Are mostly reiterations of the textbook or other student’sposts. · Detract from the discussion.
Points	8-7 Points	6-5 Points	4-3 Points	2-0 Points
Timeliness Criteria – Does not pertain to response postings	·  Initial assignment posting is done by day 3 of the workshop (Thursday).	·  Initial assignment posting is done by day 4 of the workshop (Friday).	· Initial assignment posting is done by day 5 of the workshop (Saturday).	· Initial assignment posting is done by day 6 (Sunday) or later.
Points	6 Points	5 Points	4 Points	3 Points
Interaction Criteria	·  Student makesa minimum of 2responses to other students and/or the facilitator on day 6or before when discussion threads are active and flowing.	·   Student makes a minimum of 2responses to other students and/or the facilitator on day 7OR1 responseday6or before.	Student makes only 1 response to other students and/or the facilitator on the last day of the workshop, day 7.	20 Total Points Possible
Points	6-4 Points	3-2 Points	1 Point
Revised 2.18.2011

Activity 4.4: Discussion - Case Study (40 points)

Each case study assignment is designed to provide you with opportunities to apply concepts and strategies covered in our readings and discussions to real world health care finance scenarios. Cases are both directed and non-directed. Directed means that some questions are specific, while non-directed means that you are allowed flexibility in deriving solutions.

Overview:   This case focuses on break-even analysis for an unprofitable walk-in clinic owned by a hospital. Because the spreadsheet model for this case does the busywork, you can concentrate on the problems inherent in break-even analysis and its value to managers in making service decisions.

1. Read Case 6: Columbia Memorial Hospital on page 49 in the Cases in Healthcare Finance text.
2. Complete the case by addressing all issues and questions presented.
3. You are welcome to take advantage of the student spreadsheet models for this case at http://www.ache.org/books/FinanceCases4.
4. Post your work to the Columbia Memorialdiscussion forum in the Workshop Four folder byDay 5.
5. Participation:  Respond to at least 2 other postings. Ask insightful questions. Provide topic related and meaningful examples, comments, etc.

6.      Refer to the Case Studies Rubric located below for additional details regarding grading and expectations.

Case Studies Grading Rubric

Evaluation Criteria	Possible Points
The response accurately identifies issues and opportunities presented in the case.	4
The response provides a feasible solution to issues and opportunities presented in the case.	4
The response incorporates material covered in readings and discussions.	4
Solution and rationale are presented in a logically and seamlessly manner.	4
The response includes an Excel spreadsheet detailing how solutions were derived.	4
Participation (Refer to the Day 5Discussion Grading Rubric)	20
Total	40

Day 5 Discussion Grading Rubric
Quality Criteria	Student’s contributions: ·  Are well-developed (at least a full paragraph). ·  Provide clear evidence of critical thinking (analysis, synthesis, evaluation, or application). ·  Introduce new ideas.	Student’s contributions: ·  Show some thought development. ·  Provide evidence of some critical thinking. ·  Expands on the ideas of others.	Student’s contributions: · Show nominal thought development. · Provide only the beginnings of critical thinking. · Do not add to the discussion.	Student’s contributions: · Show no thought development. · Are mostly reiterations of the textbook or other student’sposts. · Detract from the discussion.
Points	8-7 Points	6-5 Points	4-3 Points	2-0 Points
Timeliness Criteria – Does not pertain to response postings	·  Initial assignment posting is done by day 5 of the workshop (Saturday).	·  Initial assignment posting is done by day 6of the workshop (Sunday).	· Initial assignment posting is done by day 7of the workshop (Monday).
Points	6 Points	5 Points	3 Points
Interaction Criteria	·  Student makesa minimum of 2responses to other students and/or the facilitator on day 6or before when discussion threads are active and flowing.	·   Student makes a minimum of 2responses to other students and/or the facilitator on day 7OR1 responseday6or before.	Student makes only 1 response to other students and/or the facilitator on the last day of the workshop, day 7.	20 Total Points Possible
Points	6-4 Points	3-2 Points	1 Point
Revised 2.18.2011

Activity 4.5: Submission - Risk Analysis (20 points)

1.      Apply what you have learned about qualitative and quantitative risk analysis in Chapter 12 to a scenario of your choosing.  Some examples would be home improvement project, changing jobs, vacation plans.  The purpose of this activity is to simplify the subject and assessment enough so that the process can be focused on in its entirety.  This exercise can also become a reference tool for you to apply in the future.

2.      Build a decision tree and discuss some options that exist for the project at hand.

3.      Chapter 12 in your text and the following web site will help you build your decision tree: http://www.mindtools.com/dectree.html.

4.      Summarize your risk assessment in a 2 to 3 page report that conforms to all APA 6^th ed. formatting requirements.

4.      Submit your work via the WS4 A5 Risk Analysis - Submit Assignmentslink in the Workshop Four folder.  Title your saved document WS4 A5 along with your name.

5.      The assignment is due by the end of the workshop.

6.      Refer to the Risk Analysis Rubric located below for additional details regarding grading and expectations.

Risk Analysis Grading Rubric

Evaluation Criteria	Possible Points
Created a decision tree for a personal project.	5.00
Discussed options that exist for the project.	5.00
Summary meets the 2 - 3 page length requirement.	5.00
Paper adheres to all APA 6th ed. formatting requirements, including the title/cover page and reference(s) section.	5.00
Total	20.00

Activity 4.6: Workshop Four Quiz (50 points)

1. Complete the quiz located in the Workshop Four folder. The quiz is over material learned in Workshops Three and Four.

2. Your quiz is due before 11:59 PM on Day 7.It is recommended not to wait until the last minute to take the quiz in case there are functional errors in the quiz software. Contact your facilitator immediately if you should encounter a problem with the quiz.

3. You will have 45 minutes to complete this quiz.
4. There are 25 multiple choice/true/false questions worth 2 points each, totaling 50 points.

Activity 4.7: Team Project

1. As a team, continue working on your health care reformproject.
2. If you have any questions as you collaborate on completing this team project, please post them in the Facilitator Forum or send your facilitator an email.

NOTE:  The team project requires meaningful and timely insight and contributions from all members. Your facilitator will monitor your team forum and will determine whether each member is contributing substantively and consistently to her/his team’s efforts and will factor each member’s contributions into her/his grade for the HCM554 Course Project.

1. Click Here To Get More on This Topic......