Exemplary (15) Proficient (10) Marginal (5) Comments Introduction (15 Points) Goals/objectives of operation Assumptions for project

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Exemplary (15) Proficient (10) Marginal (5) Comments Introduction (15 Points) Goals/objectives of operation Assumptions for project"

Mervyn Allison
5 years ago
Views:

1 Budget Project Grading Rubric Student: This serves as a guide to grading your Budget Project and Presentation. Numbers and descriptors are given as reference. Section 1: Exemplary (15) Proficient (10) Marginal (5) Comments Introduction (15 Goals/objectives of operation Assumptions for project Section 2: Menu Planning and Analysis (20 2a: Individual menu planning 2b: Compilation of menus and costing information Three SMART goals/objectives provided for operation including: financial management, human resource management, and equipment goal. At least 6 assumptions realistic, relevant and substantial assumptions identified. Three goals/objectives provided though may not be SMART or may not meet criteria provided. Assumptions may be unrealistic or incomplete; may have 4 or 5 assumptions identified. Three goals/objectives are not provided. Three or less assumptions identified. out of 15 Exemplary (20) Proficient (14) Marginal (8) Comments Menu appropriate for student consumers. Menu meets all minimum requirements for menu planning standards. Costing is accurate and complete including calculation of SPC. Evaluation of SPC provided. 10 daily menu planning checklists compiled chronologically followed by weekly summaries for breakfast Menu may not be appropriate for K-5 student consumers. Menu meets all minimum requirements for menu planning standards. Inaccuracies noted in costing calculations. SPC is calculated, however there may not be any evaluation of this figure. 10 daily menu planning checklists included, but may not be in chronological order. Minor inaccuracies noted in Menu does not meet 1 or more menu planning requirements. Costing is incomplete or grossly inaccurate. SPC may be unrealistic for operation. All menu planning checklists are not compiled. Analysis

2 and lunch. Weekly menu planning checklists completed accurately. Analysis should include assessment of: unmet weekly requirements, kid appeal, number of menu items, selection, variety, and allergens. Suggestions for improvement made. SPC identified for each meal, each day, and average for the week (breakfast, lunch & days); Food cost % for each meal, each day and average for the week (breakfast, lunch & days) calculated accurately, and displayed clearly. Section 2b is identical to fellow group members. Section 3: Budgets: Y1 & Y2 (20 Budget Revenue, expense and statistics budget developed for this year (Y1) and next academic year (Y2). Rationale provided for budgetary decisions made; budget in alignment with goals/objectives of operation. Evidence of goal achievement weekly menu planning checklists. Analysis provided but recommendations may not be consistent with analysis. Costing calculations may be incomplete or inaccurate. Few inconsistencies may be noted in compilation of menus & costing information section compared to fellow group members. may be grossly deficient or not included; unmet weekly menu requirements not addressed. Section 2b entirely different than all fellow group members out of 20 Exemplary (20) Proficient (14) Marginal (8) Comments Revenue, expense and statistics budget developed for this year and next academic year. Rationale incomplete with insufficient alignment with goals/objectives of operation. Errors may be noted in budget figures pulled from other parts Components of budgets are missing or grossly inaccurate. Rationale for budgetary decisions nonexistent or do not support operational goals/objectives. 69

3 Section 4: Overall Quality (10 Overall Quality of Project is provided. Budget figures are appropriately pulled from other parts of the budget project (for example: revenues calculated form scenario description; food cost % calculated in section 2). Operation is a financial success indicated by positive balance or BE at end of year. Budget format used; effective use of tables and graphs help visually represent data. Evidence of accuracy is provided. of the budget project. Budgeted for break-even status this year and next year. Organization of budget may be inefficient or confusing. Operation is not at break even. Evidence of accuracy is not provided. out of 20 Exemplary (10) Proficient (7) Marginal (4) Comments Overall attention to detail excellent (for example: consistent formatting, no grammatical errors). Information organized logically; project assembled in order outlined by rubric. A table of contents is present, page numbers identified and accurate, cover page used, rubric provided. References cited appropriately throughout project. Word processed with Good attention to detail. Assembly of project may not be according to order outlined by rubric. Few grammatical errors noted. Formatting issues may be noted. Inaccurate citation of references. Inconsistent print quality. Poor attention to detail noted. Project haphazardly assembled with no regard to order outlined in rubric. Many grammatical errors may be noted. Formatting inconsistent with course requirements. References may not be cited. Poor print out of 10 70

4 Section 5: Class Presentation (10 Budget project presentation good print quality. quality. Handwritten work will not be reviewed. Exemplary (10) Proficient (7) Marginal (4) Comments All group members present and make contribution to presentation. 7-8 minutes in length. Presenters (1) discuss individual goals set in assigned area, (2) demonstrate how goals were carried through project, and (3) present 2-3 lessons learned. Presentation clearly articulated with proper speaking volume from all members. Effective visual aid utilized. All group members present and make contribution to presentation. < 7 minutes or >8 minutes. Each of three criteria covered, but may lack thoughtfulness or depth of analysis. Visual aid may not enhance verbal message. All group members may not be present. Three criteria for presentations not included, or visual aid may not be used. Presenters may not be heard throughout classroom. out of 10 BONUS Above and beyond components included and one accurately and appropriately. Examples of this might include alternative menu items, majority of items prepared from scratch or demonstration of compliance with current whole grain requirement (i.e. at least half grains offered whole grain-rich in both NSLP and SBP). Total Points for Budget Project & Presentation /75 Up to 5 points 71

5 72

How Hands on Banking / El futuro en tus manos aligns with Wisconsin Education Standards.

How Hands on Banking / El futuro en tus manos aligns with. The Hands on Banking program is helping students across the United States grasp important mathematics concepts while gaining valuable skills for