Capital Purchase Justification
Order Instructions:
Write a justification for capital purchase (800-1000 words) to your vice president as to why the purchase would be a good investment for the hospital. Include a one-page executive summary for your proposal. The paper should include the operating costs you took into consideration, what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment, and future benefits to the organization of this piece of equipment.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center
- Unsatisfactory 0.00%
- Less than Satisfactory 65.00%
- Satisfactory 75.00%
- Good 85.00%
- Excellent 100.00% 80.0 %Content
55.0 % Justification For Capital Purchase
Does not provide justification for capital purchase. No explanation as to why the purchase would be a good investment for the hospital. Does not address the operating costs you took into consideration, what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment, and future benefits to the organization of this piece of equipment. Subject knowledge is not demonstrated.
Provides only minimal justification for capital purchase with little explanation as to why the purchase would be a good investment for the hospital. Only a few of the following are addressed with minimal detail; the operating costs you took into consideration, what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment, and future benefits to the organization of this piece of equipment. Subject knowledge is unclear, inconsistent.
Provides basic justification for capital purchase with little explanation as to why the purchase would be a good investment for the hospital. Several of the following are addresses with basic detail; the operating costs you took into consideration, what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment, and future benefits to the organization of this piece of equipment. Some subject knowledge is evident.
Provides thorough justification for capital purchase with thoughtful explanation as to why the purchase would be a good investment for the hospital. Several of the following are addressed in detail; the operating costs you took into consideration, what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment, and future benefits to the organization of this piece of equipment. Subject knowledge is evident.
Provides thorough knowledge justification for capital purchase with elaborate explanation as to why the purchase would be a good investment for the hospital. Clearly addresses the operating costs you took into consideration, what facility considerations are involved regarding this new piece of equipment, and future benefits to the organization of this piece of equipment. Introduces appropriate examples.
25.0 % Integrates Information From Outside Resources Into the Body of Paper
Does not use appropriate references as required by the assignment, examples, or explanations.
Provides some supporting examples, but minimal explanations and no appropriate published references as required by the assignment.
Supports main points with examples and explanations, but fails to include published references, as required by the assignment, to support claims and ideas.
Supports main points with references, explanations, and examples. Application and description is direct, competent, and appropriate of the criteria. Includes appropriate references as required by the assignment.
Supports main points with references as required by the assignment, examples, and full explanations of how they apply.
17.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
6.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
6.0 % Paragraph Development and Transitions
Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed.
Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident.
Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.
A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.
There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.
5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use.)
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), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
3.0 %Format
1.0 % Paper Format (1- inch margins; 12-point-font; double-spaced; Times New Roman, Arial, or Courier)
GCU template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
GCU template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
GCU template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
GCU template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.
2.0 % Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment.)
No reference page is included. No citations are used.
Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.
Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.
Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and GCU style is usually correct.
In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
100 % Total Weightage
SAMPLE ANSWER
Capital Purchase Justification
Executive summary
Reducing profit margins in health care makes it complex to choose a good investment for a hospital. While buying medical equipment is an investment majority of physicians may take into account, sales executives can make it sound enticing. Nonetheless, physicians should purchase medical equipment that is beneficial to the hospital. Mr. Vice President, I understand that the facility is attempting to improve its services by investing in a quality tool for the radiology unit. I would suggest that the hospital buys a General Electric Healthcare’s Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanner. Moreover, I fully understand that making this investment calls for careful consideration of several factors including cost of the equipment and expected profit or benefit to the hospital. The hospital, particularly the radiology unit will greatly benefit from the purchase of MRI scanners. For example, the scanners will increase the physicians’ capacity to choose the effective treatment for each patient. This piece of equipment will also permit physicians to collect relevant information regarding a patient’s internal organs. Again, physicians would be able to complete many exams in a short period because of the homogenous magnet and Optima MR450w, which will be essential in saving time. Nonetheless, the price of the General Electric Healthcare installed with Optima MR450w 1.5T and Geometry Embracing Method (GEM) Suite, is roughly $49,181.00. Much as the hospital may choose to lease the MRI scanners, it not a suitable investment because of the huge cost in the long run. Basically, this piece of equipment is a good investment for the hospital as well as the patients.
Introduction
Buying medical equipment can be an intricate investment. Therefore, the hospital should ensure that factors like cost and benefits are taken into consideration. While these scanners require substantial investment, they have a great potential on the return on investment (ROI). This essay presents a justification as to why MRI offered by General Electric Healthcare is a good investment for the hospital. Mr. Vice President, MRI scanners are critical equipment for the hospital when it comes to quality improvement and a good investment for the institution.
Future Benefits to the Organization
MRI scanners are simple diagnostic practices, which enable physicians to see detailed images of internal organs of the patient without the use of x-rays (Ohsfeldt, Li, & Schneider, 2015). Additionally, this equipment is instrumental since it undoubtedly demonstrates the difference between healthy and abnormal tissues. Besides, it would help physicians to collect relevant data on the patient’s brain, spine and other internal organs. Preliminary treatment and identifying the illness and with no negative effects, therefore, the MRI scanners would increase physicians’ capacity to choose the effective treatment for each patient. The hospital will be able complete more examinations in less time. This is because of the homogenous magnet and the design of the Optima MR450w, which will enable physicians to save time during examinations and patients’ setup (Ohsfeldt, Li & Schneider, 2015). Mr. Vice President, the General Electric Healthcare‘s Optima and MR450w is a good investment for this hospital. It has more than two decades of proven record in providing further capabilities to patients as technology advances without necessarily replacing the magnet. MRI scanners expand considerably compared to radiology, since it validates the use of radiation therapy. Again, it enhances uptime with skilled and service forces across the world allowing the department of radiation to forecast and tackle service requirements with no unplanned interruption (Ohsfeldt, Li, & Schneider, 2015).
Facility Consideration
MRI scanners are not only future-based but also patient-centered as it presents extraordinary outcomes besides a wide-ranging assortment of products to meet the imaging requirements of this institution’s radiology unit. Subsequently, without compromising the quality or ability, General Electric Healthcare installed with Optima MR450w 1.5T as well as GEM Suite would be ideal for patients visiting the hospital (General Electric Company, 2014). Additionally, the Optima MR450w is appropriate for all patients irrespective of their size while decreasing audio sound for spine and brain examinations. This equipment also presents extraordinary reliability that controls the gradient to generate outstanding presentation in demanding uses including cardiac, fMRI, and transmission to improve signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). On the other hand, GEM suite and Optima MR450w would allow the institution to adhere to the requirements of patients, quality signal, efficiency, lesser stations, faster examinations and fewer failures. Due to the wider diameter of the MRI scanners, acoustic applications, comfort and aesthetic elements of the GEM suite is important when it comes to addressing common causes of anxiety among patients and nonconformity during assessments (General Electric Company, 2014).
Operating Costs
Being able to understand the cost of this investment in terms of operational outlays remains vital. The cost of this piece of equipment is about USD 49,181, as such, if the institution would get financial support that span 60 months at an interest rate of 7%, then the hospital would be making a monthly payment of USD 862.54. The monthly charges would be inclusive of operational costs such as maintenance expenses, which will be completed within the specified time-frame. However, the radiology unit can lease MRI scanners. But this alternative is not a good investment for the hospital since it will be too costly in the long run. Moreover, there will be less or no return on investment (Wu et al., 2014). Mr. Vice president based on all benefits of General Electric Healthcare’s MRI that comes with GEM suite and the Optima MR450w 1.5T will be beneficial not only for the institution’s radiology unit but also patients.
Conclusion
Healthcare organisations can only guarantee the quality of care when physicians have access to the best equipment. This is why the installation of General Electric Healthcare with Optima MR450w 1.5T and GEM Suite is strategic in terms meeting enhanced quality care and also when it comes to ROI. Ultimately, it is critical to ensure that factors to do with facility consideration, operating costs and future benefits of the MRI equipment are determined before undertaking on such an expensive venture.
References
General Electric Company. Retrieved October 19, 2016, from http://www3.gehealthcare.com/
Ohsfeldt, R., Li, P., & Schneider, J. (2015). Patterns of Onsite Magnetic Resonance Imaging Equipment among Orthopedic Practices. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 31(5), 339-346. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462315000550
Wu, S., Sylwestrzak, G., Shah, C., & DeVries, A. (2014). Price transparency for MRIs increased use of less costly providers and triggered provider competition. Health Affairs, 33(8), 1391-8. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1553396971?accountid=45049
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
