| Course | AC499 Bachelor's Capstone in Accounting |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 2 |
| Paper type | Case scoping plan |
| Length | About 570 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Accounting |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for AC499 Unit 2
Five Questions, One Home for Each Judgment: A Unit 2 Capstone Scoping Plan for a Barrel Sauna Maker
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
AC499: Bachelor's Capstone in Accounting
Unit 2 Case Scoping Plan
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Kettle Hollow Sauna Works and every figure are composite; the framework and textbooks cited are real.
Company Profile
Kettle Hollow Sauna Works is a composite C corporation in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, with a fiscal year ending September 30, 2026. Its two barrel sauna sizes, both of western red cedar, reach customers through roughly 120 dealers of spas and hot tubs plus the company website. One stave profiling line mills every sauna's cedar and runs near capacity from August to December. The company owes a bank term loan with a fixed-charge coverage covenant of 1.25 times, tested on reported results. Later units lean on these facts, so they are stated once here.
Question Table
1. Are the statements right? Evidence: the trial balance, shipping logs for late September, the warranty claims history, fixed asset additions and the bonus plan. Answered in Unit 3. Missing: dealer delivery confirmations for the last week of September.
2. Should peak stave volume be milled in-house or bought? Evidence: the standard cost card, a quote for a second profiling line and an outside mill's price per stave set. Answered in Unit 4. Missing: the outside mill's reject rate.
3. What does the year cost in federal tax? Evidence: corrected pretax income from Unit 3, the fixed asset register, meals detail and the inventory method. Answered in Unit 5. Missing: nothing yet.
4. Which control gap matters most? Evidence: process narratives for purchasing, payroll and shipping, and the seasonal staffing log. Answered in Unit 6. Missing: payroll paycard account listing.
5. What will the ethics scenario require? Evidence: unknown until release; likely the Unit 4 figures. Answered in Unit 7. Missing: the scenario itself.
Decision Homes
Every open judgment is assigned to exactly one unit, and every later unit uses that figure rather than estimating its own.
1. Warranty reserve rate: Unit 3.
2. Net realizable value of discontinued models: Unit 3.
3. Relevant cost per stave set and discount rate: Unit 4.
4. Federal income tax and deferred balances: Unit 5. Unit 3 leaves tax as a placeholder.
5. Labor rate after any payroll finding: Unit 6, fed back to Unit 4 in the Unit 8 review.
A capstone contradicts itself when the same judgment is made twice, so this plan gives each estimate one home and makes every later unit borrow it rather than redo it.
Requests and Assumptions
Two requests go to the instructor this week: the outside mill's reject rate and the paycard listing. If the reject rate is not supplied, Unit 4 will treat quality as a qualitative factor and say so. If the paycard listing is not supplied, Unit 6 will test payroll against the staffing log only.
Standards and Sources
The statement rebuild follows the inventory, revenue and income tax topics of the codification as taught in intermediate accounting (Kieso et al., 2019). The costing analysis uses relevant-cost methods (Datar & Rajan, 2021). The control assessment uses the five components of the COSO framework (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, 2013).
Schedule
Units 3 through 7 each produce one deliverable. Unit 8 checks the draft report against every earlier figure, and Units 9 and 10 deliver the report and the board presentation.
References
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. (2013). Internal control: Integrated framework. COSO.
Datar, S. M., & Rajan, M. V. (2021). Horngren's cost accounting: A managerial emphasis (17th ed.). Pearson.
Kieso, D. E., Weygandt, J. J., & Warfield, T. D. (2019). Intermediate accounting (17th ed.). Wiley.
The Purdue Global AC499 Unit 2 instructions
Unit 2 of AC499 asks you to scope the capstone case before analyzing it. Begin with a short profile of the company that states the facts later units will depend on: legal form, year end, products, capacity and financing. Then set out the questions the term must answer, typically whether the statements are right, a costing decision, the tax position, the most important control gap and the ethics scenario. For each question, list the evidence on hand, the unit that will answer it and what is missing. Assign every judgment that more than one unit might make to a single unit. State what you will request from the instructor and what you will assume if no answer comes. End with a schedule. Cite the frameworks and texts each part will draw on in APA 7.
Inside the AC499 Unit 2 example
The sample opens with a profile of Kettle Hollow Sauna Works: a C corporation in Eau Claire with two sauna sizes, about 120 dealers, one profiling line and a 1.25 times coverage covenant. A five-row question table follows, from statement accuracy to the unreleased ethics scenario, each row naming its evidence, its unit and its gap, such as the outside mill's reject rate. A decision-home list gives the warranty rate and net realizable value to Unit 3, relevant cost to Unit 4, tax to Unit 5 and the labor rate to Unit 6. The highlighted sentence states the one-home rule. A requests section asks for the reject rate and the paycard listing with fallback assumptions, then sources and a schedule close the plan.
Reading the AC499 Unit 2 grading rubric
Scoping plans in AC499 earn points for completeness and for foresight. Graders check that the company profile carries the facts later units need and that every major question has evidence, a unit and an honest list of gaps. The rubric rewards plans that prevent contradictions, which is what a decision-home list does: each estimate made once and borrowed afterward. Requests to the instructor should be specific, with an assumption stated in case no answer arrives. A row reserved for the ethics scenario, without pretending to answer it early, shows judgment. Plans that restate the prompt, or that list tasks without evidence, lose most of the available points. Clear formatting and APA 7 citations to the frameworks complete the work.
AC499 Unit 2 help from the desk
Many Unit 2 plans list the term's assignments without connecting them to evidence in the case file. Gaps go unnamed, so later units discover missing data too late to request it. The same judgment, often a warranty rate or a labor rate, is left to be estimated in two places, which guarantees two different numbers. The ethics row is either skipped or answered in advance. The company profile is copied from the case rather than trimmed to the facts later units use. Assumptions are made silently. If your section's case company or unit sequence differs, our writers can build the question table and decision homes around your file and schedule.
Get an AC499 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Send the case packet your section assigned plus the Unit 2 instructions and rubric; a note on which documents are still to come helps. The plan built from it lists your questions, their evidence and the single unit where each judgment lands. The first sample is free, generally back inside 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More AC499 papers and BS in Accounting samples
- AC499 Unit 1: Capstone Integration Discussion
- AC499 Unit 3: Statement Rebuild Package
- AC499 Unit 4: Costing Decision Analysis
- AC499 Unit 5: Tax Position Brief
- AC499 Unit 6: Control Weakness Assessment
- AC499 Unit 7: Ethics Decision Response
- AC499 Unit 8: Seminar Draft Review
- AC499 Unit 9: Integrated Final Report
- AC499 Unit 10: Recommendation Presentation
- AC112 Unit 2: Transaction Analysis Exercise
- AC468 Unit 2: Evidence Acquisition Record
- AC114 Unit 2: Account Classification Exercise
- AC466 Unit 2: Common-Size Statement Set
AC499 Unit 2 questions, answered
Why assign each judgment to one unit?
Because contradiction in a capstone usually starts with a judgment made twice. If the warranty rate is estimated in the statement rebuild and estimated again in the control work, the two figures rarely match, and the integrated report inherits both. Giving each judgment one home means every later unit cites it, and a change is made once and carried forward on purpose.
Can the ethics question be planned before the scenario is released?
Only partly. The plan can say which earlier figures an ethics response is likely to need and reserve a row for it, which this sample does. Writing the decision itself in advance would be guessing. Most capstones hold the scenario back so the response has to engage with work already submitted rather than a generic dilemma.
Where can I find a free AC499 Unit 2 sample paper?
This page holds a full AC499 Unit 2 case scoping plan for Kettle Hollow Sauna Works with a company profile, a five-question table, decision homes, requests and APA 7 references.
What if the case file is missing information the plan needs?
Name the gap and choose between asking and assuming. This sample lists the outside mill's reject rate and the paycard listing as missing, requests both, and states what Units 4 and 6 will do if neither arrives.
Why reserve a row for an ethics scenario that has not been released?
Because the plan can still say which earlier figures an ethics response is likely to need, most often the costing analysis, and make sure they are finished and documented before the scenario arrives.