Should the parent spend 318,000 dollars on a reprocessor? This HS440 Unit 9 capital request memo says yes over Saturday sessions and names the payer assumption that could sink it. Searches like "hs 440 unit 9 assignment example", "hs440 unit 9 sample" and "hs440 unit 9 example" land here.
What a finished HS440 Unit 9 capital request memo looks like
Two pages addressed to the parent hospital's capital committee. Request, recommendation and one condition fill the first paragraph. A problem paragraph follows: patients wait 34 days for a screening slot, and scopes returning from reprocessing set the pace of every room. The case table lists 500 added slots a year, 480 cases at the budgeted 96 percent fill, 572.92 dollars of contribution per case and 45,000 of new annual cash costs for a service contract and a half-time technician, leaving 230,002 dollars a year. Results sit in a box: payback in 1.38 years and a net present value of 650,850 over five years at 6 percent. An alternatives table sets the request beside Saturday sessions, worth about 73,336 a year, and a sensitivity line reruns the case with every added patient covered by Medicaid.
How a HS440 Unit 9 example is structured
The memo leads with the decision because a capital committee compares many requests and reads first paragraphs. The bottleneck argument comes before any money, so the committee understands why equipment rather than staff or rooms is the constraint. Incremental logic is explicit: only the added slot counts, never the cases the center already performs. Cash flows exclude depreciation, and the 6 percent rate is tied to the parent's borrowing cost in one sentence. The alternatives table is the memo's center of gravity, because the request consumes 22.7 percent of a 1,400,000-dollar capital pool and every other claimant will ask why this one. The sensitivity line is where the memo proves its honesty: if every added case were a Medicaid patient, the inflow drops to 54,840 dollars, payback stretches to 5.8 years and net present value turns negative. The review condition attached to approval follows from that line.
The request in one paragraph
318,000 dollars for a second reprocessor and four colonoscopes, recommended for approval with a six-month review attached.
Where the bottleneck sits
A 34-day wait for screening, and rooms idling while scopes finish their reprocessing cycle. Equipment, not staff, lifts each room from twelve cases to thirteen.
Only the added slot counts
500 new slots, 480 cases at the budgeted fill and 572.92 dollars of contribution each, less 45,000 of service contract and technician cost.
Payback and present value
1.38 years to recover the outlay and 650,850 dollars of net present value over five years at the parent's 6 percent rate.
Against Saturdays and other claims
Saturday sessions add about 73,336 dollars a year with no capital; the request uses 22.7 percent of the parent's pool, which the memo acknowledges directly.
The payer assumption that could sink it
If every added case were covered by Medicaid, net present value falls to minus 86,994. The memo proposes reviewing who fills the new slots after six months, never screening by coverage.
Where marks go in HS440 Unit 9
Requests written as a need, the scopes are old and the wait is long, with no payback or alternative, earn little; committees and graders alike expect the case priced. Counting every case on the new equipment instead of only the added slot overstates the return and is a heavy deduction. Depreciation included in annual cash flows double counts the purchase. An unexplained discount rate weakens every result that depends on it. Omitting alternatives, or listing them without figures, misses the comparison the prompt usually asks for. The most instructive loss is a request that never tests its payer assumption; on a project that looks this strong, the fragility lies in who fills the new slots. A recommendation without a review point gives the committee nothing to hold the center to.
Get a HS440 Unit 9 example written to your instructions
Capital requests hinge on the equipment cost, the capacity it adds, payment and cost assumptions and the discount rate, so list those from the Unit 9 case and attach the rubric your instructor posted. The memo arrives within 24-48h, alternatives priced and the riskiest assumption tested. No fee applies to a first custom sample.
HS440 Unit 9 questions, answered
Why does the memo compare the request with Saturday sessions?
Because a capital committee will ask whether the same result could be reached without spending capital. Saturday sessions add capacity using existing equipment but pay staff at premium rates, and they return about 73,336 dollars a year here against 230,002 for the equipment. Showing the comparison answers the question before it is asked and makes the recommendation defensible.
Is it acceptable to fill new slots only with well-insured patients?
No, and the sample does not suggest it. Scheduling by coverage raises serious legal and ethical problems, and nonprofit hospitals carry community benefit obligations. The memo instead proposes reviewing the mix of patients who fill the new slots after six months, so the committee learns whether the assumption held and can revisit the investment if it did not.
What discount rate should a nonprofit use?
Usually its cost of capital, often approximated by the rate on its tax-exempt borrowing blended with what its reserves would otherwise earn. The sample uses the parent's stated 6 percent and says where it came from. If your case supplies a rate, the memo uses it; if not, the reasoning for the chosen rate appears in one or two sentences.