| Course | MT246 Project Planning and Project Execution |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 10 |
| Paper type | Change request package |
| Length | About 860 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MT246 Unit 10
A Verbal Yes Paused: A Unit 10 Change Request Package for a Holding Cabinet and a Refrigerated Drawer
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT246: Project Planning and Project Execution
Unit 10 Change Request Package
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Harlan Street Barbecue, its staff, vendors and every figure are composite and illustrative; the sources cited are real.
Change Request Form
Request number: CR-04 Requested by: Pitmaster Date: Wednesday, May 13 Description: Add a heated holding cabinet under the serving window and a refrigerated drawer under the smoker prep station. Reason: The truck's menu, finalized after testing, includes brisket held for up to three hours. Without a holding cabinet, held brisket must stay in the smoker, which limits the smoker for the next batch. The refrigerated drawer would keep sliced meat and sauces at the prep station instead of in the main cooler. Classification: scope addition to package 2.2, Kitchen Upfit. Status note: The upfitter agreed verbally on May 12. That agreement was withdrawn on May 13, pending a decision through this request, because no change to the upfit can be made without the owner's approval under the project charter.
Impact Analysis
Scope. Both items add equipment to package 2.2. Because the health department approved the truck's equipment list, any new food equipment requires a plan review amendment. The reviewer has said a one-page amendment can be approved in two working days, during which the upfitter can continue other work.
Schedule. Each item was traced through the network. The holding cabinet adds one working day to the upfit, which is on the critical path. The refrigerated drawer draws more power than the generator's spare capacity; adding it requires upsizing the generator, which adds two days to the generator and electrical activity, also critical. Since the Saturday recovery was approved in May, the truck is due ready on Tuesday, June 30, leaving July 1 and 2 as the only spare working days.
Cost. The cabinet costs $4,320 installed. The drawer costs $1,950 installed, and the generator upsizing adds $2,010, for $3,960. Both together cost $8,280.
Options
Four options were compared on cost, schedule and remaining buffer.
Option A, both items now: $8,280; three working days added; ready July 3; buffer minus one
Option B, cabinet now, drawer deferred: $4,320; one working day added; ready July 1; buffer one
Option C, both items after launch: $9,180, including a second plan review fee and the upfitter's return visit; no schedule effect; truck out of service two days in July
Option D, reject both: no cost; no schedule effect; brisket holding continues in the smoker
Option A would push the ready date past the last working day before Riverfest and is not recommended. Option D leaves the menu problem the request was meant to solve. Option C protects the schedule but costs more and takes the truck off the road during its first busy month.
The drawer was cheap; the generator it needed was not, and neither was the time.
Funding
The request adds scope, so it is funded from the management reserve, not from contingency. Contingency exists for uncertainty in work already planned, and spending it on new scope would leave the planned work unprotected. The reserve holds $6,000. Option B would use $4,320 of it and leave $1,680. PMI (2021) draws the same line between contingency, which covers known risks inside the baseline, and management reserve, which covers changes and unknowns above it.
Owner's Decision
Decision: Option B approved. The holding cabinet is added now. The refrigerated drawer is deferred and will be re-quoted in August, with the generator question, for installation during the truck's first scheduled maintenance week in September. Signed: Owner, Harlan Street Barbecue Date: Thursday, May 14
Revised Baselines
Scope baseline: package 2.2 now includes the heated holding cabinet; the plan review amendment is added as a short activity alongside the upfit.
Schedule baseline: the upfit finishes one working day later, on May 29; ready for launch moves to Wednesday, July 1; buffer is one working day.
Cost baseline: package costs rise by $4,320 to $160,876, and the cost baseline to $170,495, which becomes the new reference for earned value in the June status reports, as Fleming and Koppelman (2010) recommend whenever approved scope changes; the management reserve falls to $1,680; the authorized budget is unchanged at $172,175.
Change Log Entry
CR-04, requested May 13 by the pitmaster, holding cabinet and refrigerated drawer; Option B approved May 14 by the owner; $4,320 from reserve; one working day; drawer deferred to September, to be re-quoted. Larson and Gray (2021) recommend that every change, approved or not, be logged with its decision and its effect on the baselines, so that the project's history can be traced later.
Why Formal Change Control in a Small Business
A restaurant with one truck does not need a change control board. It does need one rule: nobody tells a contractor yes until the owner has seen what the yes costs. The verbal agreement on May 12 would have added three days and $8,280 to a schedule with two days to spare. The form, the analysis and the signature took two days and saved the launch date.
References
Fleming, Q. W., & Koppelman, J. M. (2010). Earned value project management (4th ed.). Project Management Institute.
Larson, E. W., & Gray, C. F. (2021). Project management: The managerial process (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Project Management Institute. (2021). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide) (7th ed.). Project Management Institute.
MT246 Unit 10 instructions, in plain terms
The final unit asks students to process a change request on their project from start to decision. The prompt usually expects a request form with the requester, description, reason and classification, an impact analysis covering scope, schedule and cost, a set of options with their effects, the sponsor's decision and the revised baselines that follow. Trace schedule effects through the network, since a small item on a critical activity can cost more time than a large one elsewhere. Say which fund pays for the change and why, contingency or management reserve. A change log entry closes the record. Packages near six pages are common; cite where your change procedure comes from in APA 7.
Inside the MT246 Unit 10 example
The package opens with the CR-04 form, including the note that the upfitter's verbal agreement was withdrawn pending approval. The impact analysis covers the plan review amendment, the schedule effect of each item and the drawer's generator cost, under a margin note on tracing items separately. Four options are listed with cost, days and remaining buffer, and the highlighted line says the drawer was cheap but its generator was not. A funding section explains why new scope draws on the owner's reserve rather than on contingency. The owner's signed decision approves option B. Three revised baselines follow, with Fleming and Koppelman on resetting earned value, then a log entry with Larson and Gray and a closing argument for one simple rule.
Reading the MT246 Unit 10 grading rubric
Change packages earn credit for a complete request, an impact analysis traced through the actual network, priced options, a signed decision and updated baselines. Schedule impacts should be shown activity by activity, especially where a change touches the critical path or a resource such as a generator. Graders reward options that include deferring or rejecting the change, not only approving it. Funding the change from the correct source, reserve for new scope, shows understanding of control. Revised scope, schedule and cost baselines and a log entry prove the decision was carried through. Clear formatting and accurate citations complete the rubric. Explaining why even a small business needs one rule about verbal approvals often earns a final comment of approval.
MT246 Unit 10 help: mistakes that cost points
Students often present a change request with only its cost, leaving out the schedule effect that matters most near a deadline. Another frequent problem is offering only approve or reject, which hides cheaper middle options. Some packages pay for new scope from contingency, leaving planned work unprotected. Others approve the change but never update the baselines, so later reports measure against old figures. Check that the new ready date fits the deadline, and that the reserve balance after the change is stated. Describe the change your project faces, and a writer can trace its effects, price the options and draft the revised baselines.
Get an MT246 Unit 10 example written to your instructions
Send the change your scenario introduces, the plan and budget built so far, and the Unit 10 instructions and rubric. Returned free within 24-48h, the first package traces that change through the network, prices every option including rejection, and leaves the decision where it belongs, with the sponsor who holds the money. 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 MT246 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MT246 Unit 1: Discussion Board Post
- MT246 Unit 2: Work Breakdown Structure
- MT246 Unit 3: Estimating Exercise
- MT246 Unit 4: Network and Critical Path
- MT246 Unit 5: Project Schedule
- MT246 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- MT246 Unit 7: Cost Baseline
- MT246 Unit 8: Resource Assignment Plan
- MT246 Unit 9: Status Report
- MT245 Unit 10: Initiation Package
- MT243 Unit 10: Renewal Case
- MT242 Unit 10: Program Management Plan
- MT241 Unit 10: Analytics Report
MT246 Unit 10 questions, answered
Why fund the change from the management reserve instead of contingency?
Because contingency covers uncertainty in work already in scope, while an approved addition is new work. Drawing the cabinet's cost from contingency would leave less protection for the risks it was sized against. The example takes 4,320 dollars from the owner's reserve, raising the cost baseline to 170,495, and records the move. Some courses treat this differently; the sample follows yours.
Does a small business need formal change control?
Not a board or a committee, but it needs the same steps: a logged request, a measured impact, options and a decision by the person who holds the money. The example's owner makes every decision herself, which is normal for a family restaurant. What the package prevents is a change agreed between a cook and a contractor with nobody checking what it does to the launch.
What happens to the deferred item?
It remains in the change log marked deferred, along with the date it comes back for review and the condition that would alter the verdict. The example returns the beverage drawer to the owner after Riverfest, when the truck can spare two days out of service. A deferred request that quietly drops off the log tends to reappear as an informal agreement, the very problem the package exists to stop.
Where can I find a free MT246 Unit 10 sample paper?
This page carries the full MT246 Unit 10 change request package. It logs a pitmaster's request for new truck equipment, traces each item through the network, prices four options and records the owner's decision and revised baselines.
Why is the change funded from the management reserve in the MT246 Unit 10 sample?
Because it adds scope. Contingency covers uncertainty in work already planned; using it for new equipment would leave the planned upfit and permits unprotected, so the cabinet's $4,320 comes from the owner's reserve.