Provisional balance sheet excel format

ACCT 370

Excel Project Part III Grading Rubric

(100 point Maximum)

Criteria

Levels of Achievement

Content/Accuracy

(70 points)

Advanced

Proficient

Developing

Not present

Content/Accuracy – Tab 12 – Common Sized Balance Sheets

(7 points)

7 points

Student included three years of common sized balance sheets. Balance sheets were based on the historical balance sheets, taken from the 10-K reports. All common sized calculations were performed accurately, using total assets as the base.

5 to 6 points

Student included three years of common sized balance sheets. Balance sheets were based on the historical balance sheets, taken from the 10-K reports. All common sized calculations were performed accurately, using total assets as the base, with only minor exceptions.

1 to 4 points

Common sized balance sheets were not calculated accurately, or did not include three years of balance sheets based on the 10-K reports, as required.

0 points

Not present

Content/Accuracy – Tab 13 – Common Sized Income Statements

(7 points)

7 points

Student included three years of common sized income statements. Income Statements were based on the historical income statements, taken from the 10-K reports. All common sized calculations were performed accurately, using sales, revenue, or total revenue as the base.

5 to 6 points

Student included three years of common sized income statements. Income Statements were based on the historical balance sheets, taken from the 10-K reports. All common sized calculations were performed accurately, using sales, revenue, or total revenue as the base, with only minor exceptions.

1 to 4 points

Common sized income statements were not calculated accurately, or did not include three years of income statements based on the 10-K reports, as required.

0 points

Not present

Content/Accuracy – Tab 14 – Horizontal Analysis Balance Sheets

(7 points)

7 points

Student included three years of balance sheets, based on the historical balance sheets taken from the 10-K reports. All horizontal analysis ($ and % change) calculations were performed accurately.

5 to 6 points

Student included three years of balance sheets, based on the historical balance sheets taken from the 10-K reports. All horizontal analysis ($ and % change) calculations were performed accurately, with only minor exceptions.

1 to 4 points

Horizontal analysis balance sheets were not calculated accurately, or did not include three years of balance sheets based on the 10-K reports, as required.

0 points

Not present

Content/Accuracy – Tab 15 – Horizontal Analysis Income Statements

(7 points)

7 points

Student included three years of income statements, based on the historical income statements taken from the 10-K reports. All horizontal analysis ($ and % change) calculations were performed accurately.

5 to 6 points

Student included three years of income statements, based on the historical income statements taken from the 10-K reports. All horizontal analysis ($ and % change) calculations were performed accurately, with only minor exceptions.

1 to 4 points

Horizontal analysis income statements were not calculated accurately, or did not include three years of income statements based on the 10-K reports, as required.

0 points

Not present

Content/Accuracy – Tab 16 – Projected Income Statements (14 points)

13 to 14 points

Student included three years of projected income statements, supported by written assumptions that were developed with the company’s historical 10-K and research. The income statement numbers were reasonable, given the company’s historical trends and the written assumptions provided.

10 to 12 points

Student included three years of projected income statements, supported by written assumptions that were developed with the company’s historical 10-K and research, with only minor exceptions. The income statement numbers were mostly reasonable, given the company’s historical trends and the written assumptions provided, with only minor exceptions.

1 to 9 points

The student neglected to include a full three years of projected income statements, and/or the projections were not supported by appropriate written assumptions. If written assumptions were provided, they may be lacking in support from research. Projected income statement may lack reasonableness, given the company’s historical trends.

0 points

Not present

Content/Accuracy – Tab 17 – Projected Balance Sheets (14 points)

13 to 14 points

Student included three years of projected balance sheets, supported by written assumptions that were developed with the company’s historical 10-K and research. The balance sheet balanced, and the numbers presented were reasonable, given the company’s historical trends and the written assumptions provided. Retained earnings were appropriately calculated.

10 to 12 points

Student included three years of projected balance sheets, supported by written assumptions that were developed with the company’s historical 10-K and research, with only minor exceptions. The balance sheet balanced, and the numbers presented were mostly reasonable, given the company’s historical trends and the written assumptions provided, with minor exceptions. Retained earnings were appropriately calculated, with minor exceptions.

1 to 9 points

The student neglected to include a full three years of projected balance sheets, and/or the projections were not supported by appropriate written assumptions. If written assumptions were provided, they may be lacking in support from research. Projected balance sheets did not balance and/or retained earnings were not appropriate calculated.

0 points

Not present

Content/Accuracy – Tab 18 – Projected Cash Flows (14 points)

13 to 14 points

Student included three years of projected cash flows, supported by written assumptions that were developed with the company’s historical 10-K and research. The cash flows statement was reasonable, given the numbers presented on the projected income statements and balance sheets, and given the company’s historical trends and written assumptions provided. The three sections of the cash flows statement added up to the net change in cash, based on the projected balance sheets.

10 to 12 points

Student included three years of projected cash flows, supported by written assumptions that were developed with the company’s historical 10-K and research. Minor issues were identified with the reasonableness of the statement, and its consistency with the projected balance sheets and income statements. The three sections of the cash flows statement added up to the net change in cash, based on the projected balance sheets, with only minor exceptions.

1 to 9 points

The student neglected to include a full three years of projected cash flows, and/or the projections were not supported by appropriate written assumptions. If written assumptions were provided, they may be lacking in support from research. The three sections of the cash flows statement did not add up to the net change in cash calculated, and/or did not agree with the cash balances on the balance sheets.

0 points

Not present

Excel Formulas, Style, and Formatting

(30 points)

Advanced

Proficient

Developing

Not present

Excel Functions/Formulas

(15 points)

14 to 15 points

Excel formulas are utilized to calculate all common size and horizontal analysis figures, as well as line items from the projected financial statements. Formulas in the projected financial statements reflected the assumptions provided by the student. Totals and subtotals in the projected financial statements are appropriate calculated with Excel formulas.

11 to 13 points

Only minor issues with the required use of Excel formulas were identified. Excel formulas are utilized to calculate all common size and horizontal analysis figures, as well as line items from the projected financial statements. Formulas in the projected financial statements reflected the assumptions provided by the student. Totals and subtotals in the projected financial statements are appropriate calculated with Excel formulas.

1to 10 points

Many of the Excel formulas required to calculate common size, horizontal analysis, and projected financial statements were missing or incomplete. Excel formulas were not used consistently in required areas.

0 points

Not present

Style and Formatting

(15 points)

14 to 15 points

The submission is professionally formatted. All tabs include appropriate headings with the required information. Totals and subtotals in the common size, horizontal analysis, and projected financial statements are identified with properly placed underlines. Numbers are formatted consistently, including the use of commas and decimals. The submission is consistent, neat, and easy to read.

11 to 13 points

The submission is professionally formatted, with only minor exceptions to the following: All tabs include appropriate headings with the required information. Totals and subtotals in the common size, horizontal analysis, and projected financial statements are identified with properly placed underlines. Numbers are formatted consistently, including the use of commas and decimals. The submission is consistent, neat, and easy to read.

1 to 10 points

The submission lacks in professional formatting. It is missing headings, appropriately placed underlines, and/or consistent formatting. The submission is messy, hard to read, or substantially inconsistent in formatting.

0 points

Not present