(3 marks) Report included all elements and was generally presented appropriately. Writing mostly flowed well and sections were linked. Referencing was in accordance with guidelines. English was used effectively with few errors present. (3.5 marks) Report included all elements and was well presented. Writing flowed clearly and sections were linked effectively. Referencing was Of a high standard. English was used effectively with very few errors present. (5 marks) Report included all elements and was very well presented. Writing flowed clearly and sections were linked very effectively. Referencing was exemplary. English was used very effectively and was error free.

Presentation (5 marks) (0 mark) Report was lacking key elements and was poorly presented. Writing did not flow clearly leaving the paper to seem disjointed. Referencing was not in accordance with relevant guidelines. Basic English was used with errors present. (1.5 mark) Report lacked some elements and was poorly presented. Writing often did not flow clearly leaving the paper to seem somewhat disjointed. Referencing was not entirely in accordance with relevant guidelines. Basic English was used with errors present. (2.5 mark) Report included most elements and was adequately presented. Writing sometimes did not flow clearly leaving the paper to seem disjointed in areas. Referencing was somewhat in accordance with guidelines. Basic English was used with some errors present.

Present the Budgeted Income Statement for and Actual Income Statement for . Compare the data and provide your opinion on the changes. (5 marks) (0 mark) Unable to Present the Budgeted Income Statement for and Actual Income Statement for. No Comparison of the data and no opinion on the changes. (1.5 mark) A poor or incomplete presentation of Budgeted Income Statement for and Actual Income Statement for. Incomplete Comparison of the data and incomplete opinion on the changes (2.5 marks) An adequate presentation of Budgeted Income Statement for and Actual Income Statement for. Adequate comparison of the data and minimum opinion on the changes. (3 marks) A good Presentation of Budgeted Income Statement for and Actual Income Statement for. A good comparison of the data and sufficient opinion on the changes. (3.5 marks) A very good presentation of Budgeted Income Statement for and Actual Income Statement for . Clear comparison of the data and clear opinion on the changes. (5 marks)

Preparation of budgeted income statement for the following financial year. (8 marks) (0 mark) The budgeted income statement is not properly constructed or is fundamentally inaccurate. (2.5 marks) The budgeted income statement contains significant amount of material errors. (4.0 marks) The budgeted income statement is properly constructed with material errors in certain part(s) the statement. (5.0 marks) The budgeted income statement is properly constructed with minor errors in throughout the statement. (6.5 marks) The budgeted income statement is properly constructed with minor errors certain parts of the statement. (8 marks) The budgeted income statement is properly constructed with no error.

Discussion about the comparison of top-down and bottom-up approach to the budget process and analyse which one is more suitable for your chosen company. (7 marks) (0 mark) Unable to discuss the comparison of top-down and bottom-up approach to the budget process and analyse which one is more suitable for your chosen company. (2.5 marks) Unable to discuss adequately the comparison of top-down and bottom-up approach to the budget process and analyse which one is more suitable for your chosen company. (3.5 marks) Demonstrate an adequate discussion about the comparison of top-down and bottom-up approach to the budget process and analyse which one is more suitable for your chosen company. (4.5 marks) Demonstrate a good discussion about the comparison of top-down and bottom-up approach to the budget process and analyse which one is more suitable for your chosen company. (5.5 marks) Demonstrate a very good discussion about the comparison of top-down and bottom-up approach to the budget process and analyse which one is more suitable for your chosen company. (7 marks)

Criteria Poor Need Improvement Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent Total Explanation of the elements of the Master Budget (5 marks) (0 mark) No description of the elements of the Master Budget. (1.5 mark) A poor or incomplete description of the elements of the Master Budget. (2.5 marks) An adequate description of the elements of the Master Budget. (3 marks) A good Description of the elements of the Master Budget. (3.5 marks) A very good description of the elements of the Master Budget. (5 marks) An excellent description of the elements of the Master Budget.