| Course | MBAX 6850 Introduction to the Nonprofit Sector |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 10 |
| Paper type | Peer review post |
| Length | About 430 words, 3 pages |
| Format | Discussion reply, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Business Administration (MBA) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MBAX 6850 Week 10
Week 10 Discussion: Peer Review of a Draft
Re: "Harvest Table Is the Most Efficient Food Bank in the Region": Three Claims Checked Against the Evidence Offered, and What an Overhead Ratio Can and Cannot Show
Tasha, your draft argues that "Harvest Table is the most efficient food bank in the region, because it spends 94 cents of every dollar on programs." I am going to take that thesis seriously and check each of its main claims against the evidence the draft offers, in order of how much the thesis depends on it.
First, efficiency. The evidence offered is the program expense ratio from Harvest Table's Form 990: 94 percent of expenses reported as program services. Second, reach. The draft says Harvest Table "feeds more families than any other food bank in the region," citing its annual report's figure of 41,000 households. Third, a program claim: that its mobile pantry "reduces food insecurity in rural areas," supported by a quotation from a pantry volunteer.
The first claim carries the thesis, so it deserves the most attention. A program expense ratio describes how an organization allocates its costs among program, management and fundraising categories on its Form 990. It does not measure efficiency in the sense of results per dollar. Two food banks with the same ratio could distribute very different amounts of food per dollar, and allocation choices, such as how much of a warehouse manager's salary is counted as program cost, can move the ratio without any change in operations. Lecy and Searing (2015) found that pressure to keep overhead low has pushed many nonprofits to underinvest in systems and staff, a pattern often called the starvation cycle. A more direct efficiency measure for a food bank might be pounds distributed per dollar spent, compared with similar food banks.
The second claim compares Harvest Table with other food banks but offers only Harvest Table's own figure. Without the others' counts, measured the same way, "more than any other" is not yet supported. The third claim rests on one volunteer's observation, which shows commitment but not a change in food insecurity. Herman and Renz (2008) argue that nonprofit effectiveness has several dimensions and is judged differently by different stakeholders, and Carman (2010) cautions against reporting activity as if it were impact; a household food security survey before and after the mobile pantry began would be closer to evidence of its effect.
None of this means the thesis is wrong. Harvest Table may well be efficient. The draft just needs evidence that measures efficiency. Would pounds per dollar from its annual report, set beside two comparable food banks, be available to you?
References
Carman, J. G. (2010). The accountability movement: What's wrong with this theory of change? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(2), 256-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764008330622
Herman, R. D., & Renz, D. O. (2008). Advancing nonprofit organizational effectiveness research and theory: Nine theses. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 18(4), 399-415. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.195
Lecy, J. D., & Searing, E. A. M. (2015). Anatomy of the nonprofit starvation cycle: An analysis of falling overhead ratios in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(3), 539-563. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764014527175
Reading the MBAX 6850 Week 10 instructions
Week 10 asks you to review a classmate's draft. Begin by stating the thesis in the classmate's own words, so the review answers the argument actually made. List the main claims and the evidence offered for each, in order of importance to the thesis. Examine the evidence for the central claim most closely, explaining what it does and does not measure. Note where comparisons lack the other side's data or where anecdotes stand in for evidence. Suggest better evidence the classmate could realistically find. End respectfully, noting that the thesis may still hold. About 450 words, organized by claim, is the expected length.
How the MBAX 6850 Week 10 example is put together
The reply opens by quoting the thesis. A paragraph lists the three claims and their evidence in order. A longer paragraph explains what a program expense ratio measures, why allocation choices can move it and how chasing low overhead can harm organizations, citing Lecy and Searing, and suggests pounds per dollar instead. A paragraph addresses the reach comparison and the anecdotal program claim, citing Herman and Renz and Carman, and suggests a food security survey. The reply closes by affirming the thesis may be right and asking whether the needed figures are available. Margin notes beside each paragraph say why it sits where it does. The review never rewrites the classmate's sentences.
Reading the MBAX 6850 Week 10 rubric
Peer reviews earn credit for fairness, focus on evidence and usefulness. Quoting the thesis accurately before critiquing it is the first mark of a good review. Organizing the review around claims and evidence keeps it focused. Explaining clearly what a common metric, such as an overhead ratio, can and cannot show demonstrates subject knowledge. Suggestions for better evidence should be realistic for the classmate. A respectful close that keeps the thesis open encourages revision rather than defensiveness. Reviews that dwell on style, or dismiss the thesis without examining evidence, earn fewer marks. Citations should support the critique. Graders look for one central measurement problem explained clearly. A respectful close that invites revision is part of the grade.
MBAX 6850 Week 10 help: mistakes that cost marks
Copy your classmate's central claim word for word, then list every piece of evidence offered for it and for the supporting claims. Ask of each: does this evidence actually measure what the claim says? Overhead ratios, single anecdotes and comparisons with no data on the other side are common weak points. For each weakness, think of evidence the classmate could actually obtain. Lead with the most important issue. Close by saying what would make the argument convincing. Many reviews nitpick wording and miss the central measurement problem. If you want help assessing a nonprofit performance claim, send us the claim and its source. Quote the thesis exactly. Suggest evidence the classmate can actually get.
Get a MBAX 6850 Week 10 example written to your instructions
Add the draft under review to the prompt and rubric you send, and each of its claims is set against its evidence within 24 to 48 hours, the first free. The food bank, its overhead figure and the classmate who wrote about it exist only in this example, and no one's real draft or filing is being judged.
More MBAX 6850 papers and MBA samples
- MBAX 6850 Week 1: Nonprofit Sector Overview Post
- MBAX 6850 Week 2: Nonprofit Organizational Profile
- MBAX 6850 Week 3: Board Governance Memo
- MBAX 6850 Week 4: Board Structure Discussion Post
- MBAX 6850 Week 5: Nonprofit Revenue Mix Analysis
- MBAX 6850 Week 6: Individual Giving Fundraising Plan
- MBAX 6850 Week 7: Volunteer Workforce Analysis
- MBAX 6850 Week 8: Tutoring Program Evaluation
- MBAX 6850 Week 9: Nonprofit Case for Support
- MBAX 6850 Week 11: Final Nonprofit Sector Paper
- WMBA 6000 Week 1: Growth Phase Post
- WMBA 6010 Week 1: Management Self-Assessment
- WMBA 6020 Week 1: Innovation Types Post
- WMBA 6030 Week 1: Systems and Strategy Post
MBAX 6850 Week 10 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MBAX 6850 Week 10 sample paper?
The peer review of Tasha's food bank draft can be read below at no cost.
What thesis does the MBAX 6850 Week 10 review examine?
That a regional food bank is the most efficient because it spends 94 cents of every dollar on programs.
What does a program expense ratio measure?
How costs are allocated among program, management and fundraising on the Form 990, not results per dollar.
What better evidence does the review suggest?
Pounds of food distributed per dollar, compared with similar food banks, and a household food security survey.
Does the review reject the thesis?
No. It says the food bank may well be efficient but the draft needs evidence that measures efficiency.