HA 640 Unit 3 demand forecast example

Healthcare Operations Assessment and Decision-Making Herzing University Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

This HA 640 Unit 3 demand forecast example projects routine chemistry tubes for 2026 from 36 months of history, with a winter peak and a slow climb, and tests the method on 2025 before trusting it. Herzing HA 640 asks MS in Healthcare Administration students to forecast demand for an operations decision, and this sample links the series to the bottleneck: processing handles about 130 tubes an hour against a peak of 152. Data changes are flagged, not smoothed. Two patterns, seasonality and a 2.3% annual trend, decide the method. January 2026 is worked in full. A holdout test finds a 2.1% error against 3.4% for a naive forecast. The 2026 projection carries a range of plus or minus 27 tubes a day. A final section explains what it means for the constraint. About 1,000 words.

CourseHA 640 Healthcare Operations Assessment and Decision-Making
UnitUnit 3
Paper typeDemand forecast
LengthAbout 880 words, 6 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolHerzing University
ProgramMS in Healthcare Administration
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for HA 640 Unit 3

1

Thirty-Six Months, a Winter Peak and a Slow Climb: A Seasonal Demand Forecast for Routine Chemistry Tubes, Tested Against 2025 Before It Was Trusted

Student Name

Health Care Administration, Herzing University

HA 640: Healthcare Operations Assessment and Decision-Making

Instructor Name

January 29, 2026

What this page is doingThe title names the series length, the two patterns in it, and the test the method passed. A forecast earns trust by being checked against periods already known, so the title says it was.
2

Thirty-Six Months, a Winter Peak and a Slow Climb: A Seasonal Demand Forecast for Routine Chemistry Tubes, Tested Against 2025 Before It Was Trusted

The Series

The bottleneck assessment found that the specimen processing bench can handle about 130 tubes an hour against a morning peak of about 152. Whether that gap will grow or shrink depends on future volume. This forecast projects routine chemistry tubes for 2026 from 36 months of history, January 2023 through December 2025, taken from the laboratory information system. Volume is expressed as the average number of tubes per day in each month, which removes the effect of months having different lengths.

Month202320242025
January780778804
February774811795
March762768746
April700694737
May690735722
June681720731
July654697707
August687711731
September710701739
October743716774
November718763780
December746751783
Annual average720.4737.1754.1

Data Changes Flagged, Not Smoothed

Two changes affect the series. In July 2024, emergency department specimens moved to a separate priority path and stopped appearing in the routine series. The months before July 2024 were restated by removing specimens with an emergency department location code, so all 36 months measure the same thing; the restated months are marked in the source file. In October 2023, the information system was down for 31 hours over two days; tubes processed during downtime were entered later with estimated times, so October 2023 is averaged over the 29 days with complete records. No other gaps were found. One counting rule is also stated: tubes later rejected for labeling or quality problems are counted as received, because they consume processing time at the bench whether or not they are tested, and such pre-analytic problems are the most common source of laboratory error (Plebani, 2006).

What this page is doingBoth definitional changes are named with what was done about each. A forecast built on a series that silently changed definition midway would measure the change, not demand.
3

Pattern and Method

Two patterns are visible. Volume is highest from November through March and lowest in July, the pattern expected from higher inpatient census in respiratory season. And the annual average has climbed from 720.4 to 754.1 tubes a day over two years, about 2.3% a year. A method that ignored either would fail: a simple moving average would lag the winter rise and misstate the summer trough, and a straight trend line would miss the season entirely.

The method chosen is classical decomposition with a multiplicative seasonal index and a linear trend. It is transparent, can be checked by hand, and suits a series with a steady trend and a stable seasonal shape. More complex methods are not always more accurate for hospital volumes: a comparison of methods for daily emergency department volumes found that a regression on calendar patterns performed as well as or better than more elaborate models (Jones et al., 2008). The method follows the standard approach set out in a widely used forecasting text (Hyndman & Athanasopoulos, 2021).

Calculation, Shown for January 2026

Step 1, seasonal index. For each year, divide January's value by that year's annual average: 780 ÷ 720.4 = 1.083 for 2023; 778 ÷ 737.1 = 1.056 for 2024; 804 ÷ 754.1 = 1.066 for 2025. The average is 1.068. The twelve monthly indices are then scaled so that they average exactly 1.000; January's index remains 1.068 after rounding.

Step 2, trend. Each month's value is divided by its seasonal index to remove the season, and a least-squares line is fitted to the 36 deseasonalized values, with months numbered 1 to 36. The fitted line is 713.76 + 1.267 × month number, meaning about 1.3 tubes a day added each month.

Step 3, forecast. January 2026 is month 37. Trend value: 713.76 + 1.267 × 37 = 760.6. Forecast: 760.6 × 1.068 = 812 tubes a day.

What this page is doingOne period is worked through in full, so a reader can follow the arithmetic rather than trust a spreadsheet. The same three steps produce every other month.
4

Testing Accuracy Before Trusting It

The method was fitted to 2023 and 2024 only and used to forecast each month of 2025, which was then compared with what actually happened. The mean absolute percentage error was 2.1%. For comparison, a naive forecast that simply repeats the same month of the previous year had an error of 3.4%. The method beats the naive benchmark by a meaningful margin, Its largest single miss was March 2025, forecast at 781 against an actual 746, an error of 4.7%, when the respiratory season ended early; the core winter months, December through February, were each within 1.6%, which suggests the method handles the peak adequately.

Projection for 2026, With an Error Range

Refitted on all 36 months, the method projects the following average tubes per day. The error range is plus or minus 27 tubes a day, about 1.96 times the 13.9-tube standard error of the fitted model, an approximate 95% range that assumes future errors behave like past ones.

MonthForecast tubes per dayApproximate rangeMorning peak tubes, 5 to 7 a.m., at 39% of the dayPeak arrivals per hour
January812785 to 839317158
February820793 to 847320160
March786759 to 813306153
April to June, average740713 to 767289144
July715688 to 742279139
August to October, average757730 to 784295148
November790763 to 817308154
December799772 to 826311156

What the Forecast Means for the Constraint

The morning peak rate is projected to stay above the processing bench's capacity of about 130 tubes an hour in every month of 2026, reaching about 160 an hour in February. Even the July trough, about 139 an hour, exceeds it. The problem found in the bottleneck assessment is therefore not a winter anomaly that will pass, and it will worsen slowly as the trend continues. The forecast assumes the morning draw schedule stays as it is, with 39% of the day's tubes arriving between 5 and 7 a.m.; if the draw schedule changed, the peak rate would change even with the same daily total, which is one of the options examined later. The forecast will be updated quarterly, and any month outside the error range will trigger a review of the method.

References

Hyndman, R. J., & Athanasopoulos, G. (2021). Forecasting: Principles and practice (3rd ed.). OTexts. https://otexts.com/fpp3/

Jones, S. S., Thomas, A., Evans, R. S., Welch, S. J., Haug, P. J., & Snow, G. L. (2008). Forecasting daily patient volumes in the emergency department. Academic Emergency Medicine, 15(2), 159-170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2007.00032.x

Plebani, M. (2006). Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine? Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 44(6), 750-759. https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2006.123

The Herzing HA 640 Unit 3 instructions

Unit 3 asks you to forecast demand for a health care service using historical data. Expect to describe the series, flag data changes, identify patterns and choose a method, show the calculation, test accuracy, project the future with an error range and explain what the forecast means for operations. Students often ask which method to use and how to show accuracy. Choose a method that handles the patterns you see, such as seasonal indices with a trend. Restate earlier data when definitions change, rather than smoothing over breaks. Fit the method on early years and test it on the latest year. Compare with a naive forecast. Report a range, not just a point.

How this HA 640 Unit 3 example is built

The forecast opens with the series and why future volume matters for the processing bench. The data section explains how pre-July 2024 months were restated to match the new routine definition. The pattern section shows the November-to-March peak and the steady annual increase. A worked example calculates January 2026 step by step, from yearly seasonal ratios to the scaled index and trend. The accuracy section reports the holdout error and the naive comparison. A projection table lists average tubes per day for each month of 2026 with the error range. The final section converts daily volume to morning peak rates and shows that even the July low exceeds processing capacity, so the problem is year-round.

Reading the HA 640 Unit 3 rubric

Herzing's rubric for a demand forecast usually covers the series, data quality, pattern identification, method, calculation, accuracy testing, the projection and operational meaning. Testing accuracy on held-out data before trusting the projection gets the closest reading, because a forecast that has not been checked against reality cannot support a staffing or capital decision. Data points reward breaks flagged and restated. Method criteria look for a choice matched to seasonality and trend. Calculation credit goes to one month worked in full. Projection points reward an error range with its basis. Operational meaning should link volume to the constraint. Hyndman and Athanasopoulos's forecasting text and Jones's study of emergency department forecasting support the method.

HA 640 Unit 3 help: mistakes that cost points

Demand forecasts in HA 640 Unit 3 often come up short by picking a method without checking which patterns the data show. Another frequent problem is smoothing over a definition change instead of restating earlier months. Students often skip a holdout test. Accuracy is reported without a naive comparison. The projection has no error range. The calculation is hidden. Daily volume is never converted to peak hourly demand, so the link to operations is lost. Trend and seasonality are confused. Finally, test before you trust, because graders reward a forecast that shows how wrong it might be and what that means for the decision ahead.

Get a HA 640 Unit 3 example written to your instructions

Send the Unit 3 instructions and the rubric from your HA 640 classroom, plus the historical series your section supplies and the decision the forecast has to support. We write a custom example with the series inspected, one method justified against another, the arithmetic shown and an error range reported, returned in 24 to 48 hours. The first custom sample is free.

More HA 640 papers and healthcare administration samples

HA 640 Unit 3 questions, answered

Which forecasting method should I use?

The one the pattern in your series supports. A stable series with random variation suits a simple average or exponential smoothing, a series with a steady climb suits a trend line, and a series with repeating annual movement needs seasonal adjustment before anything else. Say what you saw in the data and choose from that, since the justification carries as much credit as the calculation.

How many periods of history do I need?

Enough to see the pattern you intend to project. Any series with annual seasonality needs several full years before the seasonal effect can be separated from a trend, while a stable daily volume needs far less. If your data set is short, say what that limits and widen the error range accordingly rather than projecting confidently from a handful of points.

Does the forecast have to be for patient volume?

Not necessarily. Supply consumption, procedure minutes, staffed hours required, imaging studies or call volume all forecast the same way and often make cleaner examples because the series is less noisy. Check what your instructions require, and where the choice is yours, pick the quantity whose projection would actually drive a decision in the setting you are describing.

Where can I find a free HA 640 Unit 3 sample paper?

The full HA 640 Unit 3 demand forecast is free on this page, 36 months of lab volume projected for 2026 with seasonal indices, trend and a tested error. A forecast for another service can be written to order.

How do you test a demand forecast?

Fit the method on earlier data, forecast a period you already know and compare with actual results using an error measure such as mean absolute percentage error, then compare with a naive forecast. This sample does that for 2025.