Introduction The main function of Baldrige’s criteria for analyzing a strategic plan is to assist in enhancing competitiveness in organizations by ensuring they deliver value as per the specified management system that acts as a role model. The role of the assessment criteria is to assist organizations in assessing their improvements and trigger efforts for setting up an improving system for the organization. The analysis criterion, therefore, focuses more on rewarding performances and capabilities of firms or organizations without specialty. UCB’s Vs Baldrige’s Criteria for Strategic Planning The Baldrige criteria for analyzing strategic plans is part of the national quality program managed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and acts as a test for the overall performance of organizations (NIST, 2009). The non-prescriptive nature of Baldrige criteria for assessing strategic plan indicates that the strategy acts only as a guidance, checklist, or a prescription that provides an outline or sample of how firms ought to manage resources or generally run their programs (NIST, 2009). The elimination of quality from the earlier forms of criteria to include performance provisions makes the organization’s focus shift from the responsibility of enhancing the quality of products or services for customer satisfaction. Firms are now more concerned with ensuring that all aspects of the organization are balanced. Unlike the strategies of UC Berkeley and the University of Colorado at Boulder, Baldrige criteria currently focus on the performance of organizations particularly on matters about business profitability. It also forms a plan on how to boost employee morale, business growth, market shares, trade safety, and business innovations (UC Boulder, 2002). Costs of Participation The Baldrige criterion has become tougher and has raised expectations thus causing the assessment procedure to become very expensive for most firms compared to its counter-productivity. There is still very little evidence of company improvement because of Baldrige’s criteria for assessing strategic plans. This is arguable because firms fail to follow the paradigm model after the awards are given. The firm’s focus shifts immediately to engage innovative ideas for subsequent awards. The Baldrige projects are therefore often sidelined to quality assurance departments in various firms. As opposed to UC Boulder and UC Berkeley plans, the criterion fails to provide the procedures of incorporating analysis feedback back to the firms’ strategic plans (UC Berkeley, 2007). Plans from the award-winning firms are well prepared but there are no procedures to enhance implementation. This is a clear indication of a success criterion that lacks execution transcription procedures. UC Boulder and UC Berkeley UC Boulder and UC Berkeley analysis criteria for education systems involve analysis of budgetary measures, the financial performance of institutions, and marketing measures. In marketing, the firm checks on shares in the market, the growth rates that involve a measure of students’ enrollments and programs progression. The growth analysis also includes a measure of new education services such as distance or web-based learning and a measure of market positions. Measuring how pupils are in a position of utilizing the available re