case brief for dinler v city of new york 607 f 3d 923 2d cir 2010

by

Case Brief for Dinler v. City of New York, 607 F.3d. 923 (2d. Cir. 2010). no plagiarism. Example is attached.

forum discussion scope management 1 2paragraph and no quoting

by

As we briefly discussed in class, defining a clear scope is important… and a project manager should clearly identify what is IN scope, and significant items that are OUT of scope that some of the stakeholders may incorrectly expect were included. Please comment on one (or more) of the following points (and the comments of others!)

– What is the difference between PROJECT scope and Product Scope?

– How can the initial WBS help clarify the project scope?

– Why is it critical to manage scope (and any scope creep) throughout the project?

– If you were a project manager with a choice of working on a project with a well defined scope with a very aggressive timeline, or a project with a loosely defined scope and relaxed time line, which would you choose, and why?

1-2 short paragraph to answer all the questions and plz do not quote.

fixing my first draft 1

by

I need you to fix my first draft memorandum because it is very long and the some data are not correct on it and the appendix part has some mistakes. so please follow the guide file to fix my paper. my paper in the attachment too.

Memorandum 1

General Education Assignment 1 (#GEA 1)

1.4 – Military Memorandum Final

Assignment due: February 11 by 11:59 PM

This assignment will be submitted a second time for General Education Submittal. Be sure to submit to both locations as grading will occur through this submittal only, while the other is important for General Education Assessments.

Writing Requirements:

This assignment will require you to demonstrate an ability to solve, understand, and explain a statistical problem in language appropriate to the professional status and background of the audience you are addressing. You will be expected to follow the provided format for presenting the material, a practice that will extend into your professional life. You are expected to use editing software to review your work for grammar and punctuation errors prior to turning it in, failure to do so will be reflected in your grade.

What will you be graded on? The list below is a general overview. Refer to the assignment rubric and the Military Memorandum Guide for specifics on what is expected.

  • Ability to discuss statistical approaches, logic, and findings in plain language
  • Correct document format
  • Appropriately addressing your audience
  • Finding and documenting evidence to support your recommendation
  • Ability to effectively use graphics to enhance your message
  • Completeness
  • Proofreading and editing your work prior to handing it in (several online programs are available to aid you with this. One that has a free version is Grammarly. )

`

Problem Description:

The United States military has been involved as a peace-keeping force in a humanitarian effort to prevent further genocide in the country of Lorian. Many soldiers have died in this effort. The government has recently approved the use of emergency funds to reduce the loss of soldiers’ lives, but funding will only support one initiative. The officer in charge of the theater of operations, your commanding officer, has asked you, a military engineer, rank of Lieutenant, to evaluate the situation and recommend a course of action to reduce the number of soldier fatalities which is necessary to enable the peace-keeping force to remain in place. Analyze the provided data regarding soldier fatalities in a one-month period and make a recommendation regarding what the government and military should do.

Audience: Any time you prepare a professional document, you should consider the audience that you are writing the document for. You should tailor the content, language, tone, and structure of the document to the audience you are addressing. This document is being prepared for senior-level government and military members. Ask yourself what they can be reasonably expected to know about this topic, and what they need to know to make an informed decision. Address the memorandum to the United States Secretary of Defense (Find the current Secretary of Defense’s name and title).

Provide carbon copies (cc)’s to :

  • The House of Representatives Defense Subcommittee
  • The United States Senate Defense Subcommittee

Tone: The Audience for this document requires that the style is precise and professional.

  • Utilize plain language when describing your analysis, as you cannot assume all readers will be statistically literate. However, there are also some who will understand statistics and will want to understand the statistical logic that you used to determine your recommendation.
  • Start the document with a summary that readers can read to understand the essential elements of the document – the context of the issue, what is being examined and how, and the recommendation you will make.
  • Develop the document around a direct, coherent message (thesis), and clear evidence to support it.
  • Do not use contractions, slang or colloquialisms (Links to an external site.), clichés (Links to an external site.), abbreviations, or text message shortcuts.

Data: The attached data spreadsheet documents the causes of the deaths of soldiers who died in the most recent full month. Each number on the attached spreadsheet identifies the cause of the death of one soldier who died in that month. The cause of death represented by each number is identified in the table below. Use the data from the entire month in your calculations.

Soldier Fatalities Data

Data Coding:

Cause of Fatality Code
Typhus 1
Dysentery 2
Cholera 3
Staph infection 4
Fragment wound 5
Burn wound 6
Gunshot wound 7
Exploding ordnance wound 8
Blood hemorrhage 9

Rubric

CA 1.4 P&S 2020 Spr (1)

CA 1.4 P&S 2020 Spr (1)
Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMemorandum Header layout and contentThe memorandum is laid out correctly and the content complete following the Military Memorandum Guide
1.0 pts

The memorandum header is correctly laid out and the content is complete

 0.75 pts

The memorandum header is weak in the layout or content in one way

 0.6 pts

The memorandum header is weak in the layout and/or content in many ways

 0.0 pts

The memorandum header is missing

1.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSources documentedThe document identifies a minimum of two sources that are used to identify an intervention appropriate to the problem being addressed. They are organized as shown in the Military Memorandum Guide and are complete enough for the sources to be located by the reader.
1.0 pts

Sources are identified in the header reference list and cited in the appropriate part of the document.

 0.65 pts

The sources are not identified in an way that makes it possible for the reader to find them, and/or are not cited in the document.

 0.0 pts

The Sources are missing

1.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMemorandum Body LayoutThe memorandum body (between the header and the appendices) is laid out correctly following the Military Memorandum Guide
1.0 pts

The memorandum body is correctly laid out

 0.75 pts

The memorandum body is weak in the layout in one way

 0.6 pts

The memorandum body is weak in the layout in many ways

 0.0 pts

The memorandum body layout did not follow the Military Memorandum Guide

1.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe “Summary” sectionThe “Summary’ section completely and clearly presents all the elements required as described in the “Military Memorandum Guide.” This must be enough to present the context, the problem you have been asked to address, the analysis approach, and the recommendation as an overview of the detail in the analysis section of the document.
2.0 pts

The “Summary” section is very well done in that is it correct, complete, clear and in plain language. That is, it is written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed.

 1.6 pts

The “Summary” section is weak in one of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, or in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 1.4 pts

The “Summary” section is weak in many of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, and/or in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 1.2 pts

The “Summary” section is difficult to understand and weak in most of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, and/or in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 0.0 pts

The “Summary” section is missing.

2.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeA recommendation is madeA recommendation for a single intervention is made in both the introduction and conclusion and has used the data to support the recommendation
1.0 pts

The recommendation for a single intervention based on the data in the problem, appears in both the introduction and conclusion

 0.75 pts

The recommendation for a single intervention based on the data in the problem, appears in either the introduction or the conclusion

 0.6 pts

The recommendation, based on the data, is for more than one intervention

 0.0 pts

The recommendation made is not based on the data in the problem or is missing

1.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe “Analysis” sectionThe “Analysis” section completely and clearly presents all the elements required in this section as described in the “Military Memorandum Guide The “Analysis” section provides a description of: the data provided, the approach the student used to analyze the data to address the problem, why the approach used allows you to know what you need to in order to provide a recommendation, what you found from the data, how your finding leads to your recommendation and the recommendation. This must be accomplished in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience and in language that the audience for this memorandum can understand.
2.0 pts

The “Analysis” section is very well done in that is it correct, complete, clear and in plain language. That is, it is written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed.

 1.6 pts

The “Analysis” section is weak in one of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, or in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 1.4 pts

The “Analysis” section is weak in many of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, and/or in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 1.2 pts

The “Analysis” section is difficult to understand and weak in most of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, and/or in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 0.0 pts

The “Analysis” section is missing

2.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe bar graph is included and used effectivelyThe bar graph is titled correctly, elements are fully identified, the data presented is accurate, and easy for the audience to read. Specifically, readers can see data, comparative data, and the significance of the data.
1.0 pts

The bar graph is very well done in that is it correct, complete, and clear.

 0.8 pts

The bar graph is weak in one of the following ways: it not entirely correct, complete, or clear.

 0.7 pts

The bar graph is weak in many of the following ways: it not correct, complete, or clear.

 0.5 pts

The bar graph is difficult to read and weak in most of the following ways: it not correct, complete, or clear.

 0.0 pts

The bar graph is missing

1.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe “Conclusion” sectionThe “Conclusion” section is included. This section synthesizes the entire memorandum including the context, what you are addressing, your process and your recommendation. It is correct, clear, complete, and in plain language.
2.0 pts

The “Conclusion” section is very well done in that is it correct, complete, clear and written in plain language. That is, it is written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 1.6 pts

The “Conclusion” section is weak in one of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, or written in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 1.4 pts

The “Conclusion” section is weak in many of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, and/or in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 1.2 pts

The “Conclusion” section is difficult to understand and weak in most of the following ways: it not correct, complete, clear, and/or in plain language (written in a tone appropriate to the status of the audience, and in language that is easily understood by the military and political audience being addressed).

 0.0 pts

The “Conclusion” section is missing

2.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe “Signature” section layout and contentThe “Signature” section is laid out correctly and the content complete following the Military Memorandum Guide
1.0 pts

The signature is correctly laid out and the content is complete

 0.75 pts

The “Signature” section is weak in the layout or content in one way

 0.6 pts

The “Signature” section is weak in the layout and/or content in many ways

 0.0 pts

The “Signature” section is missing

1.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe “Carbon Copy” (cc) section layout and contentThe “Carbon Copy” section is laid out correctly and the content complete following the Military Memorandum Guide
0.5 pts

The “Carbon Copy” section is correctly laid out and the content is complete

 0.38 pts

The “Carbon Copy” section is weak in the layout or content in one way

 0.3 pts

The “Carbon Copy” section is weak in the layout and/or content in many ways

 0.0 pts

The “Carbon Copy” section is missing

0.5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAn “Appendix” section with a summary of the data is includedThe “Appendix” section is included at the end of the document on a separate page. It begins with an easy to read summary of the data provided for the problem and includes a table clearly summarizing the data.
0.5 pts

Appendix is included and formatted correctly

 0.3 pts

The” Appendix” section is included but not formatted correctly

 0.0 pts

The “Appendix” section is missing

0.5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe summary table is included and used effectivelyThe summary table is titled correctly, elements are fully identified, the data presented is accurate, and easy for the audience to read. Specifically, readers to see data, comparative data, and the significance of the data.
1.0 pts

The summary table is very well done in that is it correct, complete, and clear.

 0.8 pts

The summary table is weak in one of the following ways: it not correct, complete, or clear.

 0.7 pts

The summary table is weak in many of the following ways: it not correct, complete, or clear.

 0.5 pts

The summary table is difficult to read and weak in most of the following ways: it not correct, complete, or clear.

 0.0 pts

The summary table is missing

1.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStudent obtained the correct numerical answer
1.0 pts

The answer is correct

 0.6 pts

Part of the answer was correct

 0.0 pts

The answer is not correct

1.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe assignment does not address the correct problem (minus 1 point)
0.0 pts

No Marks

 0.0 pts

The problem addressed is not correct MINUS 1 point

0.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMilitary Insignia were used illegally in the document (minus 2 points)
0.0 pts

Full Marks

 0.0 pts

Military Insignia were used illegally in the document – minus 2 points

0.0 pts

Total Points: 15.0

10 12 page apa masters esl dual immersion

by

10-12 pages on dual immersion esl programs across the nation. PDF below has the directions for everything you need to know

pubhealth 4

by

Week 4 Outbreak at Watersedge

  • Go to the website using this link: Outbreak at Watersedge (http://www.mclph.umn.edu/watersedge/)
  • Click the Play button to start the game.
  • Follow the instructions. They will lead you on a search for an infected organism.
  • Once you have found the infected organism, write a three- to four-page review of the process you went through and the results you obtained. You must identify the disease found and define the epidemiological process you used. Make sure to describe how you used it. This paper must be written in APA format, typed in Times New Roman with 12-point font, and double-spaced with 1” margins. Use at least two references that support your findings.

closely analyze paragraph

by

analyze a paragraph in very simple language

Length : 2 pages and half

Double-Spaced , Font (12) Times new Roman

style : MLA

make my logo

by

Make it like the one below

Logo name Fearlyss training and nutrition

Big F for letter

Use pink and purple for colors

the impact of mobile banking on people 1

by

I need a report about The impact of mobile banking on people. I’d like it to contain APA rules of citation and etc. it should be 1750 words, illustrations like (tabels and figures) and with 6 refrences at least.

critical thinking 354

by

  • The Assignment must be submitted on Blackboard (WORD format only) via allocated folder.
  • Assignments submitted through email will not be accepted.
  • Students are advised to make their work clear and well presented, marks may be reduced for poor presentation. This includes filling your information on the cover page.
  • Students must mention question number clearly in their answer.
  • Late submission will NOT be accepted.
  • Avoid plagiarism, the work should be in your own words, copying from students or other resources without proper referencing will result in ZERO marks. No exceptions.
  • All answered must be typed usingTimes New Roman (size 12, double-spaced) font. No pictures containing text will be accepted and will be considered plagiarism).
  • Submissions without this cover page will NOT be accepted.

outline of quot us federal budget and fiscal policy quot report

by

Briefly state what the study plan is and write down the resources you will draw on. I will provide one reference as a starting point for each topic. You are encouraged to search for more resources, such as lecture notes , textbooks, and academic journal articles (news articles are in general not to be used).

US federal budget and fiscal policy Reference: https://www.cbo.gov/topics/budget Things you may want to explore: budget deficits, fiscal policy, implicit liabilities…