+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

Description

please follow the rebric and format provided in the attachment bellow.

PROBLEM-SOLVING REPORT FORMAT
PROBLEM-SOLVING REPORT FORMAT
D R. MA MD OO H A . A BD E L MOTT LE P
JAN UA RY 2 021
Ideally, a Problem-Solving Report is akin to a decision memorandum. A Problem-Solving
Report must be thoroughly researched and be richly accompanied by endnotes.
A good Problem-Solving Report will have the following parts.
1. Executive Summary
A short abstract of the paper content including all the Problem-Solving Report parts.
2. Problem Background
A. History of the Problem
B. Current Status of the Problem
C. Importance of the Problem
D. Definition of the Problem
Introduction to the problem. Keep it short and to the point. This section frames the issue.
3. Problem Statement
A. Identify the objectives of the entity that is trying to solve the problem and the
Statement of the Problem
B. Statement of Methodology Used in Analysis
C. Identification of Actors Involved
D. Impact of the Problem
It concisely identifies the problem to be solved. It may be in the form of a question.
4. Alternative Solutions
A. Listing of Alternatives Considered
B. Comparison of Alternatives
1
PROBLEM-SOLVING REPORT FORMAT
C. Constraints, Including Political
Enumerate the options and describe them briefly. It is common to provide three options,
but don’t force it to that. For and against arguments do not constitute two options. Give
the decision-maker some choices.
4-D: Analysis of Options: How does each option serve the objectives listed above (3-A)
and what are the other cost issues associated with each. Consider positive and negative
externalities. You should be sensitive to the options’ domestic political repercussions.
5. Recommendations
A. Description Recommendation(s)
B. Rationale for Recommendations
C. Plan for Implementation
D. Provisions for Monitoring/Evaluation
Select the best option and recapitulate why it is the best. Do a reality check. Does the
recommendation solve the problem; is it actionable? Your recommendation should
ideally be a stand-alone, and not require another iteration of the process to figure out
how to implement it. A good recommendation is never a suicide pact.
6. References
7. Appendices
2
Unsatisfa
ctory
Baseline
Developing
Good
Exemplary
1.1
Descripti
on
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55555
Points Range:
6.66666
(6.66666%) 7.66666
Points Range:
7.77777
(7.77777%) 8.77777
Points Range:
8.88888
(8.88888%) 9.88888
Points Range:
9.99999
(9.99999%) 11.1111
(6.55554%)
(7.66665%)
(8.77776%)
(9.88887%)
(11.1111%)
No potential
problem
identified.
One feature
of a potential
problem
discussed.
Describe
multiple
features of a
potential
problem
…and explain
consequence
s to
stakeholders
…and discuss
administrative
constraints
affecting MOI
engagement.
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55555
Points Range:
6.66666
(6.66666%) 7.66666
Points Range:
7.77777
(7.77777%) 8.77777
Points Range:
8.88888
(8.88888%) 9.88888
Points Range:
9.99999
(9.99999%) 11.1111
(6.55554%)
(7.66665%)
(8.77776%)
(9.88887%)
(11.1111%)
No sources
cited.
One source
cited.
Multiple
sources cited
…and quality
of sources
described
…and
relevance of
sources to
specifics of the
problem
discussed to
produce a
coherent
justification.
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55555
Points Range:
6.66666
(6.66666%) 7.66666
Points Range:
7.77777
(7.77777%) 8.77777
Points Range:
8.88888
(8.88888%) 9.88888
Points Range:
9.99999
(9.99999%) 11.1111
(6.55554%)
(7.66665%)
(8.77776%)
(9.88887%)
(11.1111%)
No datasets
identified.
Identify one
relevant
dataset.
Identify
multiple
relevant
datasets
…and
aggregate
into a single
coherent data
structure
…and explain
quality with
reference to
missing data
outliers, and
relevant
metadata.
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55555
Points Range:
6.66666
(6.66666%) 7.66666
Points Range:
7.77777
(7.77777%) 8.77777
Points Range:
8.88888
(8.88888%) 9.88888
Points Range:
9.99999
(9.99999%) 11.1111
(6.55554%)
(7.66665%)
(8.77776%)
(9.88887%)
(11.1111%)
Describe
multiple
…and
generate
…describing
any patterns
1.2
Support
2.1 Data
2.2
Analysis
3.1
Insight
3.2
Proposal
4.1
Cogency
4.2
Template
No analytical
approach
identified.
Describe one
analytical
approach.
analytical
approaches
appropriate
representatio
ns of results
and
correlations in
the data.
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55555
Points Range:
6.66666
(6.66666%) 7.66666
Points Range:
7.77777
(7.77777%) 8.77777
Points Range:
8.88888
(8.88888%) 9.88888
Points Range:
9.99999
(9.99999%) 11.1111
(6.55554%)
(7.66665%)
(8.77776%)
(9.88887%)
(11.1111%)
No insights
derived.
One insight
derived from
analysis
Multiple
insights
derived from
analysis
…and
supported
with reference
to the
literature
…and any
limitations in
data or analysis
that may affect
validity of
interpretations
discussed.
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55555
Points Range:
6.66666
(6.66666%) 7.66666
Points Range:
7.77777
(7.77777%) 8.77777
Points Range:
8.88888
(8.88888%) 9.88888
Points Range:
9.99999
(9.99999%) 11.1111
(6.55554%)
(7.66665%)
(8.77776%)
(9.88887%)
(11.1111%)
No plan
proposed.
Plan with one
element
proposed.
Plan with
multiple
elements
proposed
…that
includes
clearly
detailed
specifications
…and
discusses
feasibility within
context of MOI
policy and
resourcing.
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55555
Points Range:
6.66666
(6.66666%) 7.66666
Points Range:
7.77777
(7.77777%) 8.77777
Points Range:
8.88888
(8.88888%) 9.88888
Points Range:
9.99999
(9.99999%) 11.1111
(6.55554%)
(7.66665%)
(8.77776%)
(9.88887%)
(11.1111%)
No apparent
organization
of ideas.
One link
between
ideas is clear.
Links among
ideas make
message
clear and
easy to follow
…and provide
focused,
relevant,
explanation
and support
to the
argument
…and frame
the argument
within the
context of a
broader
discourse.
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55555
Points Range:
6.66666
(6.66666%) 7.66666
Points Range:
7.77777
(7.77777%) 8.77777
Points Range:
8.88888
(8.88888%) 9.88888
Points Range:
9.99999
(9.99999%) 11.1111
(6.55554%)
(7.66665%)
(8.77776%)
(9.88887%)
(11.1111%)
No apparent
observance
of standards.
Irregular
observance of
a limited
Regular
observance of
…with
demonstrated
…and skillful
adaptation to
4.3 Style
range of
standards.
all common
standards
attention to
detail
specific
contexts.
Points
Range:
0 (0.00%) 6.55561
Points Range:
6.66672
(6.66672%) 7.66673
Points Range:
7.77784
(7.77784%) 8.77785
Points Range:
8.88896
(8.88896%) 9.88897
Points Range:
10.00008
(10.00008%) 11.1112
(6.5556%)
(7.66672%)
(8.77784%)
(9.88896%)
(11.1112%)
No apparent
observance
of standard
conventions
of formal
written style.
Irregular
observance of
the most
obvious and
common
conventions
of formal
written style.
Consistent
observance of
most
conventions
of formal
written style
…with word
choice
appropriate to
the intended
audience
…and
constructions
displaying
variety,
suitability and
fluency.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

  
error: Content is protected !!