№ lp_2_1_16203
File format: docx
Character count: 16055
File size: 342 KB
The document outlines the schedule and rules for the "Simply Southern" NGC Petite Design Specialty Flower Show.
Year:
2025
Region / city:
Valdosta, GA
Theme:
Flower Show
Document Type:
Event Program
Organization / Institution:
Deep South Garden Clubs, Inc.
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
Garden club members, floral enthusiasts
Duration:
March 12-13, 2025
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Regulation:
NGC Regulation 6.090(9)
Subject:
Compliance with Minimum Internal Control Standards (MICS)
Version:
Version 9
Scope:
Pari-Mutuel operations
Document Type:
Regulatory compliance checklist
Issuing Authority:
Nevada Gaming Control Board
Referenced Standards:
Minimum Internal Control Standards for Pari-Mutuel (Notes #1–#13)
Related Regulations:
Regulation 26A; Regulation 26C.160
Intended User:
Certified Public Accountant (CPA)
Applicable Entities:
Group I licensees
Operational Areas:
Wagering standards; payout standards; computer system controls; ticket and voucher processing
Record Retention Requirement:
60 days for wagering communications recordings
Compliance Method:
Examination of documentation; inquiry of personnel; observation of procedures
Year:
2026
Region / Location:
NGC 2287 (M 41), Milky Way
Subject:
Stellar clusters, stellar rotation, magnetic activity
Document type:
Research article
Institution:
Rochester Institute of Technology, Chandra X-ray Center
Authors:
Benjamin Ramsey, Joel Kastner, Ryan Butler, Alexander Binks, Tom Skillman
Target audience:
Astrophysicists, astronomers
Observation period:
Gaia DR3 release, TESS observations, recent Chandra HRC imaging
Data sources:
Gaia Data Release 3, TESS, Chandra X-ray Observatory
Methodology:
VR-assisted 3D kinematic analysis, light curve fitting, parallax and proper motion tests, color-magnitude diagram filtering
Funding:
SAO grant G04-25013X
Preliminary results:
Rotational bifurcation along upper main sequence, identification of rotational sequences in late-type stars, X-ray activity patterns
Research focus:
Stellar structure, formation, and evolution analysis using cluster members
Peer review status:
Not specified
Gaia DR3 data used:
Yes
TESS data used:
Yes
Chandra data used:
Yes
Year:
2021
Region:
NGC 7027
Topic:
Molecular astrophysics, planetary nebulae
Document type:
Research article
Institution:
IRAM, NOEMA
Authors:
J. Bublitz, J. Kastner, M. Santander-García, J. Alcolea, V. Bujarrabal, T. Forveille, P. Hily-Blant
License:
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0)
Publication date:
January 11, 2021
Observational instruments:
IRAM NOEMA interferometer, HST/WFC3
Key molecules studied:
CO+, HCO+
Spatial resolution:
2"
Contextual description:
Peer-reviewed study presenting interferometric spectral line maps of CO+ and HCO+ in the young planetary nebula NGC 7027, highlighting spatial differences in emission and their relation to photon- and X-ray-dominated regions.
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters
This site gives you a list of the top 50 think tanks. It’s a good place to start. I like to consult the University of Pennsylvania’s “Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program.” They provide de:
//www.brookings.edu/
Brookings Institute is usually ranked as the #1 think tank in the U.S. and as one of the five think tanks with the greatest global influence, often ranked #1 in that category as well. Brookin:
//www.heritage.org/
Heritage Foundation focuses on public policy “based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.” :
//www.cato.org/mission
Cato Institute focuses on public policy, and its aim is “…to originate, disseminate and increase understanding of public policies based on principles of individual liberty, limited government:
//www.hrw.org/
Note:
Human Rights Watch focuses on civil liberties and human rights worldwide. Their work is truly global in scale and they bring scholarship to bear on every aspect of human rights. Today, for example, they offer commentary on worker safety in the U.S., how the jewelry industry fuels human rights violations, Trumps actions and comments since the election, the effects of US “remain in Mexico” policy on children and families, infringements on journalism in China, rebel violence in Central African Republic, and the inequalities in availability of COVID-19 vaccines. Perspective – traditional liberalism; global www.csis.org
The Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) focuses on international affairs. Its daily brief The Evening is great going to bed reading – not in the sense of “it’s boring,” but in:
“CSIS’s purpose is to define the future of national security. We are guided by a distinct set of values – non-partisanship [they mean that], independent thought, innovative thinking, cross-disciplinary scholarship, integrity and professionalism, and talent development.” A modest agenda. Their definition of national security is well beyond “military strategy” and includes issues like global health, climate change, and human rights and the have programs with a regional focus as well. They DO have a strong focus on defense strategy. It is the overarching concern within which climate change, food security, poverty, and the African program are critical issues. Perspectives – traditional conservatism, US but with a strong global focus as well. www.jointcenter.org
The Black Institute is an action oriented think tank that is “… a Black-led policy and organizing institution dedicated to solving local problems and addressing the concerns of Black families:
education, economic fairness, environmental justice, and immigration reform. You have to click on the menu button (upper right of banner) and ten on research and publications to see the full range of issues TBI addresses. These are well-developed and documented policy pieces with a strong focus on community. Perspective – independent, national (but includes immigration) https://aipi.asu.edu/
Year:
2017
Region / City:
Manchester
Topic:
Education, MOOCs, Corporate Social Responsibility
Document Type:
Research Paper
Institution / Organization:
University of Manchester
Authors:
Prof Ann Wakefield, Dr Pat Cartney, Dr Janice Christie, Dr Rebecca Smyth, Dr Alison Cooke, Ms Tracey Jones, Mrs Erin King, Dr Helen White, Ms Jennifer Kennedy
Target Audience:
Academics, Educational Institutions, Researchers in Education
Period of Validity:
N/A
Date of Approval:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Note:
Prologue
Why, Vasher thought, do so many things begin with me getting thrown into prison? The guardsmen laughed to one another outside, slamming the cell door shut with a clang. Vasher stood and duste:
land of Returned Gods, Lifeless servants, BioChromatic research, and--of course--color. The large guard sauntered toward the cell, leaving his friends to their fun with Vasher’s pack. “They say you’re pretty tough,” the man said, sizing up Vasher. Vasher did not respond. “The bartender says you beat down some twenty men in the brawl.” The guard rubbed his chin. “You don’t look that tough to me.” Vasher shrugged. The guard snorted. “You should have known better than to strike a priest. The others, they’ll spend a night locked up. You, though--you’ll hang. Colorless fool.” Vasher turned away, looking over his cell. It was functional, if unoriginal. A thin slit in the top let in light, the stone walls dripped with water and lichen, and a pile of dirty straw decomposed in the corner. “You ignoring me?” the guard asked, stepping closer to the bars. As he did so, the colors of his uniform brightened faintly, like he’d stepped into a stronger light. The change was slight. Vasher didn’t have much Breath remaining. The guard didn’t notice the change in color--just like he hadn’t noticed back in the bar, when he and his buddies had picked Vasher up off the floor and thrown him in their cart. He’d soon wish that he’d been more observant. “Here, now,” one of the men said from behind. “What’s this?” Those two were still looking through Vasher’s pack. Vasher had always found it odd that the men who patrolled dungeons tended to be as bad, or worse, than the men they guarded. Perhaps that was intentional. Society didn’t seem to care if such men were outside the cells or in them--just as long as they were kept away from more honest men. Assuming that such a thing existed. A guard pulled a long object--wrapped in white linen--free from Vasher’s bag. The man frowned at the object, then unwrapped it, revealing a large, thin-bladed sword in a silver sheath. The hilt was pure black. The guard whistled quietly. “Who do you suppose he stole this from?” The lead guard eyed Vasher again, frowning. He was likely wondering if Vasher might be some kind of nobleman. Though such things didn’t really exist in Hallandren, many neighboring kingdoms had their lords and ladies. Yet, what lord would wear a drab brown cloak, ripped in several places? What lord would sport bruises from a bar fight, a half-grown beard, and boots worn from years of walking? Eventually, the guard turned away, apparently convinced that Vasher was no lord. He was right. And he was wrong. “Let me see that,” t
Year:
N/A
Region / City:
N/A
Subject:
Geometry
Document Type:
Exercise
Organization / Institution:
N/A
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
Students
Effective Period:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Modification Date:
N/A