№ files_lp_3_process_7_101492
File format: docx
Character count: 17818
File size: 6000 KB
This document outlines a unit plan for second-grade students focused on learning about unique habitats through various instructional activities, including digital research and collaborative group work.
Year:
2017
Region / City:
Towson, Maryland
Subject:
Education
Document Type:
Curriculum
Author:
Lauren Williams
Target Audience:
Second grade students, educators
Period of Validity:
Spring 2017
Date of Approval:
Spring 2017
Date of Revisions:
Not specified
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.
Year:
2021
Region / city:
Firth of Forth
Theme:
Environmental Regulations, Habitat Conservation, Development Impact Assessment
Document Type:
Guide
Organization / Institution:
European Union
Author:
Unknown
Target Audience:
Developers, Regulators, Environmental Impact Assessors
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Note:
Contextual Description
Year:
2015
Region / city:
Scotland
Topic:
Marine Planning, Environmental Conservation
Document type:
Regulatory appraisal
Agency / institution:
Marine Scotland
Author:
Marine Scotland
Target audience:
Policy makers, environmental regulators, marine planners
Effective period:
Ongoing
Approval date:
March 2015
Revision date:
Not specified
Year:
No date
Region / city:
Doncaster
Topic:
Pond ecosystems, pond dipping activities
Document type:
Educational resource
Organization:
No specific organization
Author:
No author mentioned
Target audience:
Teachers, students, educators
Period of validity:
No period specified
Approval date:
No approval date mentioned
Date of changes:
No date of changes mentioned
Year:
2017
Jurisdiction:
United Kingdom
Legislation:
Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017; Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)
Document type:
Method Statement template
Issued by:
Natural England
Contact:
Wildlife Licensing, Horizon House, Deanery Road, Bristol BS1 5AH, T. 020802 61089, [email protected]
Purpose:
Support a licence application for activities affecting bat species
Target species:
Bats (various species, including Daubenton’s, common pipistrelle, brown long-eared)
Intended audience:
Applicants for bat mitigation licences
Attachments required:
Photographs, maps/figures, work schedule (form WML-A13a-E5a&b)
Guidelines referenced:
Bat Mitigation Guidelines
Survey scope:
Presence/absence, roost usage, foraging, commuting, swarming
Site assessment:
Habitat and structural evaluation of roost suitability
Impact assessment:
Effects on favourable conservation status (FCS) and population survival
Year:
2024
Region / city:
Saddleworth, Greater Manchester
Theme:
Environmental Impact Assessment
Document type:
Draft Report
Organization:
Greater Manchester Ecology Unit
Author:
Greater Manchester Ecology Unit
Target audience:
Local government officials, environmental agencies, and the public
Period of validity:
2024-2044
Approval date:
March 2024
Date of changes:
None
Context description:
A draft environmental assessment evaluating the potential effects of the Saddleworth Neighbourhood Plan on European protected sites, focusing on the necessary regulatory compliance for land use planning.
Year:
2024
Region / City:
South Downs National Park, Sussex, UK
Theme:
Environmental Impact Assessment, Conservation
Document Type:
Screening and Appropriate Assessment Statement
Agency / Institution:
South Downs National Park Authority
Author:
South Downs National Park Authority
Target Audience:
Planning Authorities, Environmental Consultants, Developers
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Upper Yangtze River, China
Topic:
Fish habitat, Hydropower impact, Ecological restoration
Document Type:
Research article
Institution:
Center for Eco-Environmental Research, Nanjing Hydraulic Research Institute; Yangtze Institute for Conservation and Development, Hohai University
Authors:
Yuqing Lin, Qiuwen Chen, Ting Li, Tao Feng
Target Species:
Fish in upper Yangtze River
Methodology:
Field observation, controlled experiments, environmental DNA analysis
Experimental Variables:
Water temperature, Flow velocity
Proposed Measures:
Ecological flow design, removal of small hydropower dams, habitat compensation in tributaries
Jurisdiction:
Wales
Legislation:
Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017
Issuing Authority:
Natural Resources Wales
Document Type:
Licence application form with guidance notes
Subject:
Permanent possession of Annex IV European protected species
Purposes of Licence:
Scientific purposes; Educational purposes; Conservation or reintroduction; Strictly supervised selective possession
Application Methods:
Electronic submission or postal submission
Processing Authority:
Species Permitting Team, Natural Resources Wales
Data Protection Framework:
General Data Protection Regulation; Freedom of Information Act 2000; Environmental Information Regulations 2004
Fee Policy:
Charges applicable where clear commercial benefit applies unless exempt
Related Provisions:
General Licences for possession of dead European protected species
Year:
2017
Region / city:
Moray
Theme:
Forestry, Nature Conservation, Tourism
Document Type:
Report
Organization:
Moray Council
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Public authorities, local stakeholders, environmental professionals
Action Period:
2017-2037
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2018
Region / city:
European Union
Subject:
Species protection, Environmental Law, Habitats Directive
Document type:
Guidance document
Institution:
European Commission, Directorate-General for Environment
Author:
European Commission
Target audience:
National and regional authorities, conservation bodies, stakeholders involved in the implementation of the Habitats Directive
Period of validity:
Ongoing, subject to revisions
Approval date:
30th October 2018
Date of changes:
Updated in 2018
Implementation context:
Action Plan for nature, people and the economy
Keywords:
Habitats Directive, strict protection, species conservation, EU legislation, derogation, nature conservation
Year:
2014
Region / city:
United States
Subject:
Waterbird Management, Wetland Habitats, Wildlife Monitoring
Document Type:
Protocol Framework
Organization / Institution:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Authors:
Tavernia BG, Loges BW, Wilson AM, Herner-Thogmartin JH, Casey J, Coluccy JM, Coppen JL, Hanan M, Heglund PJ, Jacobi SK, Jones T, Knutson MG, Koch KE, Lonsdorf EV, Laskowski HP, Lor SK, Lyons JE, Seamans ME, Stanton JD, Stanton W, Thompson BA, Winn B, Ziemba LC
Target Audience:
Wildlife management professionals, researchers, conservationists
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
2014
Date of Changes:
None
Description:
This protocol provides a standardized framework for assessing waterbird use of wetlands and their habitats, focusing on non-breeding periods and enabling data analysis across broad geographic scales to inform management decisions.
Year:
2026
Region / Location:
Jardin del Gato, La Isla, El Asilo
Subject:
Marine benthic fauna
Document Type:
Research data table
Institution:
Unspecified research institution
Author:
Unspecified
Target Audience:
Marine ecologists and researchers
Data Transformation:
log (X+1)
Cut-off Point:
50%
Comparison Parameters:
Sites, habitats, rocky walls
Metrics Included:
Contribution (%), Cumulative (%), Average Abundance, Average Dissimilarity, Average Similarity
Year:
2013
Region / city:
England and Wales
Subject:
Freshwater habitats, pond ecosystems
Document type:
Reference guide
Organization:
European Commission DG Environment
Author:
Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC)
Target audience:
Environmental scientists, ecologists, conservation planners
Habitat classification:
Annex 1 Habitats Directive
Key species:
Littorella uniflora, Lobelia dortmanna, Isoetes spp., Chara spp., Hydrocharis morsus-ranae, Sphagnum spp.
Water chemistry:
oligotrophic to eutrophic, pH 3–8
Pond age:
both newly formed and mature ponds
Geographical notes:
New Forest, Cheshire Plain, Outer Hebrides, Lizard in Cornwall
Habitat types:
oligotrophic waters, mesotrophic waters, hard oligo-mesotrophic waters, natural eutrophic lakes, dystrophic lakes and ponds, Mediterranean temporary ponds
Reference:
EU Habitats Directive Interpretation Manual (European Commission DG 2013) https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/habitatsdirective/docs/Int_Manual_EU28.pdf
Year:
2026
Region / City:
United States / Arlington, Texas
Topic:
Biomes and Ecosystems
Document Type:
Educational assignment
Organization / Institution:
Book It Travel Agency
Author:
Classroom curriculum
Target Audience:
Students, educators
Period of Activity:
Summer project
Instructions Date:
2026
Submission Requirements:
Brochure and multimedia presentation
Key Biomes Covered:
Marine, Freshwater, Desert, Tropical Forest, Deciduous Forest, Taiga, Savanna, Grassland, Tundra
Research Focus:
Geographical location, climate, flora, fauna, natural resources, landforms, tourist attractions
) 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
Year:
2022
Region / City:
Wales
Topic:
Education
Document Type:
Recruitment Pack
Organization / Institution:
Estyn
Author:
Owen Evans, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education and Training
Target Audience:
Prospective applicants for the role of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Education and Training
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2022
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Entity Registration, Federal Government
Document Type:
Fact Sheet
Organization / Institution:
Federal Government, SAM.gov
Author:
Unknown
Target Audience:
Organizations doing business with the Federal Government
Effective Period:
April 4, 2022
Approval Date:
Unknown
Amendment Date:
Unknown
Note:
Year
Document Type:
Proposal
Note:
(If there are multiple corresponding authors then nominate one for communication with the editorial office.)Received date; Revised date; Editorial decision date.