№ lp_1_2_22988
File format: docx
Character count: 8901
File size: 31 KB
This document provides a list of terms related to digital accessibility and explains their relevance to the creation of accessible web pages, electronic documents, and captions.
Year:
2023
Region / City:
U.S. / University of California
Topic:
Digital Accessibility, Web Accessibility
Document Type:
Guide
Organization / Institution:
University of California
Author:
Andrew Berk, ADA Coordinator
Target Audience:
UCI staff, event organizers, digital content creators
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
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.
Note:
Study Summary 1.1 Please provide a brief summary of the study in the table below. A complete description of the study with detailed information should be provided in the body of the protocol. For sections not applicable to the study, mark them as N/A. Study Title Study Design Primary Objective/Purpose Secondary Objective(s)/Purposes Research Intervention(s) ClinicalTrials.gov NCT # Study Population Sample Size Study Duration for individual subjects Study Specific Abbreviations/ Definitions
Background 3.1 Provide the scientific or scholarly background for, rationale for, and significance of the research based on the existing literature and how will it add to existing knowledge. :
this section should be limited to only information directly related to the research questions and objectives. Do not include your full dissertation proposal. 3.2 Describe any relevant preliminary data (e.g. pilot data).
Procedures Involved 5.1 Describe and explain the study design. 5.2 Please select the methods that will be employed in this study (select all that apply):
☐ Audio/Video Recording ☐ Psychophysiological Recording ☐ Behavioral Interventions ☐ Record Review - Educational ☐ Behavioral Observations and Experimentations ☐ Record Review - Employee ☐ Deception ☐ Record Review- Medical ☐ Focus Groups ☐ Record Review - Other ☐ Interviews ☐ Specimen Collection or Analysis ☐ Investigational Medical Device – (e.g. Medical Mobile Applications) ☐ Surveys and/or Questionnaires ☐Psychometric Testing ☐ Other Social-Behavioral Procedures Provide a description of all research procedures being performed and when they are performed. (Upload any surveys, questionnaires, interview scripts, focus group scripts, debriefing scripts, psychometric tests, stimulus materials, intervention manuals, and data collection forms on the Local Site Documents page in the IRB application.) 5.3 Describe the procedures or interventions that are going to be conducted as part of the research project, but that would have been conducted anyway, even if the research was not occurring (i.e. standard of care procedures, activities that would occur in a classroom). 5.4 Describe the procedures performed to lessen the probability or magnitude of risks of items selected in 5.2.5. 5 If accessing or collecting existing data, describe: The data that will be collected during the study (e.g. demographics, medical history, etc.). Attach the data capture sheet(s) on the Local Site Documents page in the IRB application. How the data will be obtained, including how you have the authority to access the data. The source or location of the data (e.g. USF Epic, TGH Epic, Hillsborough County School records, CANVAS records, publicly available databases, etc.). 5.6 If collecting and/or analyzing biological specimens, describe: How the biological specimens will be or have been collected. How the biological specimens will be stored. How long the biological specimens will be stored. How the biological specimens will be used. The laboratories that will be used. Whether the collected biological specimens will undergo genetic testing. If so, indicate if this study is part of a Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS) and whether the data will be forwarded to the NIH dbGaP. 5.7 If there are plans for long-term follow-up (once all research related procedures are complete), what data will be collected during this period.
Data and Specimen Storage for Future Research 6.1 If data or specimens will be banked for future research studies, describe where the data or specimens will be stored, how long it/they will b:
the process to request a release, approvals required for release, who can obtain data or specimens, and the data to be provided with specimens.
) 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:
2026
Region / City:
South Carolina
Subject:
Volunteerism, Community Service, Nonprofit Organizations
Document Type:
Resolution
Organization / Institution:
South Carolina House of Representatives
Author:
Members of the South Carolina House of Representatives
Target Audience:
General Public, Community Members, Students
Effective Period:
January 20, 2026
Approval Date:
January 20, 2026
Amendment Date:
None
Year:
N/A
Region / City:
N/A
Topic:
Security requirements for leasing specialists
Document Type:
Guidelines
Organization / Institution:
N/A
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
Leasing specialists, security specialists, government contractors
Effective Period:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Note:
Contextual Description
Year:
2026
Region / City:
United States / Deer Park, WA
Topic:
Construction, Wall Assembly Systems
Document Type:
Guide Specification
Organization / Institution:
Knight Wall Systems, Inc.
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Specification writers, engineers, construction professionals
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Contextual description:
Guide specification for a thermally broken rainscreen attachment system with details on components, design requirements, performance standards, and submittal procedures.
Note:
Year
Theme:
Baseball, Outfield Training
Document Type:
Training Manual
Target Audience:
Coaches, Baseball Trainers
Context:
This document outlines strategies and drills for training outfield players in baseball, focusing on skills, techniques, and philosophies for different age groups.
Year:
2005
Region / City:
Not specified
Theme:
Biblical Studies, Textual Criticism
Document Type:
Lecture
Institution:
Mars Hill Church
Author:
Dr. Daniel Wallace
Target Audience:
Scholars, Religious Studies Enthusiasts, General Public
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Modifications:
Not specified
Year:
2017
Region / City:
United Kingdom
Topic:
Immunisation Payment Processing
Document Type:
Process Guide
Organization / Institution:
NHS
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Healthcare providers, GP practices
Effective Period:
Q2 Jul-Sep 17, Q3 Oct-Dec 17
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Context:
Process guide detailing the steps and deadlines for submitting and processing child immunisation claims through CQRS and Open Exeter, with emphasis on deadlines, data accuracy, and reconciliation procedures.
Note:
Year
Topic:
Fantasy, Adventure
Document type:
Narrative
Contextual description:
Fantasy narrative presenting a journey of a group of travelers encountering a puzzle along their way.
Year:
Not specified
Region / city:
Not specified
Topic:
Health, Oncology
Document type:
Supplementary Table
Institution / organization:
Flatiron Health
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Researchers, Healthcare professionals
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Not specified
Topic:
Health and social care
Document Type:
Report
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Service providers, healthcare professionals, social care workers, service users
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2017-2018
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Parenting, Catholic faith, discipline
Document Type:
Syllabus, Handout
Institution:
Not specified
Author:
Kurt Buckman
Target Audience:
Parents, Catholic community
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
[year]
Region/City:
[region/city]
Topic:
Grievance procedure, employee rights, workplace safety
Document Type:
Grievance filing
Organization/Institution:
[organization]
Author:
[author]
Target Audience:
Postal workers, union members, management
Period of Validity:
[period]
Approval Date:
[date]
Amendment Date:
[date]
Year:
2023
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Informed Consent, Research Ethics
Document Type:
Research Guidelines
Organization:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Human Research Protections
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Researchers, Institutional Review Board (IRB) members
Validity Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Last Update:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Subject:
Education, Legal Education, Gang Prevention
Document Type:
Lesson Plan
Institution / Organization:
Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education
Target Audience:
Middle and High School Students, Teachers, Law Enforcement Officers
Duration:
40 Minutes
Note:
Year
Topic:
Music composition, music education
Document type:
Writing guidelines
Target audience:
Students, music enthusiasts
Year:
2017
Region / City:
Yugoslavia
Topic:
NATO Intervention, International Law, War Crimes
Document Type:
Article, Film Description
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
General public
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Context:
An article commemorating the 18th anniversary of the NATO attack on Yugoslavia, reflecting on its legality and consequences, and including a reference to a film that documents the aftermath of the war.
Year:
2009
Region / city:
Western Europe
Topic:
Electoral Systems, Proportional Representation, Political Parties
Document Type:
Academic Paper
Institution:
Stanford University
Author:
Jonathan Rodden
Target Audience:
Political Scientists, Academics
Period of Effect:
Late 19th to Early 20th Century
Approval Date:
2009
Date of Revisions:
December 30, 2009