Excel budget proposal workbook, business and finance homework help Business Finance Assignment Help

Using the attached instructions and case study I need two deliverables for this project. One is a security plan and the other is recommendation memo. The security plan should be a minimum of 5 pages. And the memo a minimum of one. The grading rubric is a follows. Recommendation Memo Level 5Level 4Level 3Level 2Level 1 Introduce and Summarize Plan 10 points

Clearly introduces and summarizes the security plan.

8 points

Basically introduces and summarizes the security plan.

6 points

Weakly introduces and summarizes the security plan.

3 points

Little introduction or summary of the security plan. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

0 points

Doesn’t introduce or summarize the security plan.

Format, Grammar and Punctuation (Memo) 5 points

MS Word document using standard memo/letter formatting. No grammar, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

4 points

MS Word document using standard memo/letter formatting. Less than 3 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

2 points

MS Word document using standard memo/letter formatting. Less than 6 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

1 point

MS Word document using standard memo/letter formatting. Less than 9 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

0 points

Non-MS Word document using standard memo/letter formatting. More than 9 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

Security Strategy Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Describes Strategy 13 points

Clearly describes the security strategy being proposed. Strategy covers the confidentiality, integrity and availability.

10 points

Basically describes the security strategy that is being proposed. Strategy covers most of the following: confidentiality, integrity and availability.

7 points

Weakly describes the security strategy that is being proposed. Strategy covers some of the following: confidentiality, integrity and availability.

3 points

Little description of security strategy that is being proposed. Strategy may cover a few of the following: confidentiality, integrity and availability. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

0 points

No description of security strategy solutions. Doesn’t address any of the following: confidentiality, integrity or availability.

Link Solutions 13 points

Clearly describes the linkage between each technology and the strategy.

10 points

Basically describes the linkage between each technology and the strategy.

7 points

Weakly describes the linkage between each technology and the strategy.

3 points

Little description of the linkage between each technology and the strategy. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

0 points

No description of any linkage between each technology and the strategy.

Network Diagram 13 points

Clear, detailed network diagram that describes how the technology fits within the infrastructure.

10 points

Basic network diagram with some details that describes how the technology fits within the infrastructure.

7 points

Network diagram with weak details that describes how the technology fits within the infrastructure.

3 points

Network diagram with little or no details that describes how the technology fits within the infrastructure. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

0 points

Missing or no network diagram.

Security Technologies Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Describes Technologies 13 points

Clearly describes the technologies being proposed. Describe at least three (3) technologies.

10 points

Basically describes the technologies being proposed. Describe at least two (2) technologies.

7 points

Weakly describes the technologies being proposed. Describe at least one (1) technology.

3 points

Little description of technologies being proposed. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

0 points

Doesn’t describe the technologies being proposed.

Costs, ROI, Mitigation and Barriers 13 points

Clear and detailed description of the associated costs, expected return on investment, mitigation of risks, and barriers to success for each technology being proposed.

10 points

Basic, but detailed description of the associated costs, expected return on investment, mitigation of risks, and barriers to success for each technology being proposed.

7 points

Weak and poorly detailed description of the associated costs, expected return on investment, mitigation of risks, and barriers to success for each technology being proposed.

3 points

Little detailed description of the associated costs, expected return on investment, mitigation of risks, and barriers to success for each technology being proposed. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

0 points

No sufficient details in the description of the associated costs, expected return on investment, mitigation of risks, and barriers to success for each technology being proposed.

Finds and Applies Knowledge Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Use of Authoritative Sources 5 points

Used at least 5 authoritative or scholarly sources in paper. One must be NIST SP 800-53. No APA style errors in sources.

4 points

Used at least 3 authoritative or scholarly sources in paper. One must be NIST SP 800-53. No more than 1 APA errors in sources.

2 points

Used at least 2 authoritative or scholarly sources in paper. One must be NIST SP 800-53. No more than 2 APA errors in sources.

1 point

May have used 1 authoritative or scholarly source in paper. May use NIST SP 800-53. May not have used APA style formatting.

0 points

No authoritative or scholarly sources used in paper. NIST SP 800-53 not mentioned.

Citation of Sources 5 points

All sources cited. No errors in citing material in paper.

4 points

All but 1 source cited. Had no more than 5 citing errors in paper.

2 points

All but 2 sources cited. Had no more than 10 citing errors in paper.

1 point

All but 3 sources cited. Had less than 15 APA citing errors in paper.

0 points

No sources cited or had more than 15 APA citing errors in paper.

Organization, Execution and Appearance Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Formatting 5 points

Prepared MS Word document, used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

4 points

MS Word document didn’t follow up to two (2) of the following: used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

2 points

MS Word document didn’t follow up to four (4) of the following: used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

1 point

MS Word document followed only one (1) of the following: used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

0 points

Non MS Word document didn’t any of the following: used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

Grammar and Punctuation 5 points

No grammar, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

4 points

Less than 5 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

2 points

Less than 10 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

1 point

Less than 15 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

0 points

More than 15 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

Overall ScoreLevel 5
14 or moreLevel 4
11 or moreLevel 3
8 or moreLevel 2
5 or moreLevel 1
0 or more

The 2000 word essay topic is about inequality in organisations. The readings for Assignment 2 are the same ones you used for Assignment 1 on Inequality. You need to choose two papers and focus on analysing the different ontological assumptions that are made by the authors of each paper. Your task is to de-constructing the papers, and depending on which perspective you choose, demonstrating your ability to recognise the different assumptions made by modernist, critical theorist, symbolic interpretivist or postmodernist writings. Remember, you choose only two. Do avoid explaining the concepts of ontology and epistemology. Do not use up significant parts of your essay explaining the background, but clearly identify and justify the way you have identified the classifications. Clearly identify the two perspectives in your introduction and identify the two papers associated with your chosen perspectives. Compare the different perspectives and how each deals with inequality. Conclude by critically reflecting how managers may use this to resolve organisational problems relating to inequality.

Use search
or the table of contents in your text to get to resources and tutorials
about PowerPoints. A starter PowerPoint is attached, which is
intentionally inadequate and needs additions and corrections.

Case Management PowerPoint

Ron and Betty, two of your co-workers, created a PowerPoint for a
meeting the firm is having about case management. As a class, recommend
additions and changes to the presentation. Your recommendations should
include two types of ideas.

1. You should recommend changes and additions that give the firm
   more information about options for case management. What websites should
   be highlighted? What content about case management options would help?
2. Please recommend changes to the format, style, and contents of a
   PowerPoint. You may post an example, but keep your file size small by
   not using more than one picture or screen shot, and do not use sound.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is one of the hottest issues in corporate boardrooms. Using the Waldorf Online Library or another location where peer-reviewed, scholarly articles can be found, search for a peer-reviewed, scholarly article regarding corporate social responsibility (CSR). Begin with an introduction that defines the subject of your article and what your view of CSR would be if you were the CEO of a large corporation. In your opinion, why have stakeholders given CSR more attention in recent years? Would you give CSR a significant portion of your corporate budget? Explain and defend your point of view with examples.

Refer to your textbook for suggestions regarding how to form your ideas. Conclude your article critique by summarizing the main idea of the article you have chosen and indicating if you agree or disagree with the article’s author and why.

You will need to identify and explain the author’s ideas. Include specific passages that support your description of the author’s point of view.

Offer your own opinions and expand upon the scenario of being the CEO of a large company. Describe several points on the topic of CSR, including ethics.

For each of the points you mention, include specific supporting information from the textbook (you may summarize, quote, or paraphrase) to provide support for your point of view. Explain how the passages support your opinion.

Write your critique in standard essay form with a minimum of 500 words in APA format.