Issue (basis of the case), Response (of the parties in the case/Relevance/Recommendations (of the student), Application (to the issue or problem raised and the different options out there) and Conclusion (Analysis of the company’s response and well as your recommendations Thus, to expand on the above , the IRAC categories are the main “headings” of your written case summary and under the “IRAC” categories are sub-headings that may take the following forms, e.g. Basis of the case/Pertinent issues (Issue), Analysis of the fact pattern in the case (Response), alternative options prescribed (Application), Predicted, Possible, and Desired Outcomes (Conclusion) etc. must be part of the case summary.1.Does TCL need a second home market? How does expansion into new geographies add value? What did it learn from the Neotel experience?2.Is Russia a suitable home market for TCL? How does it compare with other emerging market options?3.What are the various entry options for a market like Russia? Compare and contrast acquisitions with alliances as well as with organic/ own play.4.Evaluate Pascal as an appropriate entry vehicle into Russia. What are its strengths and weaknesses?5.What challenges or risks would TCL face if it acquired Pascal?6.If TCL were to decide to pursue an investment in Pascal, what should be the valuation? Please state your assumptionsEach question must be between 800 - 1000 words, double spaced

APA style, no plagiarism, peer review references minimum 6This paper should clearly and comprehensively discuss a chronic health disease. Select a topic from the list provided by your course faculty. ((the topic is sickle cell disease )))The paper should be organized into the following sections:Introduction (Identification of the problem) with a clear presentation of the problem as well as the significance and a scholarly overview of the paper’s content. No heading is used for the Introduction per APA current edition. Background and Significance of the disease, to include: Definition, description, signs and symptoms, and current incidence and/or prevalence statistics by state with a comparison to national statistics pertaining to the disease.  Create a table of incidence and prevalence rates by your geographic county/city or state with a comparison to national statistics. Use the APA text for formatting guidelines (tables). This is a table that you create using relevant data, it should not be a table from another source using copy/paste.Surveillance and Reporting: Current surveillance methods and mandated reporting processes as related to the chronic health condition chosen should be specific.Epidemiological Analysis: Conduct a descriptive epidemiology analysis of the health condition. Be sure to include all of the 5 W’s: What, Who, Where, When, Why. Use details associated with all of the W’s, such as the “Who” which should include an analysis of the determinants of health. Include costs (both financial and social) associated with the disease or problem. The 5W's of descriptive epidemiology:What = health issue of concernWho = personWhere = placeWhen = timeWhy/how = causes, risk factors, modes of transmissionScreening and Guidelines: Review how the disease is diagnosed and current national standards (guidelines). Pick one screening test and review its sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and cost. Plan: Integrating evidence, provide a plan of how a nurse practitioner will address this chronic health condition after graduation. Provide three specific interventions that are based on the evidence and include how you will measure outcomes (how will you know that the interventions have utility, are useful?) Note:  Consider primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions as well as the integration of health policy advocacy efforts. All interventions should be based on evidence – connected to a resource such as a scholarly piece of research. Summary/Conclusion: Conclude in a clear manner with a brief overview of the keys points from each section of the paper utilizing integration of resources. The paper should be formatted and organized into the following sections which focus on the chosen chronic health condition.Adhere to all paper preparation guidelines (see below).Preparing the Paper:Page length: 7-10 pages, excluding title page and references. APA format current editionInclude scholarly in-text references throughout and a reference list.Include at least one table that the student creates to present information. Please refer to the “Requirements” or rubric for further details. APA formatting required. ASSIGNMENT CONTENT Category Pts % Description Identification of the Health Problem 15 7.5% Comprehensively and succinctly states the problem/concern. Clear presentation of the problem as well as the significance with a scholarly overview of the paper’s content. Background and Significance of the Health Problem 30 15% Background and significance is complete, presents risks, disease impact and includes a review of incidence and prevalence of the disease within the student’s state compared to national data. Evidence supports background. A student created table is included using APA format. Current Surveillance and Reporting Methods 30 15% Current state and national disease surveillance methods are reviewed along with currently gathered types of statistics and information on whether the disease is mandated for reporting. Supported by evidence. Descriptive Epidemiological Analysis of Health Problem 35 17% Comprehensive review and analysis of descriptive epidemiological points for the chronic health problem. The 5 W’s of epidemiological analysis should be fully identified. Supported by scholarly evidence. Screening, Diagnosis, Guidelines 30 15% Review of current guidelines for screening and diagnosis. Screening tool statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests are presented. Plan of Action 30 15% Integrating evidence, provide a plan of how a nurse practitioner will address this chronic health condition after graduation. Provide three specific interventions that are based on the evidence and include how you will measure outcomes (how will you know that the interventions have utility, are useful?) Note:  Consider primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions as well as the integration of health policy advocacy efforts. All interventions should be based on evidence – connected to a resource such as a scholarly piece of research. Conclusion 15 7.5% The conclusion thoroughly, clearly, succinctly, and logically presents major points of the paper with clear direction for action. Includes scholarly references 185 92% Total CONTENT Points=185 pts ASSIGNMENT FORMAT Category Points % Description APA current ed. 10 5% APA is consistently utilized according to the current edition throughout the paper. Grammar, Syntax, Spelling 5 3% The paper is free from grammar, unscholarly context or “voice” and spelling is accurate throughout. 15 8% Total FORMAT Points=15 pts 200 100% ASSIGNMENT TOTAL=200 points RubricNR503_Week 6 Chronic Health_Sept19NR503_Week 6 Chronic Health_Sept19CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAssignment Content Possible Points = 185 PointsIntroduction of Healthcare Problem/Concern15.0 ptsExcellentComprehensively and succinctly states the problem/concern. Clear presentation of the problem as well as the significance with a scholarly overview of the paper’s content.14.0 ptsV. GoodIdentifies the problem/concern with adequate but not in-depth presentation.12.0 ptsSatisfactoryIdentification of problem/concern is limited.8.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementImprovement- Identification of problem/concern is unclear.0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryImprovement- Identification of problem/concern is unclear.15.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBackground/Significance30.0 ptsExcellentBackground and significance is complete, presents risks, disease impact and includes a review of incidence and prevalence of the disease within the student’s state compared to national data. Evidence supports background. A student created table is included.27.0 ptsV. GoodBackground is complete, presents risk, disease impact and at least one set of incidence and prevalence statistics supported by evidence, for instance state data or national data is presented, but not both. Or, full data is presented but student table is not included.26.0 ptsSatisfactoryBackground missing one or more key points and at least one set of incidence and prevalence statistics are presented. Lack of evidence or limited presentation of the background. A table is included which may or may not be student created; may be limited in data.15.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementBackground missing more than one key point and at least one set of incidence and prevalence statistics are presented, or there is no supported evidence. Unclear conclusions or presentation. No student created table is included; or if included is limited in scope or is not student created.0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryBackground and significance of the disease is not provided.30.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSurveillance and Reporting30.0 ptsExcellentCurrent state and national disease surveillance methods are reviewed along with currently gathered types of statistics and information on whether the disease is mandated for reporting. All writing is supported by evidence.27.0 ptsV. GoodState and national disease surveillance methods are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics is scant, reporting requirements discussed. All writing is supported by evidence.26.0 ptsSatisfactoryState or national surveillance statistics are discussed as an overview, lacking detail / depth. Mandated reporting may be absent. Writing is supported by evidence but may be inconsistent.15.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementOne of either state or national disease surveillance methods reviewed; currently gathered types of statistics may be missing or information on whether the disease is mandated for reporting is missing. There is a lack of depth with inconsistent use of evidence.0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryContent not discussed.30.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescriptive Epidemiology35.0 ptsExcellentComprehensive review and analysis of descriptive epidemiological points for the chronic health problem. The 5 W’s of epidemiological analysis should be fully identified. Supported by scholarly evidence.32.0 ptsV. GoodReview and analysis has depth in general but may be missing one of the 5 W’s OR may be scant in one area of the 5 W’s. All writing is supported by evidence.29.0 ptsSatisfactoryReview and analysis superficial in all of the 5 W’s OR may be scant or missing 2 or more of the W’s. Evidence is present but may not be throughout all content areas.18.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementReview and analysis is missing depth throughout all of the content areas. Evidence may or may not support the writing.0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryNo analysis provided.35.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScreening, Diagnosis, Guidelines30.0 ptsExcellentComprehensive review of current guidelines for screening and diagnosis. Screening tool statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests are presented.27.0 ptsV. GoodAdequate review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests is presented.26.0 ptsSatisfactoryLimited review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests.15.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementMinimal or unclear review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests. There is a lack of depth with inconsistent use of evidence.0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryReview of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests not provided.30.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePlan30.0 ptsExcellentIntegrating evidence, provide a plan of how a nurse practitioner will address this chronic health condition after graduation. Provide three specific interventions that are based on the evidence and include how you will measure outcomes (how will you know that the interventions have utility, are useful?) Note:  Consider primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions as well as the integration of health policy advocacy efforts. All interventions should be based on evidence – connected to a resource such as a scholarly piece of research.27.0 ptsV. GoodAn adequate, but not fully comprehensive, plan of action specific to the problem, and the geographic area is presented with 3 evidenced based actions that will be taken to address the impact, outcomes, or prevalence of the disease.26.0 ptsSatisfactoryA limited plan of action specific to the problem, and the geographic area, outcomes, or prevalence of the disease. Three actions or less may be presented with limited or little evidence.15.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementMinimal or unclear review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests. Actions are minimal or unclear, or lack specificity, are not supported directly by evidence or are not direct actions the student can take in practice. There is a lack of depth with inconsistent use of evidence.0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryPlan of action not provided.30.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSummary/Conclusion = 185 Points15.0 ptsExcellentThe conclusion thoroughly, clearly, succinctly, and logically presents major points of the paper with clear direction for action. Includes scholarly references.14.0 ptsV. GoodThe conclusion adequately and logically presents major points of the paper with clear direction for action, but lacks one major point or is not succinct. Includes scholarly references.12.0 ptsSatisfactoryThe conclusion is a limited review of key points of the paper, is not succinct, or lacks one or more major points of the paper or clear direction for action. Scholarly references may or may not be included.8.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementConclusion is unclear or significantly limited in overview of the paper. Scholarly references may or may not be included.0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryNo Summary/conclusion is included.15.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAssignment Format Possible Points =15 PointsAPA 6th ed.10.0 ptsExcellentAPA is consistently utilized according to the 6th edition throughout the paper.9.0 ptsV. GoodOne or two errors in APA format8.0 ptsSatisfactoryThree-Five errors in APA format5.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementSix errors in APA format0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryGreater than six errors in APA formatting.10.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Syntax, Spelling5.0 ptsExcellentThere are no grammar, unscholarly context or “voice” errors in the paper and spelling is accurate throughout.4.0 ptsV. GoodOne or two errors3.0 ptsSatisfactoryThree-five errors2.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementSix errors0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryGreater than six errors5.0 pts