What is the goal of China's 2011-2020 Anti-Poverty Program
Why do Li and Sicular (2014) believe China's minimum wage has not been effective in reducing inequality and poverty?
What has happened to life expectancy and education levels in China since reforms?
What does the Human Development index measure? How has China's average HDI changed in China since reforms? How does the HDI in China compare to the global average?
What does the Harrod-Domar model say about the relationship between investment and growth? What are the weaknesses of the Harrod-Domar model?
What is the "classical" progression of structural change in a developing economy?
How did the manipulation of prices during China's socialist era distort the pattern of structural change? What does the pattern look like when evaluated at market (2004) prices?
What is the largest sector in China today by share of GDP?
How does China's pattern of structural change differ from the "classical" progression? How is that related to globalization?
Why do some believe there is a housing bubble in China today?
How does the Chinese government explain the rapid expansion of the housing market?
Describe the four stages of the demographic transition.
What is the Total Fertility Rate? The Birth Rate?
In what two ways has China deviated from the standard demographic transition model?
How has China’s TFR compared to other Asian countries?
What was the One Child Policy? How has enforcement changed over time?
What were some major critiques of China’s fertility policy?
What defines a stable equilibrium in the marriage market?
Why would a gender imbalance intensify competition in the marriage market?
What positive economic effects do Wei and Zhang (2011) observe as a result of China's skewed sex ratio?
What is the dependency ratio? How and why will China's dependency ratio be changing in the next few years?
What "marginal" changes were made to reform urban labor markets in the initial phase of reforms?
Who were the xiagang?
What share of the population was employed in the state sector before 1978?
How did the average urban worker get a job during that time?
What is the Lewisian Turning Point (LTP)?
Use the appropriate diagram to explain what happens to wages as demand for industrial labor grows before the LTP and then after the LTP.
Is there strong evidence to support the existence of an LTP in China? What else might explain rising wages?
Why can the returns to education be used as evidence of efficient labor markets?
What is a Mincer equation?
How have rising returns to education affect educational achievement in China?
Why is migration an indication of healthy labor markets?
Why did labor reforms create a need to reform China's social security system?
What was the role of the agricultural collective in during China's Socialist Era?
According to Lin, how did the collectives create a “prisoners’ dilemma?” What effect did this have on agricultural productivity?
What is a dominant strategy? What is a Nash Equilibrium?
Why did China's TVEs grow so quickly?
What are the three "models" of TVEs we discussed in class? How would you characterize each one?
Why did the rapid growth of TVEs end?
What information asymmetry problem complicated TVE privatization?
What mechanism did the gov't design to solve this problem?
What is individual rationality? What is incentive compatibility?
What are non-performing loans? How are they related to SOE reform?
What is “Grasping the large, letting go the small?”
Why was it important to increase SOEs’ marginal retention rates?
What was the Company Law?
What is SASAC and why was it created?
What share of output is accounted for by SOEs today?
What are the four elements that must be changed to turn a socialist enterprise into a “capitalist” one?
What are the theoretical advantages of corporatization? How did it work in practice?
What is the difference between market-based and control-based models of corporate governance? Which model best fits governance in China?
What is was the Anti-Monopoly Law? Why do some believe it has not been enforced effectively?
What is "creative destruction"? Why might the continued prominence of SOEs in China limit the potential for "creative destruction"?
How does China rank globally in terms of exports and total trade?
What is China's total trade as a % of GDP?
Which country was China's biggest trading partner during the Socialist era?
What were the two elements of the “double airlock” system before reforms?
What are special economic zones? Where were they first set up?
What is export processing?
What are tariff vs. non-tariff barriers to trade? What role did they play in reforms?
When did China join the WTO? What reforms were necessary for it to do so?
Why is it important to look at imports as a measure of openness? How have imports in China been changing?
Which "mode" of foreign direct investment (FDI) is most common in China today?
What were the important findings of Hu and Jefferson's (2002) study of FDI in China?
How does China manage its exchange rate today? What type of system is this?
How would a country intervene in foreign exchange markets to defend a fixed exchange rate?
What is the "impossible trinity"? How is it related to China's exchange rate policy?
What is an environmental Kuznets curve?
What are scale, composition, and technique effects? How are they related to the Kuznets curve?
Where (broadly speaking) in China are the major air pollutants concentrated?
What did the World Bank estimate for the economic costs of China's pollution in 2007? Why might this be an underestimate?
What are the main causes of China's degraded water quality? How are these problems made worse by water shortages?
How much of China's surface water is unfit for direct human contact (Grade IV and above)?
What government body is responsible for environmental protection in China today?
What has undermined the effectiveness of China's system of discharge fees for pollution?
Why is China's arable land shrinking?
What is the pollution haven hypothesis?
Do Dean, Lovely, and Huang (2009) find evidence to support this hypothesis "on average?"
Why do Dean, Lovely, and Huang (2009) argue lower pollution taxes is not an effective strategy for attracting FDI?
In: Finance
Comprehensive Health Assessment Form
Health History (5 pts total)
Biographical data: (1 pts)
No name or initial required
Age: ________ Marital status: ____M _____ S _____Sep. ____Cohab.
Birth date: _____________________ Number of dependents: ___________________
Educational level: ________________________ Gender: _____F _____ M _____Other
Occupation (current or, if retired, past): ______________________________________
Ethnicity/nationality: _____________________
Source of history (who gave you the information and how reliable is that person): _______________________________________________________________________
Present health history: (4 pts)
Current medical conditions/chronic illnesses:
Current medications:
Medication/food/environmental allergies:
Past health history: (10 pts total)
Childhood illnesses: Ask about history of mumps, chickenpox, rubella, ear infections, throat infections, pertussis, and asthma.
Hospitalizations/Surgeries: Include reason for hospitalization, year, and surgical procedures.
Accidents/injuries: Include head injuries with loss of consciousness, fractures, motor vehicle accidents, burns, and severe lacerations.
Major diseases or illnesses: Include heart problems, cancer, seizures, and any significant adult illnesses.
Immunizations (dates if known):
Tetanus _______ Diphtheria ________ Pertussis ________ Mumps ________
Rubella _______ Polio _____________ Hepatitis B ______ Influenza _______
Varicella ______ Other ____________________________________________
Recent travel/military services: Include travel within past year and recent and past military service.
Date of last examinations:
Physical examination _________ Vision ___________ Dental ___________
Family History (Genogram) (10 points)
Mother/Father/Siblings/Grandparents: include age (date of birth, if known), any major health issues, and, if indicated, cause and age at death Present as a genogram.
Review of Systems (12 points total) Be sure to ask about symptoms specifically.
General health status (1 pt): Ask about fatigue, pain, unexplained fever, night sweats, weakness, problems sleeping, and unexplained changes in weight.
Integumentary (1 pt):
Skin: Ask about change in skin color/texture, excessive bruising, itching, skin lesions, sores that do not heal, change in mole. Do you use sun screen? How much sun exposure do you experience?
Hair: Ask about changes in hair texture and recent hair loss.
Nails: Ask about changes in nail color and texture, splitting, and cracking.
HEENT (2 pts):
Head: Ask about headaches, recent head trauma, injury or surgery, history of concussion, dizziness, and loss of consciousness.
Neck: Ask about neck stiffness, neck pain, lymph node enlargement, and swelling or mass in the neck.
Eyes: Ask about change in vision, eye injury, itching, excessive tearing, discharge, pain, floaters, halos around lights, flashing lights, light sensitivity, and difficulty reading. Do you use corrective lenses (glasses or contact lenses)?
Ears: Ask about last hearing test, changes in hearing, ear pain, drainage, vertigo, recurrent ear infections, ringing in ears, excessive wax problems, use of hearing aids.
Nose, Nasopharynx, Sinuses: Ask about nasal discharge, frequent nosebleeds, nasal obstruction, snoring, postnasal drip, sneezing, allergies, use of recreational drugs, change in smell, sinus pain, sinus infections.
Mouth/Oropharynx: Ask about sore throats, mouth sores, bleeding gums, hoarseness, change voice quality, difficulty chewing or swallowing, change in taste, dentures and bridges.
Respiratory (1 pt):
Ask about frequent colds, pain with breathing, cough, coughing up blood, shortness of breath, wheezing, night sweats, last chest x-ray, PPD and results, and history of smoking.
Cardiovascular (1 pt.):
Ask about chest pain, palpitations, shortness of breath, edema, coldness of extremities, color changes in hands and feet, hair loss on legs, leg pain with activity, paresthesia, sores that do not heal, and EKG and results.
Breasts (1 pt.): (Remember men have breasts too)
Ask about breast masses or lumps, pain, nipple discharge, swelling, changes in appearance, cystic breast disease, breast cancer, breast surgery, and reduction/enlargement. Do you perform BSE (when and how)? Date of last clinical breast examination, and mammograms and results.
Gastrointestinal (1 pt.):
Ask about changes in appetite, heartburn, gastroesophageal reflux disease, pain, nausea/vomiting, vomiting blood, jaundice, change in bowel habits, diarrhea, constipation, flatus, last fecal occult blood test and colonoscopy and results.
Genitourinary (1 pt.):
Ask about pain on urination, burning, frequency, urgency, incontinence, hesitancy, changes in urine stream, flank pain, excessive urinary volume, decreased urinary volume, nocturia, and blood in urine.
Female/male reproductive (1 pt.):
Both: Ask about lesions, discharge, pain or masses, change in sex drive, infertility problems, history of STDs, knowledge of STD prevention, safe sex practices, and painful intercourse. Are you current involved in a sexual relationship? If yes, heterosexual, homosexual,, bisexual? Number of sexual partners in the last 3 months. Do you use birth control? If yes, method(s) used.
Female: Ask about menarche, description of cycle, LMP, painful menses, excessive bleeding, irregular menses, bleeding between periods, last Pap test and results, painful intercourse, pregnancies, live births, miscarriages, and abortions.
Male: Ask about prostate or scrotal problems, impotence or sterility, satisfaction with sexual performance, frequency and technique for TSE, and last prostate examination and results.
Musculoskeletal (1 pt.):
Ask about fractures, muscle pain, weakness, joint swelling, joint pain, stiffness, limitations in mobility, back pain, loss of height, and bone density scan and results.
Neurological (1 pt.): Ask about pain, fainting, seizures, changes in cognition, changes in memory, sensory deficits such as numbness, tingling and loss of sensation, problems with gait, balance, and coordination, tremor, and spasm.
Psychosocial Profile (10 pts)
Health practices and beliefs/self-care activities: Ask about type and frequency of exercise, type and frequency of self examination, oral hygiene practice (frequency of brushing/flossing), screening examinations (blood pressure, prostate, breast, glucose, etc.)
Nutritional patterns: Ask about daily intake (24 hour recall) and appetite.
Functional Ability: Ask if able to perform activities of daily living such as dressing, bathing, eating, toileting and instrumental activities of daily living like shopping, driving, cooking.
Sleep/rest patterns: Ask about number of hours of sleep per night, whether sleep is restful, naps, and use of sleep aids.
Personal habits (tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, and drugs): Ask about type, amount, and years used.
Environmental history: Identify environment as urban/rural, type of home (apartment, own home, condo)
Family/social relationships: Ask about significant others, individuals in home
Cultural/religious influences: Identify any cultural and religious influences on health.
Mental Health: Ask about anxiety, depression, irritability, stressful events, and personal coping strategies.
Now answer the question below: (3 pts)
Using the instructions below, identify 1 physical strength, 1 psychosocial/cognitive strength, and 1 weakness in either category. State why you think this to be true.
With the information you collected, you can begin developing an idea of a client’s weakness and strengths. What is a strength? This might be that a person’s nutritional status appears to be excellent. It may be that there is no impairment of mobility. They may have lots of friends with them so be socially active. What is a weakness? This might be that a person does have impaired mobility or perhaps imbalanced nutrition – more than or less than body requirements. It might be that they have a communication issue that you note or perhaps seem to have a depressed mood, seem alone/isolated.
In: Nursing
Health History (5 pts total)
Biographical data: (1 pts)
No name or initial required
Age: ________ Marital status: ____M _____ S _____Sep. ____Cohab.
Birth date: _____________________ Number of dependents: ___________________
Educational level: ________________________ Gender: _____F _____ M _____Other
Occupation (current or, if retired, past): ______________________________________
Ethnicity/nationality: _____________________
Source of history (who gave you the information and how reliable is that person): _______________________________________________________________________
Present health history: (4 pts)
Current medical conditions/chronic illnesses:
Current medications:
Medication/food/environmental allergies:
Past health history: (10 pts total)
Childhood illnesses: Ask about history of mumps, chickenpox, rubella, ear infections, throat infections, pertussis, and asthma.
Hospitalizations/Surgeries: Include reason for hospitalization, year, and surgical procedures.
Accidents/injuries: Include head injuries with loss of consciousness, fractures, motor vehicle accidents, burns, and severe lacerations.
Major diseases or illnesses: Include heart problems, cancer, seizures, and any significant adult illnesses.
Immunizations (dates if known):
Tetanus _______ Diphtheria ________ Pertussis ________ Mumps ________
Rubella _______ Polio _____________ Hepatitis B ______ Influenza _______
Varicella ______ Other ____________________________________________
Recent travel/military services: Include travel within past year and recent and past military service.
Date of last examinations:
Physical examination _________ Vision ___________ Dental ___________
Family History (Genogram) (10 points)
Mother/Father/Siblings/Grandparents: include age (date of birth, if known), any major health issues, and, if indicated, cause and age at death Present as a genogram.
Review of Systems (12 points total) Be sure to ask about symptoms specifically.
General health status (1 pt): Ask about fatigue, pain, unexplained fever, night sweats, weakness, problems sleeping, and unexplained changes in weight.
Integumentary (1 pt):
Skin: Ask about change in skin color/texture, excessive bruising, itching, skin lesions, sores that do not heal, change in mole. Do you use sun screen? How much sun exposure do you experience?
Hair: Ask about changes in hair texture and recent hair loss.
Nails: Ask about changes in nail color and texture, splitting, and cracking.
HEENT (2 pts):
Head: Ask about headaches, recent head trauma, injury or surgery, history of concussion, dizziness, and loss of consciousness.
Neck: Ask about neck stiffness, neck pain, lymph node enlargement, and swelling or mass in the neck.
Eyes: Ask about change in vision, eye injury, itching, excessive tearing, discharge, pain, floaters, halos around lights, flashing lights, light sensitivity, and difficulty reading. Do you use corrective lenses (glasses or contact lenses)?
Ears: Ask about last hearing test, changes in hearing, ear pain, drainage, vertigo, recurrent ear infections, ringing in ears, excessive wax problems, use of hearing aids.
Nose, Nasopharynx, Sinuses: Ask about nasal discharge, frequent nosebleeds, nasal obstruction, snoring, postnasal drip, sneezing, allergies, use of recreational drugs, change in smell, sinus pain, sinus infections.
Mouth/Oropharynx: Ask about sore throats, mouth sores, bleeding gums, hoarseness, change voice quality, difficulty chewing or swallowing, change in taste, dentures and bridges.
Respiratory (1 pt):
Ask about frequent colds, pain with breathing, cough, coughing up blood, shortness of breath, wheezing, night sweats, last chest x-ray, PPD and results, and history of smoking.
Cardiovascular (1 pt.):
Ask about chest pain, palpitations, shortness of breath, edema, coldness of extremities, color changes in hands and feet, hair loss on legs, leg pain with activity, paresthesia, sores that do not heal, and EKG and results.
Breasts (1 pt.): (Remember men have breasts too)
Ask about breast masses or lumps, pain, nipple discharge, swelling, changes in appearance, cystic breast disease, breast cancer, breast surgery, and
reduction/enlargement. Do you perform BSE (when and how)? Date of last clinical breast examination, and mammograms and results.
Gastrointestinal (1 pt.):
Ask about changes in appetite, heartburn, gastroesophageal reflux disease, pain, nausea/vomiting, vomiting blood, jaundice, change in bowel habits, diarrhea, constipation, flatus, last fecal occult blood test and colonoscopy and results.
Genitourinary (1 pt.):
Ask about pain on urination, burning, frequency, urgency, incontinence, hesitancy, changes in urine stream, flank pain, excessive urinary volume, decreased urinary volume, nocturia, and blood in urine.
Female/male reproductive (1 pt.):
Both: Ask about lesions, discharge, pain or masses, change in sex drive, infertility problems, history of STDs, knowledge of STD prevention, safe sex practices, and painful intercourse. Are you current involved in a sexual relationship? If yes, heterosexual, homosexual,, bisexual? Number of sexual partners in the last 3 months. Do you use birth control? If yes, method(s) used.
Female: Ask about menarche, description of cycle, LMP, painful menses, excessive bleeding, irregular menses, bleeding between periods, last Pap test and results, painful intercourse, pregnancies, live births, miscarriages, and abortions.
Male: Ask about prostate or scrotal problems, impotence or sterility, satisfaction with sexual performance, frequency and technique for TSE, and last prostate examination and results.
Musculoskeletal (1 pt.):
Ask about fractures, muscle pain, weakness, joint swelling, joint pain, stiffness, limitations in mobility, back pain, loss of height, and bone density scan and results.
Neurological (1 pt.): Ask about pain, fainting, seizures, changes in cognition, changes in memory, sensory deficits such as numbness, tingling and loss of sensation, problems with gait, balance, and coordination, tremor, and spasm.
Psychosocial Profile (10 pts)
Health practices and beliefs/self-care activities: Ask about type and frequency of exercise, type and frequency of self examination, oral hygiene practice (frequency of brushing/flossing), screening examinations (blood pressure, prostate, breast, glucose, etc.)
Nutritional patterns: Ask about daily intake (24 hour recall) and appetite.
Functional Ability: Ask if able to perform activities of daily living such as dressing, bathing, eating, toileting and instrumental activities of daily living like shopping, driving, cooking.
Sleep/rest patterns: Ask about number of hours of sleep per night, whether sleep is restful, naps, and use of sleep aids.
Personal habits (tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, and drugs): Ask about type, amount, and years used.
Environmental history: Identify environment as urban/rural, type of home (apartment, own home, condo)
Family/social relationships: Ask about significant others, individuals in home
Cultural/religious influences: Identify any cultural and religious influences on health.
Mental Health: Ask about anxiety, depression, irritability, stressful events, and personal coping strategies.
Now answer the question below: (3 pts)
Using the instructions below, identify 1 physical strength, 1 psychosocial/cognitive strength, and 1 weakness in either category. State why you think this to be true.
With the information you collected, you can begin developing an idea of a client’s weakness and strengths. What is a strength? This might be that a person’s nutritional status appears to be excellent. It may be that there is no impairment of mobility. They may have lots of friends with them so be socially active. What is a weakness? This might be that a person does have impaired mobility or perhaps imbalanced nutrition – more than or less than body requirements. It might be that they have a communication issue that you note or perhaps seem to have a depressed mood, seem alone/isolated.
In: Nursing
You've been hired by Water Wonders to write a C++ console application that analyzes lake level data. MichiganHuronLakeLevels.txt. Place the input file in a folder where your development tool can locate it (on Visual Studio, in folder \). The input file may be placed in any folder but a path must be specified to locate it.
MichiganHuronLakeLevels.txt Down below:
Lake Michigan and Lake Huron - Average lake levels - 1860-2015
Year Average level (meters)
1860 177.3351667
1861 177.3318333
1862 177.316
1863 177.1796667
1864 176.9955833
1865 176.90525
1866 176.80575
1867 176.9365833
1868 176.7891667
1869 176.8250833
1870 177.1
1871 177.0769167
1872 176.7318333
1873 176.9188333
1874 177.0413333
1875 176.9683333
1876 177.2855833
1877 177.1971667
1878 177.1183333
1879 176.85325
1880 176.90425
1881 177.0205
1882 177.1250833
1883 177.2096667
1884 177.2734167
1885 177.3208333
1886 177.3893333
1887 177.1890833
1888 176.9931667
1889 176.8393333
1890 176.788
1891 176.6149167
1892 176.564
1893 176.6204167
1894 176.6811667
1895 176.4201667
1896 176.3256667
1897 176.5094167
1898 176.5564167
1898 176.5595
1900 176.5626667
1901 176.64175
1902 176.5305833
1903 176.5748333
1904 176.7460909
1905 176.7561667
1906 176.7635
1907 176.7844167
1908 176.7670909
1909 176.5988333
1910 176.5025
1911 176.3356667
1912 176.4768333
1913 176.67025
1914 176.5297273
1915 176.3535833
1916 176.5715833
1917 176.7980833
1918 176.8866667
1919 176.745
1920 176.625
1921 176.4883333
1922 176.445
1923 176.2641667
1924 176.1866667
1925 175.9191667
1926 175.885
1927 176.1483333
1928 176.4433333
1929 176.8958333
1930 176.6508333
1931 176.1183333
1932 175.9408333
1933 175.8675
1934 175.7666667
1935 175.8908333
1936 175.9391667
1937 175.9225
1938 176.1408333
1939 176.2691667
1940 176.1416667
1941 176.1216667
1942 176.3341667
1943 176.6266667
1944 176.5966667
1945 176.57
1946 176.6016667
1947 176.5666667
1948 176.5308333
1949 176.2108333
1950 176.2608333
1951 176.7358333
1952 177.085
1953 176.9333333
1954 176.8291667
1955 176.7225
1956 176.44
1957 176.2633333
1958 176.0675
1959 176.0058333
1960 176.4775
1961 176.3766667
1962 176.2225
1963 175.9225
1964 175.6825
1965 175.9158333
1966 176.1608333
1967 176.3008333
1968 176.4466667
1969 176.6958333
1970 176.6783333
1971 176.805
1972 176.8883333
1973 177.1233333
1974 177.0933333
1975 176.9733333
1976 176.8991667
1977 176.505
1978 176.5908333
1979 176.7941667
1980 176.8033333
1981 176.6983333
1982 176.5983333
1983 176.8333333
1984 176.895
1985 177.1266667
1986 177.2925
1987 176.97
1988 176.5641667
1989 176.4008333
1990 176.35
1991 176.4691667
1992 176.4791667
1993 176.6958333
1994 176.6783333
1995 176.5275
1996 176.6541667
1997 176.9841667
1998 176.7166667
1999 176.2358333
2000 175.9783333
2001 175.9508333
2002 176.1183333
2003 175.8916667
2004 176.1108333
2005 176.09
2006 176.0158333
2007 175.9433333
2008 176.005
2009 176.2583333
2010 176.1108333
2011 176.0366
2012 175.9158
2013 175.9
2014 176.3016667
2015 176.59
Within the app, attempt to open the input file and output file MichiganHuronLakeLevelsHighAndLow.txt. If the input file didn't open, print an error message. If the output file didn't open, print an error message. Read the input file by scanning past the two header rows. Each detail row in the input file contains two fields (year, lake level). Read one token at a time from the input file. See sample Canvas app Text file input – one token per read. Determine the maximum, minimum, and average lake levels. One technique to accomplish this is to use a max variable that starts very small and a min variable that starts very large. After all lines of the input file have been read, use formatted output manipulators (setw, left/right) to print the following rows:
● Column headers.
● Max values.
● Min values.
● Average value.
And columns:
● A left-justified label.
● A right-justified year.
● A right-justified level.
Then write the same information to output file MichiganHuronLakeLevelsHighAndLow.txt. Insure that your code is commented! Provide a complete header comment and body comments. Define constants for the input and output file names and column widths. Format any real numbers to four decimal places. The output should look like this:
Welcome to Wonder Waters
------------------------
Reading lines from file 'MichiganHuronLakeLevels.txt' ...
Writing lines to file 'MichiganHuronLakeLevelsHighAndLow.txt' ...
Year Level (meters)
Max level: … …
Min level: … …
Average level: …
158 line(s) read from file 'MichiganHuronLakeLevels.txt'.
4 line(s) written to file 'MichiganHuronLakeLevelsHighAndLow.txt'.
End of Wonder Waters
In: Computer Science
You've been hired by Water Wonders to write a C++ console application that analyzes lake level data. Place the input file in a folder where your development tool can locate it (on Visual Studio, in folder <project-name>\<project-name>). The input file may be placed in any folder but a path must be specified to locate it. The input file has 158 lines and looks like this:
Lake Michigan and Lake Huron - Average lake levels - 1860-2015
Year Average level (meters)
1860 177.3351667
1861 177.3318333
…
2014 176.3016667
2015 176.59
Within the app, attempt to open the input file and output file MichiganHuronLakeLevelsHighAndLow.txt. If the input file didn't open, print an error message. If the output file didn't open, print an error message. Read the input file by scanning past the two header rows. Each detail row in the input file contains two fields (year, lake level). Read one token at a time from the input file. See sample Canvas app Text file input – one token per read. Determine the maximum, minimum, and average lake levels. One technique to accomplish this is to use a max variable that starts very small and a min variable that starts very large. After all lines of the input file have been read, use formatted output manipulators (setw, left/right) to print the following rows:
● Column headers.
● Max values.
● Min values.
● Average value.
And columns:
● A left-justified label.
● A right-justified year.
● A right-justified level.
Then write the same information to output file MichiganHuronLakeLevelsHighAndLow.txt. Insure that your code is commented! Provide a complete header comment and body comments. Define constants for the input and output file names and column widths. Format any real numbers to four decimal places.
Lake Michigan and Lake Huron - Average lake levels -
1860-2015
Year Average level (meters)
1860 177.3351667
1861 177.3318333
1862 177.316
1863 177.1796667
1864 176.9955833
1865 176.90525
1866 176.80575
1867 176.9365833
1868 176.7891667
1869 176.8250833
1870 177.1
1871 177.0769167
1872 176.7318333
1873 176.9188333
1874 177.0413333
1875 176.9683333
1876 177.2855833
1877 177.1971667
1878 177.1183333
1879 176.85325
1880 176.90425
1881 177.0205
1882 177.1250833
1883 177.2096667
1884 177.2734167
1885 177.3208333
1886 177.3893333
1887 177.1890833
1888 176.9931667
1889 176.8393333
1890 176.788
1891 176.6149167
1892 176.564
1893 176.6204167
1894 176.6811667
1895 176.4201667
1896 176.3256667
1897 176.5094167
1898 176.5564167
1898 176.5595
1900 176.5626667
1901 176.64175
1902 176.5305833
1903 176.5748333
1904 176.7460909
1905 176.7561667
1906 176.7635
1907 176.7844167
1908 176.7670909
1909 176.5988333
1910 176.5025
1911 176.3356667
1912 176.4768333
1913 176.67025
1914 176.5297273
1915 176.3535833
1916 176.5715833
1917 176.7980833
1918 176.8866667
1919 176.745
1920 176.625
1921 176.4883333
1922 176.445
1923 176.2641667
1924 176.1866667
1925 175.9191667
1926 175.885
1927 176.1483333
1928 176.4433333
1929 176.8958333
1930 176.6508333
1931 176.1183333
1932 175.9408333
1933 175.8675
1934 175.7666667
1935 175.8908333
1936 175.9391667
1937 175.9225
1938 176.1408333
1939 176.2691667
1940 176.1416667
1941 176.1216667
1942 176.3341667
1943 176.6266667
1944 176.5966667
1945 176.57
1946 176.6016667
1947 176.5666667
1948 176.5308333
1949 176.2108333
1950 176.2608333
1951 176.7358333
1952 177.085
1953 176.9333333
1954 176.8291667
1955 176.7225
1956 176.44
1957 176.2633333
1958 176.0675
1959 176.0058333
1960 176.4775
1961 176.3766667
1962 176.2225
1963 175.9225
1964 175.6825
1965 175.9158333
1966 176.1608333
1967 176.3008333
1968 176.4466667
1969 176.6958333
1970 176.6783333
1971 176.805
1972 176.8883333
1973 177.1233333
1974 177.0933333
1975 176.9733333
1976 176.8991667
1977 176.505
1978 176.5908333
1979 176.7941667
1980 176.8033333
1981 176.6983333
1982 176.5983333
1983 176.8333333
1984 176.895
1985 177.1266667
1986 177.2925
1987 176.97
1988 176.5641667
1989 176.4008333
1990 176.35
1991 176.4691667
1992 176.4791667
1993 176.6958333
1994 176.6783333
1995 176.5275
1996 176.6541667
1997 176.9841667
1998 176.7166667
1999 176.2358333
2000 175.9783333
2001 175.9508333
2002 176.1183333
2003 175.8916667
2004 176.1108333
2005 176.09
2006 176.0158333
2007 175.9433333
2008 176.005
2009 176.2583333
2010 176.1108333
2011 176.0366
2012 175.9158
2013 175.9
2014 176.3016667
2015 176.59
In: Computer Science
Problem 4: House Prices
Use the “Fairfax City Home Sales” dataset for parts of this problem.
a) Use StatCrunch to construct an appropriately titled and labeled relative frequency histogram of Fairfax home closing prices stored in the “Price” variable. Copy your histogram into your document.
b) What is the shape of this distribution? Answer this question in one complete sentence.
c) Assuming the population has a similar shape as the sample with population mean $510,000 and population standard deviation $145,000; calculate the probability that in a random sample of size 10, the mean of the sample will be greater than $600,000. You may assume a random sample was taken and the sample came from a big population. However, be sure to check the central limit theorem condition of a large sample size before completing this problem using one complete sentence. If this condition is not met, you cannot complete the problem.
d) Assuming the population has a similar shape as the sample with population mean $510,000 and population standard deviation $145,000; calculate the probability that in a random sample of size 36, the mean of the sample will be greater than $600,000. You may assume a random sample was taken and the sample came from a big population. However, be sure to check the central limit theorem condition of a large sample size before completing this problem using one complete sentence. If this condition is not met, you cannot complete the problem.
Data:
Price Year, Days, TLArea, Acres
369900 1922 44 1870 0.39
373000 1952 0 1242 0.27
375000 1952 8 932 0.15
375000 1950 2 768 0.19
379000 1952 31 816 0.21
380000 1941 53 1092 0.19
385000 1951 5 984 0.27
387700 1953 5 975 0.36
395000 1954 18 957 0.29
395000 1951 12 1105 0.22
399900 1954 29 1206 0.28
399900 1951 6 1226 0.18
400000 1954 31 957 0.27
410000 1949 6 1440 0.2
410000 1954 17 1344 0.23
412500 1954 4 1008 0.25
415000 1953 17 1371 0.28
420000 1954 2 957 0.25
426000 1952 3 1694 0.25
430000 1953 19 975 0.23
434900 1950 5 1128 0.18
435000 1954 32 1252 0.24
440000 1960 3 1161 0.26
440000 1954 2 1036 0.28
440000 1955 12 1645 0.28
440000 1960 5 1746 0.31
441000 1952 133 1062 0.23
442000 1961 4 1414 0.32
443000 1951 26 962 0.2
444900 1955 4 1122 0.19
446500 1953 3 962 0.26
450000 1952 2 1488 0.15
450000 1955 49 1122 0.23
450000 1979 0 1092 0.28
450000 1951 70 962 0.2
450000 1957 23 1300 0.51
451000 1947 12 1325 0.34
455000 1952 7 2267 0.81
455000 1962 4 1050 0.31
460000 1955 5 997 0.3
460000 1954 10 1125 0.17
465000 1954 77 1288 0.46
465900 1947 21 1309 0.19
469000 1963 153 1149 0.27
474000 1959 5 1319 0.32
475000 1955 4 1530 0.28
475000 1953 29 1008 0.2
475000 1955 6 1530 0.28
475000 1956 116 1345 0.5
475000 1956 1 1530 0.28
480000 1960 27 1236 0.27
480000 1959 133 1527 0.24
485000 1955 4 1008 0.24
485000 1956 74 977 0.24
488000 1960 11 1972 0.33
500000 1963 0 2145 0.25
500000 1953 14 1758 0.54
500500 1955 6 1630 0.28
510000 1959 5 1680 0.34
512000 1963 0 1968 0.22
519000 1961 1 1312 0.29
520000 1954 15 1492 0.25
520000 1958 80 1443 0.33
520000 1963 122 1822 0.32
530000 1962 6 1393 0.29
540000 1962 12 1414 0.25
543600 1962 4 1414 0.24
560000 1967 5 1530 0.28
560000 1961 16 1438 0.53
565000 1947 6 1510 0.25
565500 1967 5 1217 0.26
589000 1954 32 2368 0.3
593000 1954 9 2044 0.25
610000 1978 140 2091 0.09
655000 1976 180 2728 0.24
660000 1947 10 2635 0.22
665000 1950 37 2645 0.57
685000 1982 120 2752 0.09
795000 2002 259 3402 0.12
852000 2000 4 3215 0.11
895000 2000 63 3230 0.11
930000 2015 135 3175 0.15
940000 1860 42 3038 0.57
968500 1850 74 3630 0.34
1100000 2004 161 3640 0.19
In: Math
Question 29 options: A researcher is studying the effectiveness of a new “brain training” game for Android phones, which the game’s developer says can improve memory. The game involves watching a series of cartoon animals run across the screen and tapping whenever the same animal appears twice. The researcher designs an experiment in which 20 participants (the memory group) play the game for 1 hour a day for a week. Another 20 participants (the non-memory group) plays a game with similar graphics but no memory demand for 1 hour a day for a week. At the end of the week, both groups complete a standardized memory test on their phone. Participants in the memory group had a mean standardized memory test score of 59.5338 with a standard deviation of 4.1700 and a SS of 330.3959. At the end of the week one of the participants in the non-memory group reports that he lost his phone at a bar over the St. Patrick’s day weekend and all his data are lost. For the remaining participants in the non-memory group, the mean score on the standardized memory task was 57.0333 with a standard deviation of 5.5714 and a SS of 558.7226. Conduct a hypothesis test at the alpha = 0.05 level? Fill in each of the blanks below. What type of test should you use (z-test; one sample t-test; independent samples t-test; or power analysis): Step 1: State the null hypothesis (just the null, no need to state the alternative; for μ1 simply type "mu1"): Step 2: what value defines the boundary of the positive critical region (enter a positive number with 5 decimal places using only the keys "0-9" and "."): Step 3: Calculate and then enter the observed value of the appropriate statistic (enter a number with 5 decimal places using only the keys "0-9" and "."): Step 4: Do you reject the null hypothesis (type yes or no): Finally, write one sentence to interpret the result of the hypothesis test in terms of the original research question (i.e., what does your result mean):
In: Statistics and Probability
In: Computer Science
a. The 2014 Annual Report for Rolls-Royce Holdings plc:
"
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
to the members of Rolls-Royce Holdings plc only
OPINIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ARISING FROM OUR AUDIT
1 OUR OPINION ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IS UNMODIFIED We have
audited the Financial Statements of Rolls-Royce Holdings plc for
the year ended 31 December 2014 set out
on pages 95 to 151. In our opinion:
the Financial Statements give a true and fair view of the state of the Group’s and of the parent company’s affairs as at 31 December 2014 and of the Group’s profit for the year then ended;
the Group Financial Statements have been properly prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as adopted by the European Union (Adopted IFRS);
the parent company Financial Statements have been properly prepared in accordance with UK Accounting Standards; and
the Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Companies Act 2006 and, as regards the Group Financial Statements, Article 4 of the IAS Regulation.
2 OUR ASSESSMENT OF RISKS OF MATERIAL MISSTATEMENT
We summarise below the risks of material misstatement that had the
greatest effect on our audit, our key audit procedures to address
those risks and our findings from those procedures in order that
the Company’s members as a body may better understand the process
by which we arrived at our audit opinion. Our findings are the
result of procedures undertaken in the context of and solely for
the purpose of our statutory audit opinion on the Financial
Statements as a whole and consequently are incidental to that
opinion, and
we do not express discrete opinions on separate elements of the
Financial Statements.
Given the long-term nature of the Group’s business, it is inevitable that the risks that had the greatest effect on our audit change little from year to year. Nevertheless, there have been a number of changes from 2013, the most significant being:
for the 2014 audit, due to a number of revisions to the Group’s published guidance on revenue and profit, we significantly increased our focus and work on the risk relating to The pressure on and incentives for management to meet revised revenue and profit guidance;
the audit work in connection with the risk relating to Accounting for risk and revenue sharing arrangements was substantially less than that required in the 2013 audit as the Financial Reporting Council’s enquiry was concluded during the 2013 audit, there have been no changes to relevant accounting standards and only a small number of new agreements have been entered into this year; and
the risks relating to Accounting for the consolidation of Rolls-Royce Power Systems Holding GmbH and the valuation of Daimler AG’s put option required substantially less audit effort than in earlier years when the transactions took place, in part due to the exercise of the put option by Daimler AG during 2014.
The pressure on and incentives for management to meet revised
revenue and profit guidance
Refer to pages 32 to 41 (Business reviews) and pages 69 to 71
(Audit Committee report – Financial reporting)
The risk – The Group published a number of revisions to its revenue and profit guidance during the year with a generally decreasing trend in profit and revenue and there have been significant associated decreases in the Group’s share price. The Chief Executive clearly instructed the Executive Leadership Team and the senior finance executives on more than one occasion not to take any account of the pressure to meet forecasts in preparing the financial results and to be alert to how this might affect personnel across the wider Group. Nevertheless, the heightened pressure on and incentives for management to meet the latest guidance increased the inherent risk of manipulation of the Financial Statements.
The financial results are sensitive to significant estimates and
judgements, particularly in respect of revenues and costs
associated with long-term contracts, and there is a broad
range
of acceptable outcomes of these that could lead to different profit
and revenue reported in the Financial Statements. Relatively small
changes in the basis of those judgements and estimates could result
in the Group meeting, exceeding or falling short of guidance.
Our response – We have: (i) extended our enquiries
designed
to assess whether management had applied unconscious bias
or had taken systematic actions to manipulate the reported results;
(ii) compared the results to forecasts and challenged variances
at
a much more granular level than we would otherwise have done based
on our understanding of factors affecting business performance with
corroboration using external data where possible; (iii) applied an
increased level of scepticism throughout the audit by increasing
the involvement of the senior audit team personnel, with particular
focus on audit procedures designed
to assess whether revenues and costs have been recognised
in the correct accounting period and whether central adjustments
were appropriate; and (iv) challenged our entire audit approach
based on an independent review by personnel with no other
involvement in the audit.
In particular:
• when considering the risk relating to The measurement of revenue and profit in the Civil aerospace business, we challenged the basis for changes in the estimated revenues and costs in long-term contracts with a heightened awareness of the possibility of unconscious or systematic bias; and
• when considering the risk relating to The presentation of
underlying profit, we sought to identify items that affected
profit (and/or the trend in profit) unevenly in frequency or
amount
at a much lower level than we would otherwise have done and
to assess the transparency of disclosure of these items.
Our findings – Aside from one transaction which had a very small impact on the Group’s profit and which was subsequently corrected by management, our testing did not identify any indication of manipulation of results. We found the degree of caution/optimism adopted in estimates to be broadly consistent with that adopted in the previous year with no indication of conscious or unconscious bias.
154 Rolls-Royce Holdings plc
Annual Report 2014
The basis of accounting for revenue and profit in the Civil
aerospace business
Refer to page 101 and 102 (Key areas of judgement –
Introduction, Contractual aftermarket rights, Linkage of original
and long-term aftermarket contracts), pages 104 and 105
(Significant accounting policies – Revenue recognition) and pages
69 to 71 (Audit Committee report – Financial reporting)
The risk – The amount of revenue and profit recognised in a year on the sale of engines and aftermarket services is dependent, inter alia, on the appropriate assessment of whether or not each long-term aftermarket contract for services is linked to or separate from
the contract for sale of the related engines as this drives the
accounting basis to be applied. As the commercial arrangements can
be complex, significant judgement is applied in selecting the
accounting basis in each case. The most significant risk is that
the Group might inappropriately account for sales of engines and
long-term service agreements as a single arrangement for accounting
purposes as this would usually lead to revenue and profit being
recognised too early because the margin in the long-term service
agreement is usually higher than the margin
in the engine sale agreement.
Our response – We re-evaluated the appropriateness of the
accounting bases the Group applies in the Civil aerospace
business by reference to accounting standards, including examining
correspondence and attending meetings between
the Group and the Financial Reporting Council and re-examining
historical long-term aftermarket contracts. We considered whether
the enhanced disclosure included in the Financial Statements
following this dialogue enables shareholders to understand how the
accounting policies represent the commercial substance
of the Group’s contracts with its customers. We made our own independent assessment, with reference to the relevant accounting standards, of the accounting basis that should be applied to each long-term aftermarket contract entered into during the year and compared this to the accounting basis applied by the Group.
Our findings – We found that the Group has developed
a framework for selecting the accounting bases which is consistent
with a balanced interpretation of accounting standards(2013
audit finding: balanced) and has applied this consistently. We
found that the enhanced disclosure was ample. For the agreements
entered into during this year, it was clear which accounting basis
should apply.
The measurement of revenue and profit in the Civil aerospace
business
Refer to pages 101 and 102 (Key areas of judgement –
Measurement of performance on long-term aftermarket contracts),
pages 104 and 105 (Significant accounting policies – Revenue
recognition
and TotalCare arrangements) and pages 69 to 71 (Audit Committee report – Financial reporting)
The risk – The amount of revenue and profit recognised in a
year
on the sale of engines and aftermarket services is dependent,
inter alia, on the assessment of the percentage of completion of
long-term aftermarket contracts and the forecast cost profile of
each arrangement. As long-term aftermarket contracts can extend
over significant periods and the profitability of these
arrangements typically assumes significant life-cycle cost
improvement over the term of the contracts, the estimated outturn
requires significant judgement to be applied in assessing engine
flying hours, time on wing and other operating parameters, the
pattern of future maintenance activity and the costs to be
incurred. The inherent nature of these estimates means that their
continual refinement can have an impact on the profits of the Civil
aerospace business that can be significant in an individual
financial year. The assessment of the estimated outturn for each
arrangement involves detailed calculations using large and complex
databases with
a significant level of manual intervention.
Our response – We tested the controls designed and applied
by
the Group to provide assurance that the estimates used in assessing
revenue and cost profiles are appropriate and that the resulting
estimated cumulative profit on such contracts is accurately
reflected in the Financial Statements; these controls operated over
both the inputs and the outputs of the calculations. We challenged
the appropriateness of these estimates for each programme and
assessed whether or not the estimates showed any evidence of
conscious or unconscious management bias in the context of the
heightened pressure on and incentives for management to meet
the latest guidance discussed above. Our challenge was based on our
assessment of the historical accuracy of the Group’s
estimates
in previous periods, identification and analysis of changes in
assumptions from prior periods and an assessment of the consistency
of assumptions across programmes, detailed assessments of the
achievability of the Group’s plans to reduce life-cycle costs and
an analysis of the impact of these plans on forecast cost profiles
taking account of contingencies and analysis of the impact of known
technical issues on cost forecasts. Our analysis considered each
significant airframe that is powered by the Group’s engines and was
based on our own experience supplemented by discussions with an
aircraft valuation specialist engaged by the Group. We assessed
whether the valuer was objective and suitably qualified. We also
checked the mathematical accuracy of the revenue and profit for
each arrangement and considered the implications of identified
errors and changes in estimates.
Our findings – In 2013, our testing identified weaknesses in the design and operation of controls and we assessed the effectiveness of the Group’s plans for addressing these weaknesses. In planning the 2014 audit, we anticipated that the control weaknesses identified in 2013 audit would be remediated. However, our testing identified continuing, albeit reduced, control weaknesses in some areas and so, as in 2013, we increased the scope and depth of our detailed testing and analysis from that originally planned. Overall, our assessment is that the assumptions and resulting estimates
Other Information
155
Other Information
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
CONTINUED
(including appropriate contingencies) resulted in mildly cautious(2013 audit finding: mildly cautious) profit recognition and we found no indication of conscious or unconscious bias.
Recoverability of intangible assets (certification costs and
participation fees, development expenditure and contractual
aftermarket rights) and amounts recoverable on contracts primarily
in the Civil aerospace business
Refer to page 103 (Key sources of estimation uncertainty –
Forecasts and discount rates), pages 107 and 108 (Significant
accounting policies – Certification costs and participation fees,
Research and development, Contractual aftermarket rights and
Impairment of non-current assets), page 122 (Note 9 to the
Financial Statements
– Intangible assets) and pages 69 to 71 (Audit Committee report –
Financial reporting)
The risk – The recovery of these assets depends on a combination of achieving sufficiently profitable business in the future as well as the ability of customers to pay amounts due under contracts often over a long period of time. Assets relating to a particular engine programme are more prone to the risk of impairment
in the early years of a programme as the engine’s market
position is established. In addition, the pricing of business with
launch customers makes assets relating to these engines more
prone
to the risk of impairment.
Our response – We tested the controls designed and applied by the Group to provide assurance that the assumptions used in preparing the impairment calculations are regularly updated, that changes are monitored, scrutinised and approved by appropriate personnel and that the final assumptions used in impairment testing have been appropriately approved. We challenged the appropriateness of the key assumptions in the impairment test (including market size, market share, pricing, engine and aftermarket unit costs, individual programme assumptions, price and cost escalation, discount rate and exchange rates) focusing particularly on those assets with
a higher risk of impairment (those relating to the Trent 900 programme and launch customers on the Trent 900 and Trent 1000 programmes). Our challenge was based on our assessment of the historical accuracy of the Group’s estimates in previous periods, our understanding of the commercial prospects of key engine programmes, identification and analysis of changes in assumptions from prior periods and an assessment of the consistency of assumptions across programmes and customers and comparison of assumptions with publicly available data where this was available. We tested the mathematical accuracy of the impairment calculations. We considered whether the disclosures in note 9 to the Financial Statements describe the inherent degree of subjectivity in the estimates and the potential impact on future periods of revisions to these estimates.
Our findings – Our testing did not identify weaknesses in the
design and operation of controls that would have required us
to expand the nature or scope of our planned detailed test work. We
found that the assumptions and resulting estimates were balanced
(2013 audit finding: balanced) and that the disclosures
were proportionate (2013 audit finding: proportionate). We
found no errors in calculations (2013 audit finding:
none).
Liabilities arising from sales financing arrangements
Refer to page 103 (Key areas of judgement – Customer
financing contingent liabilities), page 109 (Significant accounting
policies – Sales financing support), pages 137 and 138 (Note
18
to the Financial Statements – Provisions for liabilities and
charges) and pages 69 to 71 (Audit Committee report – Financial
reporting)
The risk – The Group has contingent liabilities in respect of
financing and asset value support provided to customers. This
support typically takes the form of a guarantee with respect
to
the value of an aircraft at a future date, a commitment to buy used
aircraft or a guarantee of a customer’s future payments under an
aircraft financing arrangement. Judgement is required to assess the
likelihood of these liabilities crystallising, in order to assess
whether a provision should be recognised and, if so, the amount of
that provision. The total potential liability is significant and
can be affected by the assessment of the residual value of the
aircraft
and the creditworthiness of the customers.
Our response – We analysed the terms of guarantees on aircraft
delivered during the year in detail and obtained aircraft values
from and held discussions with aircraft valuation specialists
engaged
by the Group. We assessed whether the valuer was objective and
suitably qualified, had been appropriately instructed and had been
provided with complete, accurate data on which to base its
evaluation. For all contracts on delivered aircraft, we assessed
the commercial factors relevant to the likelihood of the guarantees
being called, including the credit ratings and recent financial
performance of the relevant customers and their fleet plans, and
critically assessed the Group’s estimate of the required provisions
for those liabilities. We considered movements in aircraft values
and potential changes in the assessed probability of a liability
crystallising since the previous year end and considered whether
the evidence supported the Group’s assessment as to whether or not
a liability needs to be recognised and the amount of the liability
recognised or contingent liability disclosed. We considered whether
the related disclosure in note 18 to the Financial Statements
appropriately explains the potential liability in excess of the
amount provided for in the Financial Statements for delivered
aircraft and highlights the significant but unquantifiable
contingent liability
in respect of aircraft which will be delivered in the future.
Our findings – We found that the assumptions and estimates were balanced (2013 audit finding: balanced) and that the disclosures were proportionate (2013 audit finding: proportionate).
156 Rolls-Royce Holdings plc Annual Report 2014
Bribery and corruption
Refer to page 147 (Note 23 to the Financial Statements – Contingent liabilities) and pages 69 to 71 (Audit Committee report – Financial reporting)
The risk – A large part of the Group’s business is characterised by competition for individually significant contracts with customers, which are often directly or indirectly associated with governments, and the award of individually significant contracts to suppliers. The procurement processes associated with these activities are highly susceptible to the risk of corruption. In addition the Group operates in a number of territories where the use of commercial intermediaries is either required by the government or is normal practice. In December 2013, the Group announced that it had been informed by the Serious Fraud Office in the UK that it had commenced a formal investigation into bribery and corruption in overseas markets. The Group is cooperating with the Serious Fraud Office and other agencies, including the US Department of Justice. Breaches of laws and regulations in this area can lead to fines, penalties, criminal prosecution, commercial litigation and restrictions on future business.
Our response – We evaluated and tested the Group’s policies, procedures and controls over the selection and renewal of intermediaries, contracting arrangements, ongoing management, payments and responses to suspected breaches of policy. We sought to identify and tested payments made to intermediaries during
the year, made enquiries of appropriate personnel and evaluated the tone set by the Board and the Executive Leadership Team and the Group’s approach to managing this risk. Having enquired of management, the Audit Committee and the Board as to whether the Group is in compliance with laws and regulations relating to bribery and corruption, we made written enquiries of the Group’s legal advisers to corroborate the results of those enquiries and maintained a high level of vigilance to possible indications of significant non-compliance with laws and regulations relating
to bribery and corruption whilst carrying out our other audit
procedures. We discussed the areas of potential or suspected
breaches of law, including the ongoing investigation, with
the
Audit Committee and the Board as well as the Group’s legal advisers
and assessed related documentation. We assessed whether the
disclosure in note 23 to the Financial Statements of the Group’s
exposure to the financial effects of potential or suspected
breaches of law or regulation complies with accounting standards
and in particular whether it is the case that the investigation
remains
at too early a stage to assess the consequences (if any), including in particular the size of any possible fines.
Our findings – We found that disclosure to be proportionate(2013 audit finding: proportionate).
Presentation and explanation of results
Refer to pages 32 to 41 (Business reviews), pages 28 to 31 (Financial Review), pages 112 and 113 (Note 2 to the Financial Statements – Segmental analysis) and pages 69 to 71 (Audit Committee report – Financial reporting)
The presentation of ‘underlying profit’
The risk – In addition to its Adopted IFRS Financial
Statements,
the Group presents an alternative income statement on an
‘underlying’ basis. The directors believe the ‘underlying’ income
statement reflects better the Group’s trading performance during
the year. The basis of adjusting between the Adopted IFRS and
‘underlying’ income statements and a full reconciliation between
them is set out in note 2 to the Financial Statements on pages 110
and 113. A significant recurring adjustment between the Adopted
IFRS income statement and the ‘underlying’ income statement relates
to the foreign exchange rates used to translate foreign currency
transactions. The Group uses forward foreign exchange contracts to
manage the cash flow exposures of forecast transactions denominated
in foreign currencies but does not generally apply hedge accounting
in its Adopted IFRS income statement. The ‘underlying’ income
statement translates these amounts at the achieved foreign exchange
rate on forward foreign exchange contracts settled in the period,
retranslates assets and liabilities at exchange rates forecast to
be achieved from future settlement of such contracts and excludes
unrealised gains and losses on such contracts which are included in
the Adopted IFRS income statement. The Group has discretion over
which forward foreign exchange contracts are settled in each
financial year, which could impact the achieved rate both for the
period and in the future. In addition, adjustments are made to
exclude one-off past-service costs on post-retirement schemes,
restructuring activities that significantly change the shape of the
Group’s operations and the effect of acquisition accounting and a
number of other items. Alternative performance measures can provide
shareholders with appropriate additional information if properly
used and presented. In such cases, measures such as these can
assist shareholders in gaining a better understanding of a
company’s financial performance and strategy. However, when
improperly used and presented, these kinds of measures might
prevent the Annual Report being fair, balanced and understandable
by hiding the real financial position and results or by making the
profitability of the reporting entity seem more attractive.
Our response – We assessed the appropriateness of the basis for the adjustments between the Adopted IFRS income statement and the ‘underlying’ income statement and recalculated the adjustments with a particular focus on the impact of the foreign exchange rates used to translate foreign currency amounts in the ‘underlying’ income statement. We assessed whether or not the selection of forward foreign exchange contracts settled in the year showed any evidence of management bias. We also assessed: (i) the extent to which the prominence given to the ‘underlying’ financial information and related commentary in the Annual Report compared to the Adopted IFRS financial information and related commentary could be misleading; (ii) whether the Adopted IFRS
and ‘underlying’ financial information are reconciled with sufficient prominence given to that reconciliation; (iii) whether the basis of the ‘underlying’ financial information is clearly and accurately described and consistently applied; and (iv) whether the ‘underlying’ financial information is not otherwise misleading in the form and context in which it appears in the Annual Report.
Other Information
157
Other Information
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
CONTINUED
Our findings – We found no concerns regarding the basis
of the ‘underlying’ financial information or its calculation
and
no indication of management bias in the settlement of forward
foreign exchange contracts. We consider that there is proportionate
disclosure of the nature and amounts of the adjustments to
allow shareholders to understand the implications of the two
bases on the financial measures being presented (2013 audit
finding: proportionate). We found the overall
presentation
of the ‘underlying’ financial information to be balanced
(2013 audit finding: balanced).
Disclosure of the effect on the trend in profit of items
which are uneven in frequency or amount
The risk – The Group’s profits are significantly impacted by items
such as cumulative adjustments to profit recognised on long-term
contracts, sale and leasebacks of spare engines to joint ventures,
research and development charges, reorganisation costs and foreign
exchange translation which can be uneven in frequency and/or
amount. If significant either to the profit for the year or to the
trend in profit, appropriate disclosure of the effect of these
items is necessary in the Annual Report and Financial Statements to
provide the information necessary to enable shareholders to assess
the Group’s performance.
Our response – We sought to identify items that affect
profit
(and the trend in profit) which are uneven in frequency or amount
at a much lower level than we would otherwise have done and to
assess the transparency of disclosure of these items.
Our findings – We identified a number of significant items that had affected profit for the year or the prior year that required appropriate disclosure in the Annual Report to enable shareholders to assess the Group’s performance. We found that proportionate disclosure of these items had been provided in the Annual Report and Financial Statements taken as a whole.
In reaching our audit opinion on the Financial Statements
we
took into account the findings that we describe above and
those
for other, lower risk areas. Overall the findings from across the
whole audit are that the Financial Statements have been prepared on
the basis of appropriate accounting policies, use mildly cautious
estimates, which are consistent when comparing this year to last,
and provide proportionate disclosure. Having assessed these
findings and evaluated uncorrected misstatements in the context of
materiality and considered the qualitative aspects of the Financial
Statements as a whole we have not modified our opinion on the
Financial Statements.
3 OUR APPLICATION OF MATERIALITY AND AN OVERVIEW
OF THE SCOPE OF OUR AUDIT
The materiality for the Group Financial Statements as a whole
was set at £70 million (2013: £86 million), determined
with reference to a benchmark of Group profit before taxation,
normalised to exclude the volatility in reported profit due to
gains and losses
on revaluation of foreign currency and other derivative financial
instruments which could otherwise result in an inappropriate
materiality level being calculated. This materiality measure
represents 4.6% of this benchmark and 34.3% of total reported
profit before tax. We carry out full audit procedures to
assess
the accuracy of the gains and losses on these derivative financial
instruments (which this year amounted to a £1.3 billion loss)
as
part of our audit of the Group’s treasury operations.
We report to the Audit Committee: (i) all material corrected identified misstatements; (ii) uncorrected identified misstatements exceeding £4 million for income statement items; and (iii) other identified misstatements that warranted reporting on qualitative grounds.
We subjected 33 of the Group’s reporting components to
audits
for group reporting purposes and 14 to specified risk-focused audit
procedures. The latter were not individually financially
significant enough to require an audit for group reporting
purposes, but did present specific individual risks that needed to
be addressed. This work also provided further audit coverage. The
remaining reporting units were subject to analytical procedures by
the Group audit team.
The Group operates shared service centres in Derby (UK) and
Indianapolis (US), the outputs of which are included in the
financial information of the reporting components they
service
and therefore they are not separate reporting components.
Each
of the service centres is subject to specified risk-focused audit
procedures, predominantly the testing of transaction processing and
review controls. Additional audit procedures are performed at
certain reporting components to address the audit risks not covered
by the work performed over the shared service centres.
Summary audit scope
UNDERLYING PROFIT BEFORE TAX
91% 9%
TOTAL ASSETS
83% 12% 5%
Audits for group reporting purposes
Specified risk-focused audit procedures
Group-level procedures only
158 Rolls-Royce Holdings plc Annual Report 2014
REVENUE
90% 7% 3%
The Group audit team instructed component auditors, and the
auditors of the shared service centres, as to the significant areas
to be covered, including the relevant risks detailed above and the
information
to be reported back. The Group audit team approved the component
materialities, which ranged from £0.3 million to £60 million,
having regard to the mix of size and risk profile of the Group
across the components. The work on 29 of the 47 components was
performed
by component auditors and the rest by the Group audit
team.
The Group audit team visited 25 component locations in the
UK,
the US, Germany and Norway, the purpose of which included an
assessment of the audit risk and strategy. Telephone conference
meetings were also held with these component auditors and with
those of the higher risk components that were not physically
visited. At these visits and meetings, the findings reported to the
Group audit team were discussed in more detail, and any further
work required by the Group audit team was then performed by the
component auditor.
4 OUR OPINION ON OTHER MATTERS PRESCRIBED BY THE COMPANIES ACT
2006 IS UNMODIFIED
In our opinion:
the part of the Directors’ Remuneration Report to be audited has been properly prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 2006; and
the information given in the Strategic Report and Directors’ Report for the financial year for which the Financial Statements are prepared is consistent with the Financial Statements.
5 WE HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT IN RESPECT OF THE MATTERS
ON WHICH WE ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT BY EXCEPTION
Under ISA (UK and Ireland) we are required to report to you if,
based on the knowledge we acquired during our audit, we have
identified other information in the Annual Report that contains a
material inconsistency with either that knowledge or the Financial
Statements, a material misstatement of fact, or that is otherwise
misleading. In particular, we are required to report to you if:
we have identified material inconsistencies between the knowledge we acquired during our audit and the directors’ statement that they consider that the Annual Report and Financial Statements taken as a whole is fair, balanced and understandable and provides the information necessary for shareholders to assess the Group’s performance, business model and strategy; or
the Audit Committee report does not appropriately address matters communicated by us to the Audit Committee.
Under the Companies Act 2006 we are required to report to you if, in our opinion:
adequate accounting records have not been kept by the parent company, or returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not visited by us; or
the parent company Financial Statements and the part of the Directors’ Remuneration Report to be audited are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or
certain disclosures of directors’ remuneration specified by law are not made; or
we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit.
Under the Listing Rules we are required to review:
the directors’ statement, set out on page 164, in relation to going concern; and
the part of the corporate governance report on page 59 relating to the Company’s compliance with the ten provisions of the UK Corporate Governance Code 2012 specified for our review.
We have nothing to report in respect of the above responsibilities.
Scope of report and responsibilities
As explained more fully in the directors’ responsibilities statement set out on page 93, the directors are responsible for the preparation of the Financial Statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view. A description of the scope of an audit of Financial Statements is provided on the Financial Reporting Council’s website at www.frc.org.uk/auditscopeukprivate. This report is made solely to the Company’s members as a body and is subject to important explanations and disclaimers regarding our responsibilities, published on our website at www.kpmg.com/uk/ auditscopeukco2014b, which are incorporated into this report
as if set out in full and should be read to provide an understanding of the purpose of this report, the work we have undertaken and the basis of our opinions.
JIMMY DABOO (SENIOR STATUTORY AUDITOR)
for and on behalf of KPMG LLP, Statutory Auditor
Chartered Accountants 15 Canada Square London E14 5GL
12 February 2015"
a. Describe several pieces of information included in this audit report that are not provided in the audit report for U.S. public companies.
b. If you are an investor in Rolls-Royce Holdings plc, then do you feel more or less comfort with the underlying financial statements after reading the auditor’s opinion? Why?
In: Accounting
Results for the fourth quarter of 2019 are provided below. CVI's management is concerned as to why the operating income was lower than budgeted. 2019 fourth-quarter operating statement
Actual Budget Revenues: High-speed Internet service $1,822,800 $1,890,000 Regular-speed Internet service 2.856.000 2.646.000 4,678,800 4,536,000 Expenses Billing and collection (55 per customer per quarter) 226,800 210.000 Variable costs of high-speed service ($15 per customer per quarter) 176,400 189.000 Variable costs of regular-speed service ($5 per customer per quarter) 168,000 147.000 Fixed costs 2.650.000 2.300.000 3221 2002 846 000 Operating income $1.457 600 $1.690.000 The budget was based on CVi holding a 35% market share assuming a total budgeted market size of 120.000 customers.
The actual market size for the fourth quarter of 2019 turned out to be 125.000 customers, due to new apartment buildings in the area. The budget also assumed that 30% of CVI's customers would select the high-speed package and the remaining 70% of CVI's customers would select the regular-speed package CVI's high-speed package was budgeted with a selling price of $150 per customer per quarter. The regular-speed package had a budgeted selling price of $90 per customer per quarter. The actual prices in the fourth quarter were $155 and $85 per customer for the high-speed and regular-speed packages respectively.
[PLEASE PROVIDE TYPE-WRITTEN ANSWER -> Not hand-written, hard to understand handwriting]
Calculate each of the following variances:
a) Sales price variance
b) sales volume variance
c) Sales quantity variance
d) Sales mix variance
e) Market size variance
f) Market share variance
In: Accounting