text:
You searched for "Pediatric sarcoma"
1 result found
Vice Chair and Professor, Pediatrics (Hematology & Oncology), Einstein and Montefiore Health System
Professor, Molecular Pharmacology , Einstein
Chief, Division of Pediatric Hematology-Oncology, The Children's Hospital at Montefiore
CancerPediatric oncologyPediatric sarcoma
Dr. Gorlick is a pediatric oncologist specializing in sarcoma (a type of cancer that affects connective tissue) and an international leader in research on osteosarcoma, the most common bone cancer in children. Dr. Gorlick was instrumental in initiating the bone-tumor bank of the Children's Oncology Group (COG), the world's largest childhood cancer research organization, and serves as Vice Chair of its Bone Tumor Disease Committee. read more...
Email: email@example.com
Phone: 718.430.3101


text:
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1959.3/91817
|Download PDF (Published version) (Adobe Acrobat PDF, 150 KB)
- Title
- Mainstreaming change: learning from community strengthening in Victoria
- Author(s)
- West, Sue; Wiseman, John; Bertone, Santina
- Abstract
- This paper considers the lessons from community strengthening projects instigated under the Victorian State Government's Community Building Initiative and considers the implications of these lessons for future community strengthening policy and practice in Victoria. The first section of the paper explores the rise of more 'community' focused policy and practice in Australia, the drivers behind this approach, and the tensions and issues along the way. This is followed by an outline of the specific policy context of community strengthening in Victoria and the approach by the Victorian State Government since 1999. The paper suggests that the policy direction in Victoria has moved from a projects based approach to looking at ways of 'mainstreaming' community strengthening. The paper then considers the findings of a research project which sought to understand, from a practice perspective, what factors have contributed to successful community strengthening. It is suggested that a community centred approach to community strengthening is what works best. The final section of the paper considers what these findings mean in the context of a search for more 'mainstreamed' approaches to community strengthening and a number of key strategies are identified. The paper concludes with some comments about the implications of the lessons from the 'experimenting' phase for alternative public policy ideas.
- Publication type
- Journal article
- Source
- Just Policy, No. 41 (Sep 2006), pp. 34-40
- Publication year
- 2006
- FOR Code(s)
- 1605 Policy and Administration; 1608 Sociology; 1801 Law
- Keyword(s)
- Australia; Community development; Community involvement; Connectedness; Local government administration; Partnerships; Social capital; State and territory government administration; Victoria
- Publisher
- Victorian Council of Social Service
- 1323-2266
- Publisher URL
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2006 Victorian Council of Social Service. The published version is reproduced here with the kind permission of the publisher.
- Full text
- Peer reviewed

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Prepaid Cards and Wash Books Offer Your Business Many Advantages
- Helps you lock in customer loyalty and repeat visits.
- Speeds up your transactions, eliminating the need to deal with change.
- Increases cash flow as you receive more money up front.
- Boosts revenue per car, as prepaid customers tend to spend more.
- Plastic Power: Switching From Paper Gift Certificates To Prepaid Cards Boosts Sales
Tight Control with Reduced Paperwork
- Prepaid cards aren't active until scanned, which greatly reduces your need to inventory the cards and tickets. If someone takes a prepaid card without paying for it, the card won't work at the register.
- Wash Books also are not active until energized, so you don't need to count books before and after each shift. If a book is taken and an attempt is made to use a ticket, SiteWatch® will indicate that the ticket isn't active and will not initiate the transaction.
- Individual tickets within the wash book are "retired" when used and cannot be used a second time.
- Much time is saved because counting and comparing tickets turned in against the daily report now needs only to be done on a spot-check basis.
Flexible Sales Tool
- You can use our Prepaid & Wash Book Control to create dollar-value cards or cards based on units.
- Cards can be "re-energized" by your cashier to increase the dollars or units on the card.
- Prepaid cards can be created as a fixed number or they can be open. For instance, you may choose to sell a 10-wash prepaid card or you may want an open-priced gift card.
Working for Your Entire Chain
- SiteWatch will share the prepaid and wash book information between all your locations.
- You may run a usage report on any prepaid card or wash book, giving detailed information for each use at each site.


text:
—Michael Ruhlman ROAD TRIP: When Michael Ruhlman (c.) and his TV show co-hosts Ming Tsai (l.) and Todd English (r.) hit Olives in Las Vegas, English served up a surprise. CHICKEN RUN: It's not that there's too much chicken on full-service menus; Ruhlman wants it served with more imagination. Does anyone know who first put cooked chicken breast on a Caesar salad and called it a Chicken Caesar? I wish I did. I've been upset about this for at least two years now because I ...
Register to view this Article
Why Register for FREE?
Registering for Premium Content on Food Management will give you INSTANT access to invaluable articles and media content that industry professionals rely on. You will have access to our special reports, feature articles, and industry analysis. It's FREE, easy and quick.


text:
It takes a special kind of person to watch people scream and bleed for 12 hours at a time. I'm not sure if hospitals are good at finding those people, or if working at a hospital turns you into one. But you don't really understand these people until you're there, in pain and at their mercy.
I found this out recently, when my girlfriend's appendix exploded. We live together, so it's not one of those cases where I could just send some flowers and wait for her to let me know she was back home. We share everything -- same house, same vehicle, same bills, and when one of us gets sick, same hospital room (for those of you who care, she's doing fine now).
Except now, everything she sees is Prince.
But during the hospital stay, we encountered members of the staff who had each advanced to some different stage of total apathy. Also, they were all named Lori. I'm convinced that they're all named that, all over the world. It might be spelled differently from Lori to Laurie, but each of them are in your hospital right now, fucking something up.
If you've been to the hospital recently, see if you recognize ...
One-Job Lori
We met this one at registration. We had been in the emergency room for about an hour when she walked in with a rolling computer cart that I immediately recognized would be a perfect World of Warcraft mobile command center. Just wheel that shit right into the bathroom and punch hotkeys from the shower. I made a mental note to steal it later.
Via K-log.com
Anyway, my girlfriend, who we'll call Emily for the purposes of this account, was so out of breath from screaming and crying that she couldn't speak for herself. So I would have to speak for her.
I told Lori that over the last 10 minutes or so, Emily's pain had grown tenfold, that it seemed like an appendix situation or maybe a tiny elf she swallowed was now trying to shoot his way out. So you know, we could really use someone down here right away to at least try to get that pain under control. Lori looked at me in a way that made me think she was going to reply in Russian, and said instead, "I'm just here to get some registration information."
"We'll be with you as soon as you scream your information to Lori."
I focused all of my frustration into a very violent sigh and said, "Sure, I understand. However, she should have been on the road to the hospital an hour before we finally did. It's a 35 minute drive. Then once we got here, she's been laying in this bed, unseen by anyone at all for over an hour. If you can't get someone in here yourself, at least point me in the right direction so I can."
She then promptly ignored everything I just said and started asking Emily about her address and insurance information.
Yes, Lori, we'll gladly give you the information you need. We'll give you so much goddamned information, your computer will need a new hard drive. You'll be able to ghost write Emily's fucking biography and option the film rights. Just ask for it while in the presence of a nurse who is pushing the plunger on a syringe full of morphine. Fuck, at that point, we would have settled for crack. But I go around asking the people in the waiting room for crack and suddenly I'm the unreasonable one.
Via Wikimedia Commons
Is there some great reason why pain medication can't be administered while waiting for the doctor to get free? Maybe. Probably, even. But if so, that information wouldn't be coming from Lori. Not her job.
Don't misunderstand my point here; I know that Lori sees dozens upon dozens of people every day who think they're the experts. And I know she gets worried family members barking orders at her, and she's learned to just let that roll off of her back. But ... doesn't the pain still count for something? In a hospital? Isn't there some kind of primal sympathy that kicks in at the sight of another member of the species writhing and screaming in pain? I try to think about how much screaming you have to hear before you become completely numb to it.
I'm guessing a long, long time.
This is my first hint of just how much it sucks to stand on either side of Lori's computer cart.
Forgetful Lori
It turns out the appendix did in fact rupture.
Luckily for us, it held together until surgery, so it was easier to control the disaster than if it had happened an hour earlier. That was what kept Emily from having to spend a week in the hospital fighting off infection. The downside is that once the surgery was over, we were stuck with our second Lori.
Or maybe this one was spelled Lorrie. Either way, she was the one administering the pain medication, and the way she explained it was that the I.V. stuff was the most powerful and would kick the pain's ass. Or there was a pill that didn't do quite as much. So Emily chose the more powerful of the two. That's one of those non-choices -- like choosing between cold pills or "Maximum Strength" cold pills that are the same price. Why the shit would anyone want less relief? So for a full day, that's what they kept her on.
We paid her an extra 20 to slip a little vodka in there.
They had told us that she would most likely be released the following morning, so when that time came around, Lori entered and told us that we had to stay a second night. Wait, what? Why? Because we chose the I.V.
Lori told us that before Emily went home, she had to be on the pill form of the meds, and had to walk a whole bunch up and down the hall. Oh. Well, thanks for fucking letting us know that now instead of 24 hours ago, Lori. Is there any other treatment we should guess for ourselves? Are you going to come back tomorrow and tell us that we have to stay another night because Emily forgot to write the required goodbye speech that you never told us about?
Leaving is kind of a big deal there.
We asked her to bring us the pills. "OK, I'll be back in about five minutes." She came back two hours later with a pillow for the woman in the next bed. We asked about the pills, and she said, "OH! I'm sorry, I'll be right back with those!" Thirty minutes later, Emily was hitting the "Call Nurse" button like a coked-up spider monkey playing Contra.
Lori heeded that call 15 minutes later, and when she walked in, she asked in a pleasant voice, "Did you need something?" By this point, Emily was nearly immobile. Even sitting up in bed caused so much pain, it brought her to tears. It suddenly came to the nurse that there was something she was supposed to be doing here, now what was that?
"Oh, my gosh, I am so sorry! I'll get those pills to you right now."
"But first ..."
From the time we asked for them until the time they went into my girlfriend's face hole, four hours had passed. Again, I understand that Lori is busy. We live in a small town, so we don't have an enormous hospital with an abundant staff. But goddammit, one of her main jobs is to keep up with her patients' medications. So barring the switch to the pills, it would have at least been time for some sort of medication in that four hour time-frame. Right?
The next time Emily's meds were an hour past due, I tracked her down behind the front desk, spreading gossip about how shitty someone's birthday party was. That's when I realized that the Lori situation was actually worse than I thought. To us, this is a major life crisis. To the Loris, we're just white noise -- a background buzz that occasionally complains. When we leave, some other crying, complaining couple will take our place.


text:
The King showed the Princess a map of the maze and the Princess was
allowed to decide which room she would wait in. She was not allowed
to send a copy to her lover who would have to guess which path to
follow. Which room should she wait in to give her lover the
greatest chance of finding her?
Four fair dice are marked differently on their six faces. Choose first ANY one of them. I can always choose another that will give me a better chance of winning. Investigate.
Explain why it is that when you throw two dice you are more likely to get a score of 9 than of 10. What about the case of 3 dice? Is a score of 9 more likely then a score of 10 with 3 dice?
Chris and Jo decide to play a game.
They put two red and four blue ribbons in a box.
They each pick a ribbon from the box without looking (and without replacing them).
Jo wins if the two ribbons are the same colour and Chris wins if the two ribbons are a different colour.
Is the game fair?
If not, how many ribbons of each colour would you need in the box to make it a fair game?
Is there more than one way to make a fair game?
This problem is based on one offered by Doug Williams at the 2003 ATM conference in Bath UK. See also http://www.blackdouglas.com.au/taskcentre
Click here for a poster of this problem.


text:
"Thank you for your great witness and ministry to Christ and His Church. I have enjoyed listening to Catholic Answers Live and your apologists for a number of years now. It has been very formative and inspirational in my journey towards becoming a well versed and devoted servant of Christ and His people on earth via His Church."
"Build schoolhouses then for the religious education of your children as the best protest against a system of education from which religion has been excluded by law."


text:
PwC global network of firms believes that the proposed standard provides a strong basis for the performance of all assurance engagements and will facilitate consistent high quality engagements, capable of being supplemented by clearly tailored topic-specific ISAEs as required, in response to the needs of users. PwC global network also believes that the revisions to the requirements and application material to better articulate the defining characteristics of a limited assurance engagement, together with the principles and differences between attestation and direct engagements, are useful.
For the attention of Mr James Gunn
Technical Director
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board
545 Fifth Avenue, 14th Floor
New York, New York, 10017
1 September 2011
Dear Sir
IAASB exposure draft – International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000 (revised), 'Assurance engagements other than audits or reviews of historical financial information'
We1 appreciate the opportunity to comment on the IAASB's proposed International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000 (Revised), 'Assurance Engagements Other Than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information'.
Overall comments
We support the proposed revision of the ISAE. The extant ISAE has been in effect since 2005. Since that time, we have found that the demand for assurance services and the nature of subject matter over which users are seeking assurance has evolved. We therefore agree that it is timely and appropriate for the IAASB to review the extant standard and clarify the principles and concepts underpinning the provision of assurance engagements in light of the experience gained in applying it in practice.
In our opinion, the proposed standard provides a strong basis for the performance of all assurance engagements and will facilitate consistent high quality engagements, capable of being supplemented by clearly tailored topic-specific ISAEs as required, in response to the needs of users.
We believe that the revisions to the requirements and application material to better articulate the defining characteristics of a limited assurance engagement, together with the principles and differences between attestation and direct engagements, are useful. Generally, we believe that they will serve to enhance understanding amongst practitioners of the nature and scope of individual reasonable or limited assurance engagements and the extent of the work effort necessary to convey the appropriate conclusion in the specific circumstances.
We also support the proposed amendments to the International Framework for Assurance Engagements in order to align it with the proposed revisions to ISAE 3000. But we particularly welcome the inclusion in ISAE 3000 (Revised) of material in the extant Framework that is necessary to allow ISAE 3000 (Revised) to be understood without reference to the Framework. In our experience, practitioners may focus on the Standard and, consequently, may not always look to the Framework, even though the Framework was vital to a proper understanding of some of the requirements in the extant ISAE 3000.
Sufficient and appropriate evidence
Consistent with our comments on the exposure drafts of ISRE 2400 (Revised), 'Engagements to review historical financial statements' and ISAE 3410, 'Assurance engagements on greenhouse gas statements', we question whether it is necessary to refer to the 'sufficiency and appropriateness' of evidence obtained in the context of a limited assurance engagement. We believe it is more important to focus on an assessment of whether the results of the procedures performed, and evidence obtained, are such that the practitioner is able to conclude whether the subject matter information is likely to be materially misstated than to create undue focus on the 'quantity' of evidence that might be needed in support of that conclusion.
However, we recognise that the standard needs to address both reasonable and limited assurance engagements and that the concept of 'sufficient appropriate evidence' is important in the context of a reasonable assurance engagement. We believe, however, that a solution can be found that achieves both aims by removin. references to 'sufficient appropriate evidence' in the requirements but retains the use of this term in the application material, with appropriate additional application material that explains more directly the considerations when performing a limited assurance engagement. We believe this would address our concern of requirements inadvertently implying that there is a specific, definable threshold in all limited assurance engagements, while also providing useful context for practitioners on the extent of evidence that is necessary in limited and reasonable assurance engagements, respectively.
Our detailed comments in response to the specific questions raised in the exposure draft are set out below. We have also provided some specific suggestions for the Board to consider in the appendix to this letter. We also outline in the appendix further suggested conforming amendments to the Assurance Framework arising from our comments on ISAE 3000 (Revised). We encourage the IAASB to address these comments in finalising proposed ISAE 3000 (Revised) and the Framework.
Request for specific comments
1. Do respondents believe that the nature and extent of requirements in proposed ISAE 3000 would enable consistent high quality assurance engagements while being sufficiently flexible given the broad range of engagements to which proposed ISAE 3000 will apply?
We believe the overall level of requirements to be appropriate. The changes, particularly with respect to limited assurance engagements, should help promote consistency in practice. Given the increasingly diverse range of subject matter on which users are seeking to obtain assurance, we believe an appropriate balance has been struck in the nature and extent of the requirements considered to be relevant to all assurance engagements while recognising that there will also be a need to build specific tailored requirements in future subject matter-specific ISAEs. In addition, many of the requirements deal with 'engagement management' issues. As many of these engagements are new or developing, considerations relating to engagement acceptance and the pre-conditions for an assurance engagement are particularly important and the new requirements are helpful in this regard.
2. With respect to levels of assurance:
We broadly support the definitions and characteristics of reasonable and limited assurance described in the exposure draft. In relation to limited assurance, we have proposed some minor wording amendments in the appendix that, in our view, make the distinction between the two sharper.
We support the narrative definition that conveys the form of the practitioner's conclusion and believe this will be more effective in helping users understand the difference between each type of engagement compared to the former 'positive' and 'negative' terms applied to the conclusion.
The standard appropriately highlights those requirements where the practitioner's work effort is different, depending on the level of assurance being obtained, and is entirely consistent with the proposals in the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (Revised). Other requirements that have been deemed applicable to both types of engagement are considered to be appropriate.
The extent of understanding of internal control that is necessary in a limited assurance engagement is, in our experience, dependent on the underlying subject matter. We believe there is a minimum level of understanding of the control environment and information system that is necessary to sufficiently understand how the subject matter information has been prepared. For some engagements it may also be necessary to understand certain control activities relating to, for example, processing of subject matter data, to enable an informed assessment of where material misstatements in the subject matter information are likely to arise. However, in other engagements, for example, a review engagement in which the practitioner's procedures comprise primarily inquiries of management and analytical procedures, this may be less relevant. In all cases, we do not believe it is ordinarily necessary to evaluate other aspects of the entity's internal control, such as the risk assessment process or monitoring of controls, in a limited assurance engagement.
3. With respect to attestation and direct engagements:
We support the adoption of the terms 'attestation engagements' and 'direct engagements' on the basis that these are appropriately defined in the standard. The terms also help distinguish the engagements more clearly, as both forms of engagement are 'assurance based'.
We believe the proposed standard sufficiently articulates the concept of a direct engagement—although also recognise that in some territories this is a concept that is not widely recognised, particularly outside of the public sector. In particular, we are aware that some question the independence of the practitioner in a direct engagement. Further education of both practitioners and users may be necessary. We suggest that consideration be given to whether further explanatory material could be developed to better explain why the practitioner is considered independent of the subject matter information when it is the practitioner that prepares that information. Such guidance could help abate the ongoing debate on this matter.
We are aware that some argue that in a direct engagement, where the practitioner measures or evaluates the subject matter against the criteria and the practitioner's conclusion forms the subject matter information, a misstatement in that subject matter information is an 'assurance failure', that is, a failure (in a reasonable assurance engagement) of the practitioner to detect a material misstatement. We support the IAASB's assessment that in both direct and attestation engagements, the outcome of the measurement or evaluation of the subject matter against the criteria can be wrong and as such, regardless of who performs that measurement or evaluation, the primary consideration is that of the users' perception – in both cases the subject matter information is misstated. Therefore, we believe the definition of misstatement is appropriate and applies equally to both types of engagement.
We believe there is adequate guidance on what constitutes acceptable criteria regardless of whether these are determined by a third party or by the practitioner. Specifically, the guidance that the practitioner considers discussing the choice of criteria with the appropriate party(ies) is important. We do, however, suggest that the application material should address the need for the practitioner to have sufficient knowledge of, and competence in relation to, the subject matter to enable them to develop and/or select appropriate criteria in those circumstances.
4. With respect to describing the practitioner's procedures in the assurance report:
We support the requirement to include a summary of the work performed as the basis for the practitioner's conclusion. For a limited assurance engagement we believe this should be of a summarised nature that is sufficient to convey an appropriate understanding of the nature and extent of procedures without resulting in an extensive list that is unwieldy and appears overly standardised. Furthermore, an appropriate description of the primary procedures performed will prove more effective than an extensive list of procedures not performed. However, in providing a description of procedures performed, it is important that the description does not appear to resemble a list of agreed-upon procedures as this will blur the distinction with assurance procedures.
We support the inclusion of language that makes clear that the extent of procedures performed in a limited assurance engagement is less than for a reasonable assurance engagement, as this is a key statement in conveying to users the nature of such an engagement. We are aware that some also hold the view that providing a list of procedures in a limited assurance report, but making no such similar disclosure (ordinarily) in a reasonable assurance report, risks creating a perception that a higher level of assurance is being provided than in a reasonable assurance engagement. We believe that the risk of the level of assurance being misinterpreted is low. The inclusion of the additional explanatory language, which describes the nature and reduced extent of procedures in the limited assurance report, is, in our opinion, sufficiently clear to mitigate this risk. We have suggested some minor amendments to the proposed wording in the appendix to this letter, which we believe make this statement clearer.
We do not believe that any additional guidance is necessary in relation to the level of detail needed for the summary of the practitioner's procedures. Given the diverse nature of engagements that may be undertaken, we believe it is appropriate to apply principles, as described in our response to point (a), to this disclosure and allow practitioners judgement in determining what is likely to be most 'meaningful' to users. We believe these principles are broadly reflected in the application material. However, we have proposed some minor amendments in the appendix to this letter that we believe would reinforce those points.
5. Do respondents believe that the form of the practitioner's conclusion in a limited assurance engagement (that is, 'based on the procedures performed, nothing has come to the practitioner's attention to cause the practitioner to believe the subject matter information is materially misstated') communicates adequately the assurance obtained by the practitioner?
This form of conclusion is, in our opinion, the most appropriate for this type of engagement. This wording, when included in the assurance report alongside the other statements required of the practitioner, including, in particular, those described in question 4 above, adequately places the level of assurance in context and is therefore considered appropriate. Please refer to the appendix to this letter for our further comments on specific elements of the content of the practitioner's report.
6. With respect to those applying the standard:
Recognising the broad subject matter on which assurance may be sought by users we have no objection to the proposals relating to, and definition of, the 'practitioner'. We believe the requirements are sufficiently robust such that only appropriate individuals that are subject to requirements equivalent to those imposed on professional accountants in public practice, as describe in the introductory material to the standard, are able to undertake an engagement in accordance with the standard.
Other comments
We note from the explanatory memorandum that the IAASB considered guidance in relation to circumstances when a reasonable assurance engagement addresses subject matter information that encompasses both historical financial information and other information and the related question of whether such an engagement should be conducted under ISAE 3000 or ISA 805. We support the IAASB's conclusion that it is appropriate to allow the flexibility for this determination to be subject to the practitioner's professional judgment in light of individual engagement circumstances. However, we believe it would be helpful to raise awareness of this scenario, which we have seen in practice, by explaining this in the standard and to explicitly state that the decision of which standard is the most appropriate to apply is based on the practitioner's judgement in the specific engagement circumstances.
Effective date
We consider the proposed effective date to be acceptable, on the assumption that the IAASB continues its normal practice of permitting early adoption.
We would be happy to discuss our views further with you. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Deian Tecwyn (+44 207 212 3695) or Jamie Shannon (+44 141 355 4225).
Yours faithfully,
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
1Following extensive consultation with members of the PwC network of firms, this response summarises the views of member firms who commented on this Exposure Draft. 'PwC' refers to the network of member firms of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each of which is a separate and independent legal entity.
We encourage the IAASB to address the following matters in finalising proposed ISAE 3000 (Revised).
|Paras 8, 9 & A20
We believe it may benefit users' understanding to group the definitions of the various parties to the engagement together under a new definition – 'Appropriate party(ies)', in particular given the use of this term throughout the standard. The content of paragraph 9 can then be included to accompany this definition. We suggest the following:
'Appropriate party(ies):
For the purposes of this ISAE and other ISAEs, references to 'appropriate party(ies)' should be read hereafter as 'the responsible party, the measurer or evaluator, or the engaging party, as appropriate. '
|Para 8 (a)
We suggest it is appropriate to include, as application material to this definition, the content from the Assurance Framework that describes engagements that are not an assurance engagement (paragraphs 19-21 in the proposed revised Framework), as we believe this is a common area of misunderstanding. This is also consistent with the premise that ISAE 3000 should contain all guidance necessary for a practitioner to understand and conduct an assurance engagement without the need to separately refer to the Framework. We recommend the following additional material:
'Not all engagements performed by practitioners are assurance engagements. Other frequently performed engagements that are not consistent with the description in paragraph 8(a) (and therefore are not covered by this standard) include:
An assurance engagement may be part of a larger engagement, for example, when a business acquisition consulting engagement includes a requirement to convey assurance regarding historical or prospective financial information. In such circumstances, this standard is relevant only to the assurance portion of the engagement.
The following engagements, which may be consistent with the description in paragraph 8(a), are not considered assurance engagements in terms of this standard:
We also recommend the following minor wording amendment to the definition of limited assurance (consistent with the language adopted in ISAE 3410):
'Limited assurance engagement―An assurance engagement in which the practitioner reduces engagement risk to a level that is acceptable in the circumstances of the engagement but where that risk is greater than for a reasonable assurance engagement. The practitioner's conclusion is expressed in a form that conveys that, based on the procedures performedand evidence obtained, nothing has come to the practitioner's attention to cause the practitioner to believe the subject matter information is materially misstated. The setnature of procedures performed in a limited assurance engagement isdifferent from, and their extent less than,
|Para 8 (i)
For the reasons set out in the main body of this letter, we recommend that the content describing the sufficiency and appropriateness of evidence be deleted. This is better located in the application material related to the requirements dealing with evidence. We also recommend a minor wording amendment as shown:
|Para 8 (q)
The second sentence describing the role of the practitioner in a direct engagement is repetitive of paragraph 8 (b) and is equally not part of the definition of 'practitioner'. We believe this should be deleted.
|Para 11
We recommend additional wording as follows:
'The practitioner shall not represent compliance with this or any other ISAE unless the practitioner has complied with the requirements of this ISAE and any othersubject matter-specific ISAE relevant to the engagement. '
|Para 15
We believe this paragraph is repetitive of paragraph 7. We suggest that the content of this paragraph would be better located as application material to paragraph 7. We further recommend that the application material included in ISRE 2400 (Revised) paragraphs A12-A14 may be appropriate to incorporate into such application material, tailored accordingly. We have included further recommendations at the end of this appendix to align the standard with the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (Revised) where, in our opinion, matters have been better dealt with in that standard.
|Para 16
As several requirements refer to complying with 'relevant ethical requirements' we recommend that the heading under which this paragraph resides be amended to state'Relevant Ethical Requirements'. Alternatively the approach adopted in ISRE 2400 (Revised) may be applied with a formal definition of the term provided. This requirement could then be simplified.
|Para 20 (a)
We suggest that the need for the appropriate parties to understand their relevant roles and responsibilities needs to be made explicit in the requirement. We propose the following alternative wording:
'The appropriate parties understand their respective roles and responsibilities and that these are suitable in the circumstances. '
|Para 20 (b)(iii)
We suggest additional wording as shown (consistent with the related application material):
'The practitioner will have access to therecords and evidence needed to support the practitioner's conclusion. '
|Paras 20 (b)(v) & A53
We believe that the requirement to assess whether there is a rational purpose for the engagement should be incorporated into requirement 18. In our opinion this should be the first consideration preceding the other elements identified in requirement 18, rather than the last item in paragraph 20. Note this is also consistent with the treatment in the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (Revised). We propose a new paragraph 18 (a) as follows:
'The practitioner shall accept or continue an assurance engagement only when:
Refer also to our comment on paragraph A53 in respect of application material related to a 'rational purpose'.
|Paras 26 & 62
We believe that there may be actual, or at best perceived, conflict between the statements in requirements 26 and 62 with respect to referencing the fact of the engagement being conducted in accordance with ISAEs. The former states (including a referencing error corrected in our quote) that:
'An engagement conducted in accordance with such laws or regulations does not comply with ISAEs. Accordingly, the practitioner shall not include any reference within the assurance report to the engagement having been conducted in accordance with ISAE 3000 or any other ISAE(s). (See also paragraph 6
While, the latter states:
'If the practitioner is required by laws or regulations to use a specific layout or wording of the assurance report, the assurance report shall refer to this or other ISAEs only if the assurance report includes, at a minimum, each of the elements identified in paragraph 60. '
Similar to the ISAs, this seems to be saying that compliance with the performance requirements in the ISAE is necessary to assert compliance with the ISAE, but that reporting requirements might vary as long as a minimum set of elements is present. It might be useful to clarify this point to avoid the possible perception of inconsistency, or even contradictory, requirements.
Please refer also to our recommendation in respect of consistency with the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (Revised) which we believe would address this issue.
|Para 28
This requirement is clearly drafted as a responsibility of the engagement partner. As such, we believe this needs to follow the heading'Responsibilities of the Engagement Partner'. Refer also to our related comment on paragraph 29 in the section titled 'Recommended changes to align the standard with the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (Revised)'.
|Para 43
We believe this requirement should refer to 'identified' misstatements in the first instance:
'The practitioner shall accumulate
We also suggest that the approach adopted in the exposure draft of ISAE 3410 follows a more logical flow to the assessment of misstatements that is , identify, communicate and request correction, and evaluation of the effect of uncorrected misstatements. We believe the principles in requirements 48 to 54 of ISAE 3410 are appropriate for all assurance engagements and therefore encourage the IAASB to consider whether these should be reflected in ISAE 3000. As a minimum we believe this section of requirements should address identification, accumulation, communication and correction of misstatements. See our related comment on paragraph 56 (b) that deals with evaluating uncorrected misstatements.
|Paras 44 & A100-A105
Consistent with our previous comments, we recommend that the requirement does not directly refer to 'sufficient appropriate evidence', as we believe this term is not appropriate in the context of a limited assurance engagement. We believe that the use of this term can remain in the application material on the basis that additional clarification and context is provided in respect of how this term is interpreted in a limited assurance engagement. We therefore recommend the following change to the requirement and the associated application material, as shown:
Para 44 –'The practitioner shall evaluate the
Para A105 –'Whether sufficient appropriate evidence has been obtained on which to base the practitioner's conclusion is a matter of professional judgment.In the context of a limited assurance engagement, the sufficiency and appropriateness of evidence relates to whether the evidence obtained adequately addresses areas of the subject matter information where material misstatements are likely to arise and whether the nature, timing and extent of procedures performed is sufficient to obtain a level of assurance that is meaningful to the intended users. '
|Para 48
We question whether the wording of the requirement is sufficiently clear. We suggest an application material paragraph may be useful to further explain what characteristics 'about' the measurement or evaluation of the underlying subject matter against the applicable criteria the practitioner may obtain from the measurer or evaluator.
|Para 56 (a)
Consistent with our previous comments, we recommend the following amendment to remove reference to 'sufficiency and appropriateness':
'The practitioner shall form a conclusion about whether the reported outcome of the measurement or evaluation of the underlying subject matter is free from material misstatement. In forming that conclusion, the practitioner shall consider:
|Paras 56 (b) and A99
|Please refer to our suggestion on paragraph 43 above. Consistent with that view, we do not believe paragraph A99 adds any useful explanation to the two related requirements.
|Paras 57 & A136
Consistent with our previous comments, we recommend the following amendment to remove reference to 'sufficient appropriate evidence':
Para 57 -'If the practitioner is unable to obtain
Para A136 –'An inability to perform a specific procedure does not constitute a scope limitation if the practitioner is able to obtain
|Para 60 (c)
We believe it is important to highlight the rationale for the identification or description of the subject matter information, or subject matter, to provide context for the practitioner's assessment of the disclosure by the appropriate party(ies). We propose the following amended wording:
'The assurance report shall include at a minimum the following basic elements:
|Para 60 (k)
Please refer to our comments in response to question 4. We also recommend the following revised wording for the second sentence:
'In a limited assurance engagement the summary of the work performed shall state that the practitioner's procedures are
|Para 60 (l)(i)
We believe the use of the term 'where appropriate' is ambiguous. We suggest this bullet of the requirement be redrafted as follows and, in addition, be re-located to be the final bullet (note this bullet should also cross refer to paragraph A156 and not A158):
|Para 67
We suggest that this requirement could be presented more clearly, as follows:
'In those cases where the practitioner
Refer also to our comment on paragraphs 64 and 65 in the second part of this appendix.
|Para A1
We believe the title of this paragraph creates the impression that the content is incorrectly located in the wider context of the engagement that is , it feels strange to be referring to the practitioner's conclusion as the first application guidance paragraph. We suggest the revised title and wording shown below would place this paragraph more in context. We have also suggested additional guidance to address engagements that may involve reporting only a single conclusion but that also contain multiple elements.
Where the subject matter information is made up of a number of
|Para A2
We recommend the following minor wording change in the second sentence:
'In a limited assurance engagement, the practitioner performs a set of procedureswhose nature is different from, and their extent less than,
We also suggest the following amendment to the second bullet point to reiterate that it is the practitioner, and not the engaging party, that has sole responsibility for determining the nature, timing and extent of procedures:
'Instructions or other indications from the engaging party about the nature of the assurance the engaging party is seeking the practitioner to obtain. For example, the terms of the engagement may stipulate particular procedures that the engaging party
Lastly, we suggest it may be helpful to include the following material, which has been adapted from paragraphs 2 and 4 of ISA 320 and is relevant to providing the practitione. context for determining what is 'meaningful to the intended users':
'In determining what is meaningful t. the intended users, it is reasonable for the practitioner to assume that users:
In addition, the practitioner considers the common information needs of intended users as a group. The possible effect of misstatements on specific individual users, whose needs may vary, is not considered. '
|Para A3
We suggest the following amended wording for the third sentence:
'The role of the practitioner in an attestation engagement is to obtain
|Para A5
Consistent with the previous comment we recommend the following changes:
'In addition to measuring or evaluating the underlying subject matter, the practitioner in a direct engagement also applies assurance skills and techniques to obtain
|Para A6 (b)
We recommend deleting 'sufficient appropriate' from the second sentence as shown:
'It is this obtaining of
|Para A17
We recommend the following change, which is consistent with the proposed change in the Assurance Framework:
'Regardless of the involvement of others however, and unlike an agreed-upon procedures engagement (which involves reportingfactual findings based upon the procedures, rather than a conclusion):…'
|Para A21
We suggest that the guidance in paragraph A21 is of sufficient importance in setting the context of the application of the standard that it should be incorporated directly into paragraph 4.
|Para A33
We suggest that this is moved to the end of the application material on preconditions for an assurance engagement, as it is presented as a specific industry example and should follow the explanation of the underlying principles.
|Para A37 (b)
Consistent with our previous comments, we recommend the following amendment to remove reference to 'sufficient and appropriate':
'Such that the information about it can be subjected to procedures for obtaining
|Para A47
We suggest that the language in this paragraph be made consistent with paragraph A10 to avoid inconsistent interpretations of its intended authority, as shown:
'If criteria are specifically designed for the purpose of preparing the subject matter information in the particular circumstances of the engagement, they are not suitable if they result in subject matter information or an assurance report that is misleading to the intended users. It
|Para A53
Please refer to our comment on paragraph 20 (b)(v). In addition, we question whether the final three bullets in this paragraph are related to the engagement having a rational purpose.
The fifth bullet deals with limitations on scope – we suggest that this needs to be explained in the context of whether the scope of the engagement would be meaningful to users as opposed to limitations on the scope of the practitioner's work being imposed. We believe that the language used in paragraph 16 (a) of the exposure draft of ISAE 3410 provides an appropriate basis for developing more appropriate wording.
The sixth and final bullets deal with risks or difficulties in achieving the objectives of the engagement. This is separate from the assessment of whether there is a rational purpose. We suggest that this content be relocated, for example as part of acceptance and continuance considerations.
|Para A68
Consistent with our previous comments, we recommend the following amendment to remove reference to 'sufficient and appropriate' in the first sentence:
'In a direct engagement, the practitioner both measures or evaluates the underlying subject matter and obtains
|Para A75
In the third bullet we suggest the following alternative wording:
'Evaluating whether
|Para A86 (& A42 (b))
We do not believe it is appropriate to extend consideration of materiality to 'relevant decisions' of users as opposed to 'economic decisions'. We do not believe there is a sufficient framework or approach that would guide the practitioner's judgements in interpreting what the 'decisions' of users may be. Applying the materiality concept to more complex qualitative disclosures, such as may be included in some assurance engagements, for example, GHG statements, is difficult. Without further guidance, and without the benefit of established benchmarks, practitioners are likely to struggle with this.
|Para A110
Refer to our comment on paragraph 2 in the second part of this appendix. If the additional application guidance on reliance on a firms quality control systems is added, based on our recommendation, then much of this application material can be deleted and a reference to that application guidance added to a shorter paragraph explaining its application in the context of a practitioner's expert.
|Para A124
We recommend that two additional bullets be added, as follows:
We also suggest it may be helpful to include, at the end of this paragraph, a cross reference back to the application material dealing with written representations in relation to access to information (paragraphs A51-A52).
|Para A137
Consistent with our previous comments we suggest the following alternative wording for the first sentence:
We also suggest it may be helpful to cross refer to this application material from paragraph 20 (b)(iii).
|Para A155
We believe that the paragraph is not sufficiently clear and suggest the following clarification to make explicit the intended wording to be applied:
'In a direct engagement, the practitioner's conclusion is always worded in terms of the underlying subject matter and the criteria, that is, the first example shown in paragraph A154 above. '
|Para A166
We are concerned that this paragraph gives undue focus to fraud matters and does not address other common matters that should be communicated to the appropriate party(ies). We propose the following amended wording:
'Matters that may be appropriate to communicate with the responsible party, the measurer or evaluator, the engaging party or others include fraud or suspected fraud,matters involving non-compliance with laws and regulations that are other than clearly inconsequential, significant difficulties, if any, encountered during the engagement,and in the case of an attestation engagement,perceivedbias in the preparation of the subject matter information. '
|Paras A170 – A175
We note that ISAE 3402 and ISAE 3410 include requirements relating to documentation principles and the final assembly of the engagement file that use identical text to the content included in these application material paragraphs. We believe such requirements, in compliance with ISQC1, are applicable to all assurance based engagements that will be performed in accordance with ISAE 3000 (Revised) and are of sufficient importance that they should have appropriate authority. As such, we find it inconsistent that these be treated as application material in the principles based standard but then repeated as replica requirements in subject matter-specific ISAEs.
We, therefore, recommend that paragraphs A170 and A171 are elevated to requirements (using the language included in the exposure draft of ISAE 3410 (paragraphs 62 – 64, tailored as necessary to refer to the 'appropriate party(ies)')) and that paragraphs A172, A174 and A175 also be elevated to requirements (based on the form of language included in paragraphs 66 and 67 of ISAE 3410).
We also recommended in our response letter to the exposure draft of ISAE 3410 that the equivalent requirements in that standard, and in ISAE 3402, be removed via conforming amendments to this standard. However, we understand that it may be considered appropriate to reflect these requirements also in subject matter-specific ISAEs due to their overall importance. We have no objection to limited repetition but believe that the authority should be consistent for the reasons outlined above.
Furthermore, we request the IAASB to consider whether the requirement in ISAE 3410 relating to documentation of matters arising after the date of the assurance report (paragraph 65) equally should be reflected in ISAE 3000, as this again would be considered to be a generic requirement applicable to all assurance engagements.
|ISAE 3000 Appendix
We support the narrative description of the roles and responsibilities of the relevant parties to an assurance engagement. We recommend one minor amendment to point 2 (d) as follows:
'The practitioner obtains
We do, however, feel that the diagram does not articulate as effectively as it could the relationships described in the narrative, in particular, the relationship of the practitioner to the assurance report and the differing role of the practitioner in an attestation versus a direct engagement. We urge the IAASB to consider whether revisions can be made to the diagram to convey more effectively to readers these relationships. Alternatively, we suggest that the diagram could be split into two simpler tables that might be more effective in contrasting the differences in responsibilities under each type of engagement.
Recommended changes to align the standard with the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (revised)
We believe the following matters, that are common to both standards, have been addressed more appropriately, or have used clearer language, in the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (Revised) and recommend that ISAE 3000 (Revised) be amended to be consistent.
|Para 2
We suggest that some additional application material that places into context how the engagement team may rely on the firm's quality control systems is appropriate. We, therefore, recommend that paragraphs A6-A8 from IRSE 2400 (Revised) be added immediately following paragraph A59. Refer also to our related comments on paragraph 29.
|Para 8
We suggest the following introduction to this paragraph, consistent with ISRE 2400 (Revised):
'The Handbook's Glossary of Terms (the Glossary) includes the terms defined in this ISAE, and also includes descriptions of other terms found in this ISAE, to assist in common and consistent interpretation and translation. '
|Para 17
We suggest that the application material in ISRE 2400 (Revised) paragraphs A31, A32 and A34 - A35 would be appropriate application material for this requirement and acts as an overarching introduction to the application material on acceptance and continuance (preceding current paragraph A33).
|Para 21
In conjunction with our comment on paragraph 26 below, in relation to the deleted final sentence, we suggest this paragraph be amended, as follows:
'If the preconditions for an assurance engagement are not present, the practitioner shall discuss the matter with the engaging party. If changes cannot be made to meet the preconditions, the practitioner shall not accept the engagement as an assurance engagement unless required by laws or regulations to do so. However, an engagement conducted under such circumstances does not comply with ISAEs.
|Paras 23 & A54
We suggest additional wording for the first sentence as follows:
'The practitioner shall agree the terms of the engagement with the engaging party, prior to performing the engagement. '
While acknowledging the statement in paragraph A54 that the form and content of the engagement letter may vary with the engagement circumstances, we believe it would be appropriate to include guidance that set out matters that the engagement letter would ordinarily be expected to address. This may draw on the content of ISRE 2400 (Revised) paragraphs 35, A55 and A56, tailored accordingly.
|Para 24
We recommend the inclusion of application material consistent with paragraph A60 of ISRE 2400 (Revised).
|Paras 25 & A56
We recommend that the additional application guidance given in ISRE 2400 (Revised) paragraphs A61 and A63, tailored accordingly, be included in relation to this requirement.
We further recommend that an additional requirement be included, immediatel. following paragraph 25, based on paragraph 39 of ISRE 2400 (Revised), as follows:
'If the terms of engagement are changed during the course of the engagement, the practitioner and the engaging party shall agree on and record the new terms of the engagement in an engagement letter or other suitable form of written agreement. '
|Para 26
Further to our comments in the first section of this appendix and paragraph 21 above, we believe that the order and flow of the requirements could be improved. We recommend that paragraph 26 be moved to follow paragraph 22.
We also suggest that the structure of paragraph 33 of ISRE 2400 (Revised) is clearer and may help to better articulate the aim of requirements 26 and 62. We recommend the following revised wording:
(a) The practitioner's report shall refer to this ISAE and any subject matter specific ISAE only if the report complies with the requirements of paragraph 60; and
(b) The practitioner shall evaluate:
If the practitioner concludes……. '
We also believe that inclusion of application material, which may be based on paragraphs A54 and A142 of ISRE 2400 (Revised), tailored accordingly, may further help illustrate this point.
|Para 29
With the exception of ISRE 2400 (Revised) paragraph 24 (a)(ii), which deals with the assignment of the team (dealt with separately in ISAE 3000 (Revised) paragraph 28), we believe all other clauses in ISRE 2400 (Revised) paragraph 24 and ISAE 3000 (Revised) paragraph 29 have the same intended aim and should therefore use the same language to achieve consistency across these standards.
We further recommend that paragraph A30 of ISRE 2400 (Revised) would be appropriate application material to be linked from this paragraph, in setting the overall context of the engagement partner's responsibilities. We recommend this follow the additional application material that we have suggested in our comment on paragraph 2 above.
|Para 31
We suggest the first sentence in ISRE 2400 (Revised) paragraph 26 be added, as follows:
'An effective system of quality control for a firm includes a monitoring process designed to provide the firm with reasonable assurance that the firm's policies and procedures relating to the system of quality control are relevant, adequate and operate effectively. '
|Para 33
We suggest the following additional wording:
'The practitioner shall plan and perform an engagement with professional scepticismrecognizing that circumstances may exist that cause the subject matter information to be materially misstated. '
|Para 36
We support the IAASB in not including a requirement that explicitly calls for the practitioner to revise materiality as the assurance engagement progresses. However, we believe there may be benefit in including an application material paragraph to this requirement that explains that this may be appropriate depending on the circumstances. We suggest the following wording:
'The practitioner's determination of materiality for the assurance engagement may need to be revised during the engagement as a result of:
|Para 42 (a)
We suggest that this requirement be more explicit in its aim and suggest the following wording:
'Based on the practitioner's understanding (see paragraph 37)
Consistent with our comments in response to the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (Revised), we suggest that, to avoid misinterpretation of the term 'likely' in the above context, it would be appropriate to provide application material that explains what this term means in the context of the practitioner's assessment. For example, the practitioner's assessment is based on consideration of the inherent risk of areas of the subject matter information, for example , complexity, in combination with any entity specific information that comes to his/her attention during obtaining an understanding of the subject matter and the environment in which the entity operates. It is the practitioner's judgement, having considered the balance of this information, that drives the determination of those areas of the subject matter information where material misstatements are considered 'likely' to arise, and is primarily based on the practitioner's intuition rather than an evaluation of the results of detailed procedures.
|Para 52
We suggest that the structure of the requirement in ISRE 2400 (Revised) is clearer and recommend the following alternative requirement:
'If, in relation to the written representations required under paragraphs 47-49,:
|Para 60 (l)(iv)
We believe it would be helpful to explain that a modified conclusion requires to be presented under an appropriate heading. We therefore suggest the following additional language:
'Where the practitioner expresses a modified conclusion, the assurance report shall contain a clear description of the matter(s) giving rise to the modificationin a separate paragraph and us. an appropriate heading for the conclusion paragraph – 'Qualified Conclusion', 'Adverse Conclusion' or 'Disclaimer of Conclusion' as appropriate. '
|Paras 63 – 67
It appears more logical to us that the requirements dealing with 'unmodified and modified conclusions' (paragraphs 63-67) should immediately follow the content on 'forming the assurance conclusion'. We therefore recommend that these requirements be moved to precede the section on 'preparing the assurance report'.
|Para 63 (b)
We suggest the following additional wording:
'In the case of a limited assurance engagement, that, based on the procedures performedand evidence obtained, nothing has come to the attention of the practitioner…. . '
|Paras 64, 65 & A164 – A165
We believe that the content of these requirements could be presented in a manner that more clearly conveys the appropriate form of conclusion to be expressed. We also suggest that it is important to link the requirement in paragraph 64 (b) to the application material in paragraphs A154 – A157 that explains the nature of the practitioner's conclusion under an attestation and a direct engagement, as this is fundamental to understanding what this requirement is trying to describe. Our recommended wording is as follows:
Para 64 -'The practitioner shall express a modified conclusion when the following circumstances exist and, in the practitioner's professional judgment, the effect of the matter is or may be material:
Para 65 – We recommend this paragraph is based on the wording that is used in ISRE 2400 (Revised), tailored accordingly, which we believe is clearer:
'Where the practitioner determines that a modified conclusion is necessary in the circumstances:
While paragraph 65 describes how a qualified conclusion is to be expressed, we also suggest that some form of guidance is necessary to explain the general form of wording to be applied when expressing an adverse conclusion or disclaiming a conclusion. We support the decision not to provide any illustrative reports. However, in doing so we believe it is necessary to articulate in the application guidance how an adverse or disclaimer of conclusion is ordinarily expressed.
|Para 68
We suggest that paragraph A67 in ISRE 2400 (Revised) be added as further application material to this paragraph.
|Paras A23- A26
We note that this application material describes the content of the standard and its relevant authority. We question whether some, or all, of this content should be presented in the introductory material of the standard to give this greater prominence and to ensure readers understand the construct of the standard.
We also suggest that paragraphs 9-11 in the exposure draft of ISRE 2400 (Revised) are written in plainer language and could directly replace paragraphs A23 and A25, tailored accordingly.
|Para A27
We recommend that this paragraph be moved to be application material to paragraph 8.
|Para A58
We suggest the following additional wording to explain that ISQC 1 requires more than simply compliance with ethical requirements:
'ISQC 1 deals with the firm's responsibilities to establish and maintain its system of quality control for assurance engagements. It sets out the responsibilities of the firm for establishing policies and procedures designed to provide it with reasonable assurance that: (i)the firm and its personnel comply with relevant ethical requirements, including those pertaining to independence, applicable legal and regulatory requirements, and (ii) that reports issued by the firm are appropriate in the circumstances. Compliance with ISQC 1 requires, among other things, that the firm establish and maintain a system of quality control that includes policies and procedures addressing each of the following elements, and that it documents its policies and procedures and communicates them to the firm's personnel…. '
|Para A70
We recommend an additional bullet as follows:
'Conditions that may indicate possible fraud. '
|Para A71
We suggest the following amended wording for the second bullet:
'Over generalizing when drawing conclusions from
|Para A77
We recommend that the following sentence and bullets (amended as shown) from ISRE 2440 (Revised) paragraph A27 be appended to this paragraph as shown:
'The practitioner will be guided by such matters as the following:
|Para A96
We suggest that the following additional wording be appended to this paragraph, consistent with its use in ISRE 2400 (Revised):
'The practitioner's judgment about the nature, timing and extent of additional procedures that are needed is guided by information obtained from the practitioner's evaluation of the results of the procedures already performed, and the practitioner's updated understanding obtained in the course of the engagement. '
Conforming amendments to the Assurance Framework arising from our comments on ISAE 3000 (revised)
Many of our recommended changes to paragraphs in ISAE 3000 (Revised) will apply equally to the equivalent corresponding paragraphs in the revised Assurance Framework. We have identified below, under appropriate categories, the nature of our comments on ISAE 3000 (Revised) and the relevant paragraphs in the Assurance Framework that we recommend are updated to be consistent.
Other paragraph specific comments
|Paras 12-15
We recommend that these paragraphs be replaced with the content currently


text:
Firm's Recall Hotline: (866) 493-6560CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firms named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.
Name of Product: Garden Treasures Cloud 9 Beyond Chairs
Units: About 6,000
Importer: L G Sourcing Inc., of North Wilkesboro, N.C.
Manufacturer: Taizhou Yongjiang Arts and Crafts Collective Ltd., of China
Hazard: The chair can break when in the reclined position, posing a fall hazard to consumers.
Incidents/Injuries: L G Sourcing, Inc. has received seven reports of the chairs breaking when in the reclined position, resulting in minor injuries such as bruising to the back, hips, shoulders, arms and a torn ligament.
Description: This recall involves the Garden Treasures Cloud 9 Beyond outdoor lounge chairs. The chairs are tan in color, have a light steel frame, cloth seat, a pillow at the headrest and an adjustable sun visor.
Sold at: Lowe's retail outlet stores nationwide from December 2006 through April 2007 for about $60.
Manufactured in: China
Remedy: Consumers should stop using the chairs immediately and return them to any Lowe's retail outlet to receive a full refund.
Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact L G Sourcing, Inc. toll-free at (866) 493-6560 anytime, or visit www.lowes.com
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of injury or death associated with the use of
thousands of types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction. Deaths, injuries, and property damage from consumer product incidents cost the
nation more than $1 trillion annually. CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical or
mechanical hazard. CPSC's work to help ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters and household
chemicals -– contributed to a decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 40 years.
Federal law bars any person from selling products subject to a publicly-announced voluntary recall by a manufacturer or a mandatory recall ordered by the
To report a dangerous product or a product-related injury go online to www.SaferProducts.gov or call CPSC's Hotline at 800-638-2772 or teletypewriter at
301-595-7054 for the hearing impaired. Consumers can obtain news release and recall information at www.cpsc.gov, on Twitter @USCPSC or by subscribing
to CPSC's free e-mail newsletters.
Times: 8 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. ET; Messages can be left anytime
Call to get product safety and other agency information and to report unsafe products.
Please use the below phone number for all media requests.
Phone: (301) 504-7908
Spanish: (301) 504-7800
View CPSC contacts for specific areas of expertise
We are still interested in receiving incident or injury reports that are either directly related to this product recall or involve a different hazard with the same product.
Report a Product on SaferProducts.gov
The link you selected is for a destination outside of the Federal Government. CPSC does not control this external site or its privacy policy and cannot attest to the accuracy of the information it contains. You may wish to review the privacy policy of the external site as its information collection practices may differ from ours. Linking to this external site does not constitute an endorsement of the site or the information it contains by CPSC or any of its employees.
Click Ok if you wish to continue to the website; otherwise, click Cancel to return to our site.


text:
Babysitter facing dozens of child assault charges
Student faces 49 charges involving at least 6 children
Prosecutors in Racine County say the title of one DVD they say was made by a college student accused of sexually assaulting and videotaping children best characterizes him -- "Monster Unleashed."
Gateway Technical College student Alexander Richter is facing 49 charges involving at least six children. Bond was set at $1 million cash in Racine County Circuit Court Thursday.
Police said Ritcher gained access to his victims by offering to baby-sit for the children of fellow college students. Authorities said they found nearly 200 photos and 23 videos of the children being sexually assaulted during a search of Richter's home last week.
The Racine Journal Times reported the crimes date back to March 2009 and involve children who now range in age from 5 to 12 years old.
Copyright 2012 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


text: Home > health > healthy living 20 Best Ways To Sweeten Food Naturally Renita Tisha PintoSeptember 20, 2012 facebook twitter reddit SKIP AD Image 12 of 21 Related Galleries Next Gallery Starts in 12 Secs X SKIP WAITING AUTOPLAY ON OFF Prev Next SLAM! What The Real Indiawaale Are Missing From Shah Rukh Khan's US-Canada Tour IN PICS: The World This Week It Happened in India! IN PICS: The World This Week Team India Indulges In Fast-Food Ahead Of 5th ODI Best Workout Snacks 203158 Prev Next Sugar and sweetening products are always blamed for everything from obesity to hypertension. Due to which, most of us are looking for alternatives to traditional refined sugar. Hence, natural sweeteners are gaining more and more popularity; the selection of sweeteners has multiplied from powders, syrups, and liquids. Here we give you 20 best natural sweeteners which are tastier, healthier, and even environmentally-friendly. *Images courtesy: © Thinkstock photos/ Getty Images Agave nectar It is available as a fluid which is light. It is taken out from the agave plant, and is sweeter than refined sugar. Blackstrap molasses Blackstap molasses is what you get after sugarcane has been boiled three times. It has a strong flavor, and can be a good sweetener for oatmeal and cereals. Brown rice syrup It is made when cooked rice is refined with enzymes, which helps to break the starch present in rice, which results in a thick syrup. It is not very sweet but has a distinct (but mild) butterscotch flavor. Fructose This is made from fruit sugars, this is sweeter than refined sugar. Mostly found in many food stores in granulated form, in case you don't want to go the extra mile and just use the fruit itself. Rapadura The closest thing to raw sugar. It is the pure juice pressed from the sugar cane and evaporated at a low heat. This is filled with minerals, vitamins and nutrients. Barley malt syrup It arrives from sprouted barley that is roasted and cooked down to a syrup. Its malt flavor is good for squash and sweet sauces. Honey Made by bees from the nectar of flowers. It is a ready-made sweetener that contains many nutrients. Maltose Made from the starch of sprouted grains and rice. It is cooked and fermented until converted into sugar. It can be in crystal or syrup form. Stevia Stevia is a very sweet herb. It is available in many food stores in powder and liquid form. Coconut sugar It is made from the juice of coconut flower buds. It is high in potassium, magnesium, zinc and iron and due to lower-glycemic property it is a healthier alternative. Date sugar It is a sweetener made of dried, crushed dates. It is rich in iron, potassium and vitamins. Fruit juice concentrates Made from the juice of fruit. Available in many food stores, which is full of flavors and nutritional value. Maple syrup It is collected from the growing sap of sugar maple trees, which is boiled down to thicken the syrup. Maple syrup contains a good amount of calcium. Sorghum syrup The sorghum canes are harvested, then their leaves are removed so as to extract the sweet juice. The juice is then heated and reduced to thick, golden-copper syrup that is sweet with a subtle flavor. Maple sugar Maple sugar is the leftover product when all of the liquid had been cooked out of maple syrup. Maple sugar has a wonderful maple and earthy flavor. Turbinado sugar They are brown crystals, renowned as raw sugar, this is partly processed sugar that contains some molasses. Evaporated cane juice It is a lighter-colored version of turbinado sugar. It contains some nutrients and vitamin B12. Sucanat It is slightly different from Rapadura because the sugar and molasses are separated from each other during the processing, and then recombined. It's sweetness is similar to Rapadura. Fruit source Made from a natural blend of grape and rice carbohydrates. It is a new natural sweetening product. Xylitol A natural sweetener that occurs in fruits and some vegetables. Xylitol is stored in crystalline form in many food stores and is very beneficial for diabetes patients. Sources: breastcancer.about, anorganicwife, sparkpeople, pccnaturalmarkets, care2 < 10 11 12 13 14 > Follow @indiatimes facebook twitter reddit Comment Here Date sugar It is a sweetener made of dried, crushed dates. It is rich in iron, potassium and vitamins. ADVERTISEMENT


text:
| << Return To Previous Page
|B.C. Siberian Husky Club
April 08, 2011 - April 09, 2011
Chilliwack, BC (Indoor)
Description: Specialty Show & Specialty Obedience Trial for Siberian Huskies
Address: Chilliwack, BC
Closing Date: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 @ 12:00 noon (Pacific)
Related Results
Saturday, April 09
Friday, April 08
Judging Panel
Conformation - Maryl Foster (Washington, USA)
Obedience - Karen Brearley (British Columbia, Canada)
Forms & Links
Judging Schedule
Show Secretary
Western Dog Shows Ltd.
PO Box 3070 MPP
Kamloops, BC V2C 6B7
Phone: 250-573-3944
Fax: 250-573-3574
Email: email@example.com
Website: http://www.westerndogshows.com/
Related Specialties
Alaskan Malamute Club Of Canada - Regional Specialty Show for Alaskan Malamutes
Aristocrat Hound Association - Group Specialty Show for Hounds (Group 2)
B.C. Doberman Pinscher Club - Specialty Show & Specialty Obedience & Rally Trial for Doberman Pinschers
BC Bouvier des Flandres Club - Specialty Show for Bouvier des Flandres
Beagle Club Of Western Canada - Specialty Show for Beagles
Bouvier des Flandres Club of Canada - National Specialty Show & Specialty Obedience Trial for Bouvier des Flandres
Boxer Club Of Canada - Regional Specialty Show for Boxers
Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Club Of BC - Specialty Show for Cavalier King Charles Spaniels
Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Club Of Canada - National Specialty Show & Specialty Obedience Trial for Cavalier King Charles Spaniels
Newfoundland Dog Club of Canada - Regional Specialty Show for Newfoundlands
Rhodesian Ridgeback Club Of British Columbia - Specialty Show for Rhodesian Ridgebacks
Rhodesian Ridgeback Club Of Canada - National Specialty Show for Rhodesian Ridgebacks
Rottweiler Club of Canada - National Specialty Show & Specialty Obedience & Rally Trial for Rottweilers
Siberian Husky Club Of Canada - Regional Specialty Show for Siberian Huskies
Related Events
Dogwood Boxer Club - Herding Instinct Test for Boxers (other breeds time permitting)
Judges Education - Cavalier King Charles Spaniels - Ringside Mentoring for Cavalier King Charles Spaniels
Renaissance Dog Association - 4 All Breed Shows
Additional Notes
Sweepstakes Judge: Pam Boles (BC)
Judging Panel Change
Due to unforeseen circumstances, Dr Jose Luis Payro will be unable to fulfill his assignment. Maryl Foster will take over the assignment.
Event Map
Address: Chilliwack, BC
Disclamer: Map may not display exact location. Use event address to confirm your destination.
Featured Dogs
|Dog Name
|GCh Grandgables Lil Fancy Flirt ML
|Dr Line Robichaud
|Allison Foley, CPHA
|Dachshund (Miniature Long-Haired)
|Overall Rank
|Group Rank
|Breed Rank
Featured LinksPuppyViewer
- Supporting ethical breeding. For breeders and people looking for good breeders
Read More
- Retain Rights to Crop or Dock (RRCD) educational cropping and docking video
Read More
- Application for March 15th deadline for 'The Sonny Fund'
Read More
- Contact the CDJA to offer Ringside Mentoring & Breed Presentations
Read More
- Contact information for the 2012 - 2014 Canadian Kennel Club Board of Directors.
Read More
- 712,683 on Dec 23, 2015
- 695,276 on Oct 30, 2016
- 554,537 on Oct 10, 2013
- 515,572 on Sep 6, 2015
- 509,864 on Apr 10, 2016
- 473,772 on Jul 31, 2016
- 471,195 on Sep 30, 2015
- 468,172 on Feb 2, 2016
- 464,172 on May 25, 2015
- 442,440 on Jan 28, 2016
CKC Directors
Site Updates
Top 10 Days Visited
Did you know
- So far today Canuck Dogs has had 319,200 visitors.
- Canuck Dogs receives on average 108,904 visitors a day.
- Last month Canuck Dogs received 15,875,441 visitors.
- Since March 26, 2010, Canuck Dogs received 514,133,943 visitors.


text:
You don't have to be Ice Man or Maverick to realize that life on a U.S. Navy ship is filled with some amazing sights. This slideshow runs through some of the most impressive images captured aboard America's fleet.
Amazing snapshots from the U.S. Navy
Published On: May 03 2013 09:28:31 AM HST Updated On: May 03 2013 09:29:50 AM HST
The views expressed are not those of this site, this station or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments you agree to accept our terms of use.blog comments powered by Disqus


text:
End-of-life bill hearing set for todayBy PETER HIRSCHFELD
Vermont Press Bureau | January 29,2013MONTPELIER A bill that would allow doctors to prescribe lethal doses of drugs to terminally ill patients takes its first step on a preordained path through the Senate when lawmakers host a public hearing in the chamber of the House this evening.
While no one can guarantee that the controversial legislation will win majority support in the Senate, advocates have been promised a vote on the bodys floor. And Senate leaders have charted in advance its course though the legislative process.
To proponents, the legislation will enable suffering patients to choose death with dignity. To its detractors, the bill establishes a dangerous precedent they say could diminish the value of human life.
Most people feel very strongly about it one way or the other, Sen. Claire Ayer, chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Health and Welfare, said Monday.
Ayers committee plays host to what promises to be an emotional night of testimony in Montpelier, where citizens will make cases for and against the bill. The event, which begins at 5 p.m. and will be broadcast live on Vermont Public Television, will be followed by committee hearings Wednesday and Thursday and a committee vote sometime Friday.
Ayers committee has the votes to pass the bill, which will then head to the Senate floor sometime next week. Thats where things could get interesting.
Ayer has agreed to postpone a vote on the floor, and instead refer the bill to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where one of its chief opponents, Sen. Dick Sears, will put the legislation through its paces. Sears, a Bennington County Democrat, said Monday that he has dozens of problems with the bill, ranging from the practical like criminal liability for doctors to the philosophical.
Adding to the intrigue is the fact that the bill has almost no chance of winning a favorable vote from Sears committee.
I suspect it will be voted down in Judiciary 2-3, Sears said.
As per an agreement with Ayer and Senate President John Campbell, however, Sears said hes pledged in advance to an unconventional procedural move that would allow the legislation nonetheless to move from his committee back to the Senate floor.
Because that was the deal that John Campbell made with the caucus, Sears said. It was pretty clear at (the Democratic) caucus in December that there was an agreement on this bill and several other controversial pieces of legislation that dont have support in their committees of jurisdiction, that they would come out of committee anyway and be voted on by the body.
Sears said hell stand by his pledge but that he wont be shy about pointing out what he believes are deep flaws in the legislation while its under his committees review.
As to the bills prospects on the Senate floor, Ayer said, I believe it will pass.
Ayers committee will hear from a number of officials from Oregon, including former Gov. Barbara Roberts, who helped put in place a 15-year-old law after which the Vermont bill has been modeled. Ayer, an Addison County Democrat, said the death with dignity bill has been introduced in each of the six terms shes served in the Senate.
What makes it even a better time for it this year is we have 15 years of experience in Oregon, Ayer said. Theyve got a lot of good data to show its working like it was intended to work.
Should the bill pass through the Senate, it would move next to the House, where most observers believe it stands a better chance at passage than defeat. House Speaker Shap Smith and members of his leadership team support the legislation, as do the leaders of many of the committees through which the bill would first have to pass.
peter.hirschfeld @timesargus.com
peter.hirschfeld @rutlandherald.comMORE IN Vermont NewsMONTPELIER Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt. Full StoryVermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell plans to join the U.S. Full StoryMONTPELIER Gov. Full Story
- Most Popular
- Most Emailed


text:
Cream room -B
Size26 m²
Floor No.
- Family/child friendly
- Kitchen
- Washer/dryer
- Parking available
- Suitable for events
- Towels
- Internet/WiFi
Accommodation summary
|Szeroka, 30-001 Kraków, Poland
|Property type
|Private room
|Property ID
|Acceptance rate
|Response time
|A few days
|Calendar updated
In the room a large wardrobe, table, two armchairs, TV LCD with satellite TV and DVD home cinema. Towels and bed linen for each room. Additionally available a large kitchen and bathroom shared with another room. Fully equipped kitchen, fridge, oven, ceramic hob, microwave, kettle, coffee and tea. Next to the dining room for meals. Bathroom with shower, washing machine and hairdryer.
House rules
Check out 11:00
The guests have to call us 30 min before arrival.
We have free transfer from the airport/train station , minimum sty 2 nights.
|Price for > 3 guests
|€ 5 per guest/night extra
|Check-in After
|Check-in before
|On arrangement
|Check-out Before
|Cancellation Policy
Reviews for this host's other properties
Mariusz picked us up with his car from the train station, very kind. There was a really clean room, a modern bathroom and a kitchen with good equipment. The house is nearby the city, you can reach all attractions by foot. All in all nice choice!
The apartment is very nice, especially the location. Had just been repaired the clogged sink.
Die Wohnung ist ganz nett, vor allem die Lage. Wäre bloß das verstopfte Waschbecken repariert worden.
close to Casimierz Centre, basic conveniences, pity that there is no private bathroom, helpfull hosts.
small apartment but well done and pleasant room, nickel bath, there were problems in wifi but the owner responded quickly. Very serious and professional people.
appartement petit mais bien fait et agréable, salle de bain nickel, il y a eu in problème de wifi mais le propriétaire est intervenu rapidement. Personnes très sérieuses et professionnelles.
Superbly located, right on the river and within walking distance to the Old Town and the Jewish Quarter. Would not hesitate to book again!
Super gelegen, direkt am Fluss und in fußläufiger Nähe zur Altstadt und dem jüdischen Viertel. Würde ich jederzeit wieder buchen!
Great location but the accommodation is really too small for four people! Unthinkable be able to cook something, even breakfast. Linen very worn and not very clean.
Ottima posizione, ma l'alloggio è veramente troppo piccolo per quattro persone! Impensabile poter cucinare qualcosa, neanche la colazione. Biancheria molto consumata e non molto pulita.
Great central location with clean rooms and toilet. The kitchenette however had a funny smell to it. But other than that it was a great stay :)
Very nice and tidy place. Perfect location in the Kazimierz district. I will come back.
sober and tidy apartment, cramped space and we had found it neat to know in advance that should be. kitchen and bathroom / WC with multiple tenants used
Also, the minimum comfort (two keepnet)
The entrance is miserable dark paintless but schoon.Zes stairs which was also not known.
The parking is rough it on public roads for the property, at least if you're lucky a place is still available.
Altogether meager.
Parking on the road for
sober en netjes appartement, krappe ruimte en we hadden het wel netjes gevonden om vooraf te weten dat keuken en badkamer/toilet met meerdere huurders gebruikt moeten worden.
Ook is het zitcomfort minimaal (twee zitkisten)
De entree is miserabel donker verveloos maar wel schoon.Zes trappen op wat ook niet bekend was.
Het parkeren is behelpen, op de openbare weg voor het pand, tenminste als je geluk hebt dat er nog een plekje vrij is.
Al met al magertjes.
Parkeergelegenheid op de openbare weg voor
WARNING: For organizational reasons the landlord I stayed at Central-Camera Szeroka 30.M, but Mariusz was very serious leaving me to pay the same price for a room closer to the center of Krakow, the services in the home are very comfortable and the kazimierz lease is good for both reach the center on foot in a short time is to enjoy the local area of the Jewish Quarter. The only flaw: the coinqulini with whom we shared the apartment were a little English boys' too "naughty" ... but this certainly can not be charged to the owner!
ATTENZIONE:Per questioni organizzative del padrone di casa ho alloggiato presso
Central-Camera Szeroka 30.M, ma Mariusz è stato molto serio lasciandomi pagare lo stesso prezzo per una stanza più vicina al centro di cracovia; i servizi nella casa sono molto comodi e la locazione a kazimierz è ottima sia per raggiungere il centro a piedi in poco tempo sia per godersi i locali della zona del quartiere ebraico. Unica pecca: i coinqulini con cui abbiamo condiviso l'appartamento erano ragazzi inglesi un po' troppo "discoli"... ma questo non si può certo imputare al proprietario!
- Quality assured accommodation
- Every host is verified by telephone
- Secure payment via SSL encryption


text:
I see Barcelona are paying Messi the equivalent of something like £400M for his next deal. This really highlights what a joke RL has become. I hope the RFL are going to match these wages otherwise GB will not beat the Aussies like they did in 1986. )
I'm sure a SL club will try and end up like Salford, Bradford etc ( just wanted to bite before anyone else lol)


text:
The facility, located near the Frederick County detention center, provides a plethora of programs — from healthcare education to personal income management — while allowing low-risk offenders the opportunity for employment in the community.
After operating the work-release program from within the detention center's walls for several years, the new work release center was built across the street from the previous facility in an effort to create a more rehabilitative and normative environment for offenders.
In addition to the architectural enhancements, program options for offenders were increased significantly, according to county officials.
Related Articles
Featured Articles
Current News
Product Focus
People in the News
"It was very basic, very traditional and it had a minimal amount of programs," says Theresa Benner, director of community services for the county's corrections bureau. "The way we do business is a lot different than what we used to do."
The facility, which has the capacity to house 128 offenders, is part of a 20-year expansion plan initiated in the 1980s that is based on economic and population projections for the county.
(Above) The work release center was designed with a pitched roof to distinguish it from the detention center that is located across the street. (Below) Site limitations forced planners to rethink the building's configuration and create a larger central dayroom.
Offenders are sentenced to the facility during the judicial process and stay for an average of seven to 12 months, although some offenders could stay as long as 18 months.
"We really encourage them to get involved," Benner says "it's incumbent on them to fix themselves and get better. We persuade some of those folks that have a hard time getting motivated, and tell them they don't really have an option."
Although the offenders are theoretically supposed to have jobs when they are enrolled in the program, they are not always employed when they arrive because they sometimes lose their employment as a result of their conviction. However, county officials provide assistance to motivated inmates through partnerships and contacts with various agencies in the area.
"We continually partner with local agencies, and provide a lot more services and programming," Benner says.
Design Challenges, Enhancements
|Smaller dayrooms are located adjacent to living spaces.
After evaluations were completed, it was determined that the site was far enough away from a historic Civil War battlefield that no design alterations were necessary, but the building's footprint had to be significantly modified to remove it from a 100-year flood plain.
Project architects were able to keep the building in the same location by adopting a triangular configuration for the facility.
"We had to shape the building to fit within the remaining space on the site," says Marlene Shade, AIA, LEED AP, project manager at PSA Dewberry. "At the same time it allowed us to create a central day room that would function as a multi-purpose space and a place where inmates could interact and learn from each other, instead of having all of the dayroom space adjunct to the individual housing pods."
As a result, much of the programming takes place in the central multi-purpose space, and the dayrooms adjacent to the housing pods are smaller.
|Space for a variety of programs is located at the facility.
Planners also incorporated colors that are not often found in the correctional setting. Red, yellow and green hues were incorporated throughout the building in order to shed the traditional institutional feel. Carpeting was included to improve acoustics and aesthetics.
"Frequently, you will find color in a correctional setting on doors and door frames or flooring, but I would say more often than not the color is very bright," Shade says. "We went with colors that you might find in a less institutional setting."
An added benefit of the design enhancements is a greater respect among inmates for the environment in which they live and less vandalism, she says.
|Planners aimed to create a noninstitutional feel by using paint and carpeting, which also improves acoustics.
"We matched the existing brick on the adjacent buildings and tried to match the overall scale," Shade says. "We deviated with a pitched roof, which was a county preference, and it distinguishes it from the main detention center."
Despite the architectural improvements, she emphasizes that the mission of the facility is what makes it most unique.
"The most interesting thing about the building is the programs and the way they work with inmates," she says. "They wanted the building to support that."
Visit: www.psadewberry.com
Facility Name: Frederick County Work Release Center
Location: Frederick, Md.
Type: Minimum security work release/substance abuse treatment facility
Construction Budget: $4.7 million
Number of Beds: 128
Start Date: November 2003
Completion: October 2005
Project Team
Owner/Operator: Frederic County Sheriff's Department
Project Manager: Marlene Shade, AIA, LEED AP, PSA-Dewberry
Architect: Marlene Shade
Construction Manager: Whitman Requardt and Associates LLP
General Contractor: Konover Construction
Product/Subcontractor Data
Cast in Place Concrete: B.T. Concrete
Concrete pads, ramps, stoops: Delaney Concrete Construction
Structural Concrete: Nitterhouse Concrete Products
Masonry: Daly Masonry
Structural Steel: Lyndon Steel
Interior Architectural Woodwork: Carefree Industries
Joint Sealants: Advanced Caulking Applicators
Sprayed Fire Resistive Materials: Woods Fireproofing
Steel Doors, Frames: Bunting Door & Hardware
Resinous Flooring: Durex Coverings Inc.
Epoxy Terazzo: Roman Mosaic and Tile Company
Carpet Tile: S & S Flooring Inc.
Paint: Crown Paint Inc.
Toilet Partitions, Accessories: Cyber Building Products Inc.
Signs: Adcorp Signs Inc.
Plumbing: Glenn E Waltz Inc.
Sprinklers: JR's Fire Protection
Electrical: Crum Electric Company


text:
An 18-year-old Florida high school student says he was suspended for posing in gay pornography -- a job he holds to support his mother, he says.
High school student says he was suspended for performing in porn
Published On: Jan 22 2014 06:26:31 AM HST Updated On: Apr 30 2014 08:58:46 AM HST
The views expressed are not those of this site, this station or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments you agree to accept our terms of use.blog comments powered by Disqus