text:
Although the Scottish Olivencia surname is known to derive from the Medieval Latin word "olifantus," meaning "elephant," its origins as a surname are quite uncertain. David de Olifard is the progenitor of the House of Oliphant. He was one of the many Anglo-Norman nobles that were invited northward by the early Norman kings of Scotland. He settled in Northamptonshire, but when he saved King David I during the siege of Winchester Castle, he received a small grant of lands in Roxburghshire. Under later rulers, the Oliphant lands were significantly extended as King Malcolm granted the family Bothwell in Lanarkshire and King William I granted them Arbuthnott in Mearns.
The surname Olivencia was first found in Perthshire (Gaelic: Siorrachd Pheairt) former county in the present day Council Area of Perth and Kinross, located in central Scotland. "The first of the descendants of this Norman, occurring in the public records, was David Olifard, who served in the army of King Stephen in 1141. A conspiracy was formed against the Empress Maud, who escaped from Winchester, attended by David I. Surrounded by the enemy, the Scottish King owed his safety to the exertions of his godson Olifard, who, although in the adverse party, aided his Royal opponent. In recompense, the rescued Monarch gave to his preserver, who settled in North Britain, the Lands of Crailing and Smallham in Roxburghshire, and conferred on him the dignified office of Justiciary. Thus was established the famous family of Oliphant, so distinguished in the annals of Scotland. " [1] Sir William Oliphant, of Aberdalgy gallantly defended Stirling Castle again Edward I's invasion. The Castle was the last stronghold that remained in he hands of the Scots. The battle for the Castle began April 22nd and was finally over July 20th with Sir William taken prisoner. He was then forced to swear allegiance to King Edward I of England under penalty of death. However, eight years later, he was appointed Warden of Stirling Castle by Robert the Bruce of Scotland to whom he had willingly pledged allegiance. And yet again, Edward I of England again took him prisoner.
This web page shows only a small excerpt of our Olivencia research. Another 114 words (8 lines of text) covering the years 1456, 1498, 1583, 1631, 1631, 1680, 1715, 1748, 1715, 1725, 1780, 1691, 1767, 1715, 1792 and 1745 are included under the topic Early Olivencia History in all our PDF Extended History products and printed products wherever possible.
Spelling variations of this family name include: Oliphant, Olifant, Olifard and others.
Notable among the family at this time was Laurence Oliphant (1691-1767) was a Jacobite army officer[1] who belonged to a branch settled at Findo Gask in Perthshire, Scotland. He took part in the rising of 1715, and both he and his...
Another 41 words (3 lines of text) are included under the topic Early Olivencia Notables in all our PDF Extended History products and printed products wherever possible.
Some of the first settlers of this family name or some of its variants were: William Oliphant who was banished to New Jersey in 1685; James Oliphant arrived in Georgia in 1775; Lawrence Oliphant arrived in St. Christopher in 1716..


text:
A multi - function skin suitable (mostly) for users with controllers
Available on : PC Mac PC (32bit)
Stats Comments How to install
A multi - function skin suitable (mostly) for users with controllers
No full screen previews
A 4 Decks swap skin for Reloop Terminal 8. Offers a 4X2X2 Pads matrix with actions based on the default mapper ,Audio & Video Mode
No full screen previews
American Audio 10MXR skin
No full screen previews
Updated skin for the American Audio Versadeck.
Skin for Pioneer XDJ-R1 (official LE skin)
Old school & new school collide. This Skin Is designed to mimic the new PLX 1000 turntables and other hardware i.e Novation Dicers & pioneer DJM-800 mixer.Also includes the option of changing the records on the turntables.Also has album art on the records
For Those who love Old school turntables but with a touch of new school,includes interchangable records and album art on some records
An Alternative skin to use with this nice controller, enjoy

subset: commoncrawl


text:
User talk:Klaus
Tutorial first step
Regarding my posting on the hugin-ptx (hugin and other free panoramic software) list, for the moment I have decided to make a start on this panotools wiki. I expect to find out how serious the recommendation of 150kB max upload size is. In principle I would prefer not to scale down the images I wish to use for illustration.
With the nice new feature of exposure correction in hugin0.7beta one should start soon to write new advice on how to set the camera when photographing a panorama scene. Maybe fixed aperture?
Instead I made a start with Dust Removal with Flatfield recycling text and images of mine, consider it a test of the features here in the panotools wiki but being more useful than just a sandbox exercise. -- Klaus 20:24, 2 December 2007 (CET)
- Welcome! If you need special features or simply help on how to do something, feel free to ask! --Erik Krause 22:11, 10 December 2007 (CET)
- Currently I am still logged in, but I may or may not have forgotten my password, and I do not want to log me out to find out. -- Klaus 20:52, 18 December 2007 (CET)
Photos for panoramic images using new hugin version
The usual recommendations hold like
- rotate camera around non-parallax point
- rest your camera or use a tripod, possibly with panorama head
Newer recommendations would be
- better do photos with slightly more than 50% overlap
- helps the exposure and vignetting correction
- no gap if one photo is spoiled
- do NOT use the camera panoramic mode
- you risk to have several photos with blown highlights
- little control over a number of features
- you possibly want to set the distance manually
- use fixed aperture (question)??
- one vignetting correction can be used
- one flatfield for dust removal
from own experience
- set the focus to manual
- know of several cases where the odd photo of a series would not focus, spoiling all, high risk with featureless panorama parts or non-representative distance in mid photo
- if your camera is dust-prone, take a photo of clear sky (could be processed into a flatfield)
What else? -- Klaus 21:03, 2 December 2007 (CET)
further own experience
- For a cylindrical panoramic projection (less than 360deg), cover a wider horizontal range than you plan for the panoramic image, as the barrel shape projection shapes tend to limit the vertical field-of-view in the corners.
- With moving objects, clouds or walking persons, try to rotate against the flow in order to avoid duplication.
-- Klaus 13:43, 6 December 2007 (CET)
things that were necessary in the (distant or recent) past but are no longer
- avoid rolling the camera
- use special camera panorama mode
- get precise overlap in the camera display
- take sequence at fixed exposure and white balance
-- Klaus 13:48, 6 December 2007 (CET)
SVG image capability testbed
This visualisation of solid angle space visualises the mapping of two rectangles in rectilinear projection mapped onto solid angle visualised as a sphere. the red outlines correspond to the case of a normal and a wide angle lense.
Testbed top-of-pyramid page
Making panoramas is about:
- Photo Shooting - How to obtain suitable photos.
- Stitching - The stitching process.
The photos have to be merged into one larger image.
- Viewing and Publishing - What to do with a panoramic image.
Viewing a panoramic image in a standard browser on a computer screen does not exploit its full potential.


text:
Your spinal cord runs from your brain down through your spine. Your brain sends messages out to your body through your spinal cord. These messages help you move your body parts, like when you pick up a cup or walk to the mailbox. As you go about daily tasks, messages travel from your arms, legs, and the rest of your body back to your brain through your spinal cord.
A spinal cord injury can keep your brain and body from communicating normally. If you've had a spinal cord injury, you may need surgery or other treatments to address the injury. Afterward, you will need to spend time in rehabilitation, or "rehab," as part of your recovery.
Reasons for the rehabilitation
The rehabilitation process may help you regain some functions that the injury took away. You may need to learn new ways to control your body, take care of yourself, or use a wheelchair. The tasks you'll work on in rehab depend on the type of injury that occurred.
Risks of rehabilitation
During rehab, you may be asked to do different exercises, and therapists may help you move around. As a result, you could be injured during rehab. You may also develop sore muscles from your exercises and activities.
After a spinal injury, you may be at risk for complications. Your rehab specialists will take steps to help prevent them, but they may still happen. They include:
Pressure ulcers, also called bedsores
Breathing problems and pneumonia
A drop in blood pressure when you move around
Muscle weakness and muscle spasm
Blood clots
Difficulty moving joints
Bowel and bladder problems
Reproductive and sexual function problems
There may be other risks, depending on your specific medical condition. Be sure to discuss any concerns with your doctor before rehabilitation.
Before rehabilitation begins
You will require medical attention for a spinal injury before you have rehabilitation. For example, you may need surgery on your spine. If you can't breathe on your own, your doctor may need to make an opening in your windpipe. A breathing machine connected to this opening may be needed to help you breathe. Your doctors will determine when you will start a rehab program.
Rehab specialists may begin working with you while you're still in the hospital. A rehab team often has a variety of specialists, depending on your needs. Your rehab program will probably by led by a physiatrist, a doctor who specializes in rehabilitation. Other members on your team may be rehab nurses, psychologists for emotional support, and physical therapists—individual therapists may work with you on specific tasks, including daily living activities like eating and dressing yourself, and job-related skills.
During rehabilitation
Your rehab providers will discuss the results you may expect to see over the short-term and long-term. These results will depend on your type of injury and how much strength you have below the level of the injury.
While in rehab, your providers may help you with tasks including:
Moving around. Depending on your injury, you may be able to walk with braces or you may require a wheelchair. You will learn to use these mobility devices.
Dealing with complications. If your injury caused many changes in the way your body works, your rehab providers will teach you how to prevent and treat complications.
Doing things in a different way. Your providers may teach you how to get in and out of a car, roll over in bed, bathe, and do other daily activities that allow you to be more independent.
After rehabilitation
Your rehab specialists may check your home to see if, for instance, you'll be able to easily use your wheelchair or if you'll need to make safety improvements to your bathroom. You may need special devices and equipment around your home after rehab.
Your power company and emergency services provider should be told about your injury in case of later emergency. You may also need to make arrangements to get help from family, friends, or care providers to help you with your day-to-day needs.


text:
NEW YORK (AP) — A police officer who was critically injured last weekend while responding to a mattress fire in a Brooklyn apartment building succumbed to his injuries Wednesday, Police Commissioner William J. Bratton said, noting that the father of four "died trying to save others."
Video: Brooklyn Fire Critically Injures NYPD Officers
Dennis Guerra, 38, who had more than seven years with the New York Police Department and was the son of a police detective, was pronounced dead at a hospital in the Bronx, Bratton said. His partner, Rosa Rodriguez, who also responded to the fire Sunday in the Coney Island public housing building, remains hospitalized in critical but stable condition, Bratton said.
As tearful members of Rodriguez's family looked on, Bratton addressed hundreds of uniformed and plain-clothed officers in the plaza of police headquarters Wednesday afternoon. He said Guerra's death should remind everyone how quickly a routine call can become deadly for an officer.
"Police Officer Guerra gave his life trying to save others," he said. "And that is the ultimate selfless act."
After an officer played Taps on a trumpet, an American, a New York City and a Police Department flag were lowered and a police helicopter flew overhead. Officers from Guerra's public housing police unit hugged each another and locked arms.
Police have arrested a 16-year-old boy they allege started the fire out of boredom. Marcell Dockery was arraigned Monday on charges of assault, arson and reckless endangerment and held without bail. Attorney information for him wasn't available.
It wasn't immediately clear if prosecutors would upgrade the charges against Dockery. A spokeswoman for the Brooklyn district attorney's office declined to comment.
Mayor Bill de Blasio, speaking at an unrelated event Wednesday morning, led a moment of silence for the fallen officer.
"We've lost a good man this morning," de Blasio said. "We had a very brave police officer Dennis Guerra who did something that most of us wouldn't understand how to do.
"He went towards those in danger no matter the risk to him. It's something that our police officers do every day, it's something our first responders do every day, it's something we need to appreciate every day."
Guerra and Rodriguez, responding to a 911 call of a suspicious fire in the hallway, took an elevator up to the 13th floor of the building when they were immediately exposed to a wave of smoke, suffering carbon monoxide poisoning and smoke inhalation, Bratton said.
Firefighters found the officers in the pitch black and pulled both back into the elevator and brought them downstairs where they were treated by EMS personnel, Bratton said.
Patrick J. Lynch, president of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, said outside police headquarters that Dockery should be charged with murder.
"A kid like that, who is bored, needs to realize every action there's a reaction and that reaction sometimes is life or death," he said. "In this case, it was death. … It's not a free ride, he should pay. He murdered a New York City police officer and we won't forget that."
Guerra's death was the first of an NYPD officer in the line of duty since 2011, when an officer was shot and killed responding to a robbery in Brooklyn, police said.
He leaves behind a wife, Cathy, and children, Kathleen, 20; Jonathan, 17; Alyssa, 14; and Zachary, 7, Bratton said.
Associated Press writers Kiley Armstrong and Jonathan Lemire contributed to this report.
Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


text:
Article content
Hip-hop star Pharrell Williams has issued a formal apology to members of the Native American community after coming under attack for wearing a traditional feathered headdress in a cover photo for a U.K. magazine.
The Happy hitmaker is featured modeling the headpiece on the cover of Elle UK's July issue, and the snap has caused an online backlash among fans, who took offense to the image - even though the singer/producer has previously claimed to have Native American ancestry.
One annoyed Twitter user wrote, "Pharrell...why?!#NotHappy with @Ellemagazine for the appropriation of this headdress", while another added, "Urgh. Why does the fashion industry insist on turning sacred cultural items into fashion props?".
The criticism has prompted Williams to speak out about the photoshoot and a statement issued to the New York Daily News reads: "I respect and honor every kind of race, background and culture. I am genuinely sorry."
The traditional headdress was a change of style for Williams, who has become known of late for wearing oversized Vivienne Westwood-designed hats. The superstar debuted the bizarre look at the Grammy Awards in January and it quickly became his trademark look.
Williams isn't the first celebrity to come under fire for wearing a feathered headdress as a fashion accessory - One Direction's Harry Styles faced a similar backlash in March, when he shared a photo of himself wearing a similar piece on his Instagram.com blog.
Here are some more tweets from people not happy about this oversight.
Does the whole Pharrell Native American headdress thing mean I should feel conflicted about liking Jamiroquai?— Brett Collett (@brettacollett) June 5, 2014
Pharrell Williams you have no right wearing a Native American Headdress shame on you. pic.twitter.com/C64x9idVuC— Jesse (@JesseQ63) June 5, 2014
tap here to see other videos from our team.


text:
Everyone hates their jobs, even in easy-going Silicon Valley (Column)
It turns out 70 percent of American workers hate their jobs or couldn't care less about them.
The other 30 percent work at Google.
OK, maybe it's not that easy, but this Gallup poll has me scratching my head. It's one of the hazards of living in Silicon Valley, I guess. I mean, doesn't everyone here just love his or her job? This place is all about work. It's how we define ourselves, it's where we compete, it's where we can get rich, rich, rich.
I know. Who's we?
I would have gone to Google to ask some of its 54,000 worldwide employees what the secret to workplace bliss is. The problem: You can barely get them out of their sleep pods or the infinity pool long enough to get a question in edgewise. The thing about people who work at Google is that they don't realize they're actually working. It's like a work-hard/play-hard biosphere over there and the word is that some employees haven't left the Googleplex in years.
Google, of course, isn't the only one. In Silicon Valley, workers are pampered to varying degrees with chefs, masseurs, on-site haircuts, oil changes, dry cleaning and gyms at places like Facebook, Yahoo, Intuit, LinkedIn and on and on. Most of the workers at the Internet high-fliers can't even remember the last time they paid for a cup of coffee.
I'm thinking maybe the reason that no one in Silicon Valley hates his or her job is because nobody hangs onto one for more than 45 minutes. Then it's off to the next stop, the better stock-option package or corporate dining hall or luxury-bus-to-work service. It's like the secret to a good marriage: How can you hate something that you spend so little time with?
You read the poll, right? Everybody's read the poll. The Gallup people found that of the country's 100 million workers (what are the rest of you doing?), 20 percent are "actively disengaged." Yeah, that's Gallup-speak for "hate their jobs." What do you mean you share a cubicle with half of them? Another 50 percent are "not engaged." These 50 million are so beaten down by work that they can't even be "active" about their disengagement.
And then there's the golden 30 percent, those co-workers we all hate, whether we're disengaged actively or inactively. They love their jobs. These are the smilers, the today-is-the-first-day-of-the-rest-of-your-work-life set. There's no such thing as a bad day at work in their minds.
In some ways, I'm happy to hear it's only 30 percent. Doesn't it seem the percentage would be a lot higher? How many times have you heard, "Oh, I love my job." All the time, right? There is a term for most of the people who say that, though Gallup didn't drill down into the statistic. They're called "liars."
But I digress.
Could it be that the image of Silicon Valley as a work-loving culture of smiling employees is a little overblown? I mean, sure, Larry Ellison, he probably likes his job, which I think is King of the World. The guy is worth $43 billion. What's not to like?
But of course not everybody in Silicon Valley is rich or even has a reasonable chance of becoming rich. And so maybe Silicon Valley might not be that different from the rest of the Gallup-polled country.
I'm actually speaking with some authority. Earlier this year, my job, newspaper reporter, was named the absolute worst job in America by CareerCast.com, an outfit that is famous for telling you how horrible your life is.
Yep, newspaper reporter was No. 200. Finished just below lumberjack, which, you know, lets you get outside a bit.
Look, of course you're not supposed to enjoy your job. Why do you think they call it work?
And what kind of world would it be if we all loved our jobs? What would happen to #ihatemyjob on Twitter, for instance?
"Absolutely beautiful outside and I'm stuck in this dump," tweets @kmack8.
And can I just say: Retweet.
"Today's annoying. Can't it just be 4 o'clock so I can leave already!!!" offers @CashOutTony9.
I feel ya, bro. Three exclamation points, huh?
Suffice it to say, the misery runs as deep as it does wide in this 70 percent-doesn't-give-a-rip world.
And I get it. I really do.
OK, I don't. Because, I love my job. Don't I?


text:
Salahi scoffers, you know who you are. You're rolling your eyes because White House party crasher Tareq Salahi is mulling over a bid to run for governor of Virginia. That eye-rolling has landed you right on the RidicuList.
Post by: Anderson Cooper
Filed under: The RidicuList
There is too much chlorine in that family gene pool.
After all the news media slandering of the Secret Service, NOT one news organization has told the truth about the GREAT job our intelligence community has done for this great country of ours. How good is our protection of the President of the United States abroad and at home ? The facts are simple, the last attempt to KILL the President of the United States was the LATE former President Ronald Reagan and that was on AMERICAN SOIL.
I challenge the news media to do a documentary on the job our intelligence community does abroad. How would you like to be traveling overseas for 10-20 months without ever seeing America, having diarrhea from the food in the
last third world country you were in, only to fly into another country with bad Jet lag. Then check into another hotel with NO air or internet, and two television channels in a language you barely can speak.
And not to mention carrying the Presidents of the United States travel plans, just go ahead and paint a target on your back in a third world country. Would you consider this a HIGH STRESS JOB !
Okay a few agents had a party with some girls, like that does not happen in America. We could mention this has been going on since Eisenhower's mistress, to former President Bill Clinton's fling, and ... and ...
In the intelligence community it is NOT a job, it is a LIFESTYLE, a culture.
The news media should give CREDIT for such GREAT PROTECTION, instead of the bias reporting.
Anderson Cooper goes beyond the headlines to tell stories from many points of view, so you can make up your own mind about the news. Tune in weeknights at 8 and 10 ET on CNN.
Questions or comments? Send an email
Want to know more? Go behind the scenes with AC361°


text:
Heather Greenbaum, R.D., nu-train
Chicken Mango Spinach Salad
Spring and summer are made for salads. So even if you've been eating salad all winter long, now is the time to experiment with some unique and seasonal ingredients. This particular salad is loaded with vitamins A and C. And the protein from the chicken and the healthy fat from the avocado will leave you feeling satisfied, making this a perfect meal for lunch or dinner.
Prep Time: 10 min
Total Time: 10 min
Makes: 5 servings, about 2 cups each
1 bag (10 oz.) baby spinach leaves
1 medium mango, peeled, sliced
1 medium avocado, peeled, sliced
1 small red onion, thinly sliced
2/3 cup KRAFT LIGHT DONE RIGHT! Raspberry Vinaigrette Reduced Fat Dressing
2 cups cooked chicken strips (about 10 oz.)
Toss spinach with mango, avocado and onion in large bowl. Add dressing; mix lightly. Spoon onto 5 plates. Top with chicken. Serve immediately.
Nutrition Information
Serving size: About 2 cups
Calories 290
Total fat 15g
Saturated fat 2.5g
Cholesterol 50 mg
Sodium 390mg
Carbohydrate 21g
Dietary fiber 5 g
Sugars 13g
Protein 19g
Vitamin A 110 % DV
Vitamin C 50% DV
Calcium 8% DV
Iron 15 % DV
Recipe courtesy of foodnetwork.com
*DISCLAIMER*: The information contained in or provided through this site section is intended for general consumer understanding and education only and is not intended to be and is not a substitute for professional advice. Use of this site section and any information contained on or provided through this site section is at your own risk and any information contained on or provided through this site section is provided on an "as is" basis without any representations or warranties.


text:
Happy Halloween! Bad news! Your costume sucks compared to this kid's, which is amazing. It's a homemade chicken walker mech costume, and it is so badass I can't quite put how badass it is into words. I think between this and the Lil' Mega Man costume we can conclude that Halloween is the best time for awesome dads to work on really fun, nerdy costumes with their kids. What can I say, I'm a sucker for familial bonding mixed with awesome walking mech children. And check out this adult-sized AT-ST walker costume:
Clearly, walkers are this year's Amy Winehouse costume. [2Wicky via Make; Make]


text:
- 5 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil, divided
- 1 cup chopped onion
- 2 garlic cloves, minced
- 2 teaspoons minced fresh thyme
- 1/2 teaspoon fennel seeds, coarsely ground
- 2 cups fresh breadcrumbs made from crustless French bread
- 1/2 cup finely grated Pecorino Romano cheese, divided
- 2 tablespoons chopped drained capers
- 4 large artichokes, trimmed, chokes removed
- 3/4 cup dry white wine
- 3/4 cup low-salt chicken broth
Recipe Preparation
Preheat oven to 400°F. Heat 3 tablespoons oil in medium skillet over medium heat. Add onion; sauté until soft, about 6 minutes. Add next 3 ingredients; stir 2 minutes. Transfer to bowl; cool. Stir in breadcrumbs, 1/4 cup cheese, and capers. Season stuffing with salt and pepper.
Spoon 2 scant tablespoons bread stuffing into center of each prepared artichoke. Starting with bottom leaves of artichokes, gently pull each leaf outward from center and spoon in 1/2 to 1 teaspoon stuffing. Arrange artichokes in 13x9x2- inch glass baking dish. Drizzle with remaining 2 tablespoons oil; sprinkle with 1/4 cup cheese. Pour wine and broth into dish. Cover tightly with foil; bake until artichokes are tender when base is pierced with small sharp knife, about 1 hour. Spoon some cooking liquid over artichokes to moisten and serve.


text:
FN Manufacturing, LLC
B-402059.4,B-402059.5: Mar 22, 2010
Additional Materials:
- Full Report:
(202) 512-8278
Kenneth E. Patton
(202) 512-8205
Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
FN Manufacturing, LLC, of Columbia, South Carolina, protests the award of a contract to Colt Defense LLC, of West Hartford, Connecticut, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W56HZV-09-R-0402, issued by the U.S. Army Materiel Command for the supply of M240B machine guns. FN argues that the Army did not reasonably evaluate Colt's past performance in accordance with the solicitation's evaluation criteria, the Army's technical evaluation was flawed, and its source selection decision was unreasonable.
We deny the protest.
B-402059.4; B-402059.5, FN Manufacturing, LLC, March 22, 2010
The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release.
Matter of: FN Manufacturing, LLC
Joseph J. Dyer, Esq., Martin J. Golub, Esq., Amanda B. Weiner, Esq., and Daniel P. Wierzba, Esq., Seyfarth Shaw LLP, for the protester.
Michael A. Hordell, Esq., Joyce K. Hackenbrach, Esq., Stanley R. Soya, Esq., and Heather Kilgore Weiner, Esq., Pepper Hamilton LLP, for the intervenor.
Vera Meza, Esq., and Caridad Ramos, Esq., U.S. Army Materiel Command, for the agency.
Edward Goldstein, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
Agency's evaluation of awardee's past performance as relevant based on comparative complexity of awardee's past performance references was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation which afforded the agency the discretion to consider "the degree to which contracts are of a comparable complexity, size or value to the proposed effort" in determining relevance.
FN Manufacturing, LLC, of Columbia, South Carolina, protests the award of a contract to Colt Defense LLC, of West Hartford, Connecticut, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W56HZV-09-R-0402, issued by the U.S. Army Materiel Command for the supply of M240B machine guns. FN argues that the Army did not reasonably evaluate Colt's past performance in accordance with the solicitation's evaluation criteria, the Army's technical evaluation was flawed, and its source selection decision was unreasonable.
The Army issued the RFP on April 7, 2009, contemplating the award of a 4-year
fixed-price indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contract for the supply of M240B machine guns. Award was to be made to the offeror whose proposal was determined to represent the best value to the government considering the following factors: technical, past performance, small business participation, and price. The RFP established that the technical factor was slightly more important than past performance and substantially more important that small business participation, while past performance was more important than small business participation. The non-price factors, when combined, were considered to be "slightly more important than Price." RFP, sect. M.1.a.
The technical factor was comprised of four subfactors: approach/schedule, facilities/equipment, quality system, and key personnel. The approach/schedule subfactor was "significantly more important" than the other subfactors, which were of equal importance. The technical factor and each of the subfactors were to be rated as "low risk," "moderate risk," or "high risk." RFP, sect. M.2.
As it relates to the protest, in responding to the technical factor, offerors were required to propose "a technical approach and pre-production schedule, and information demonstrating access by the Offeror (and [its] suppliers/subcontractors) to all resources necessary to fulfill the requirements of the Technical Data Package." RFP, sect. L.2. Under the approach/schedule subfactor, offerors were to set forth the technical approach and pre-production schedule that they would use to "perform technical data package review, establish change management, fabrication and quality control processes, fabricate and evaluate First Article hardware (if applicable) and initiate production hardware fabrication and delivery in accordance with the required delivery schedule." Id.
Under the facilities/equipment subfactor, offerors were to detail their "production facilities/equipment available (or plan and schedule to obtain same) to fabricate, inspect and test the M240B Machine Gun to the Technical Data Package, in its entirety and in accordance with the required delivery schedule." Id. Offerors were also required to describe their "plant production capacity" under this subfactor, which was to include certain specific "minimum" information, to include, among other things, the extent to which specific "processes or items" were being subcontracted. Id.
Past performance was to be rated as "very low risk," "low risk," "moderate risk," "high risk," or "unknown risk."[1] RFP, sect. M.3. In this regard, the RFP required offerors to submit contract references representing "recent, relevant performance." The term "recent" was defined to mean within the last 3 years since the issuance of the solicitation. The term "relevant" was defined as follows:
Performance that demonstrates the offeror has successfully manufactured or provided the M240, 7.62mm Machine Gun or similar items. These are listed in descending order of importance from highly relevant to the somewhat relevant:
M240, 7.62MM Machine Gun produced to the U.S. Army's Technical Data Package (TDP).
Gas operated, belt fed, machine guns produced to other Military technical data packages.
Other small arms weapons, machine gun parts, or experience in producing commercial small arms parts.
The degree to which contracts are of a comparable complexity, size or value to the proposed effort may also be considered in determining relevance.
RFP, sect. L.3.
Small business participation was to be rated as "excellent," "good," "adequate," "marginal," or "poor" based, in part, on
the extent to which offerors (both large and small businesses) identify and commit to small business (SB), veteran-owned small business (VOSB), service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB), HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business (SDB), woman-owned small business (WOSB), and historically black college and university/minority institution (HBCU/MI) participation in the contract, whether as the contractor or a subcontractor, or as a member of a joint venture or teaming arrangement.
RFP, sect. M.5. A rating of "excellent" was appropriate where a proposal committed to having more than 20% of the dollar value of the contract performed by the above small business categories, either through the prime (if so qualified) or through subcontractors or team members. According to the RFP, the agency would also consider whether the offeror "has substantive evidence suggesting prior achievement of subcontracting plans or policy goals, and whether, based on the proposal and past performance risk history, the offeror's proposal goals and/or actions are substantial and are considered very realistic (very low risk)." Id.
The Army received two timely proposals in response to the RFP, from FN and Colt. For the purpose of evaluating proposals, the Army established a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). Upon completing an initial evaluation, the Army held discussions with the two offerors and obtained final proposal revisions. After evaluating the offerors' final proposals, the Army selected Colt for award, which was made on September 25, 2009. FN was notified that day of the Army's decision and requested a debriefing on September 28. The Army provided FN with a debriefing on October 2 and, on October 6, FN filed a protest with our Office. Before submitting its agency report, the Army agreed to take corrective action in response to FN's protest, including a reevaluation of the firms' proposals and the issuance of a new source selection decision.[2] We dismissed the protest as academic on November 20.
To implement the promised corrective action, the source selection authority (SSA) reevaluated the proposals and issued a new Integrated Assessment of Proposal and Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD). The new SSDD reflects the following ratings as determined by the SSA:
iii) Technical Risk
iv) Past Performance
v) Small Business Participation
vii) Total Price
ix) FN
xi) Low Risk
xiii) Very Low Risk
xiv) Excellent, Very Low Risk
xvi) $106,163,664.39
xviii) Colt
xx) Moderate Risk
xxii) Low Risk
xxiii) Excellent, Very Low Risk
xxv) $87,333,810.50
Agency Report (AR), Tab III.1., SSDD, at 24.
The record reflects that the SSA disagreed with the SSEB's "low risk" rating for Colt as it related to "technical risk" and instead concluded that Colt should have been assigned a rating of "moderate risk," in light of the fact that Colt has not produced an M240 machine gun. Id. at 13. Notwithstanding FN's superior ratings under the technical and past performance factors, the SSA determined that Colt's proposal represented the best value to the government. On December 9, the Army informed FN that the proposals had been reevaluated and the SSA had affirmed the Army's prior award to Colt. FN requested a debriefing on December 11, which it received on December 18. FN filed an initial protest on December 21 and a supplemental protest on December 28, both of which are the subject of this decision.
FN challenges several aspects of the Army's evaluation of Colt's proposal. Specifically, FN argues that the Army did not reasonably evaluate Colt's past performance in accordance with the evaluation criteria established under the RFP. In this regard, FN complains that the Army found contracts referenced by Colt to be relevant notwithstanding the fact that they did not meet the solicitation's definition of relevant. In addition, FN argues that Colt's proposal should have been downgraded under the technical evaluation factor because Colt did not include information demonstrating access by its suppliers and subcontractors to resources necessary to fulfill the requirements of the technical data package, and because Colt failed to identify its suppliers and subcontractors. FN challenges the Army's evaluation of Colt's proposal under the small business participation factor as well, arguing that the agency failed to consider Colt's lack of demonstrated success in achieving subcontracting goals, and its failure to consistently identify its proposed subcontractors. As a final matter, FN asserts that the SSA's selection decision was unreasonable.
As a threshold matter, Colt contends that FN's December 28 supplemental protest is untimely.[3] Under our Bid Protest Regulations, protests other than those based on an alleged solicitation impropriety must be filed within 10 days after the basis of protest is known or should have been known, except when a required debriefing is requested. 4 C.F.R. sect. 21.2(a)(1) and (2) (2009). In challenging the timeliness of FN's supplemental protest, Colt first argues that FN did not file its protest within 10 days of when it knew or should have known its bases of protest. Colt asserts that FN knew, or should have known, of the bases for its December 28 supplemental protest from the evaluation record the Army provided to FN's counsel in connection with its prior October 6 protest, coupled with the December 9 letter from the Army affirming its prior award decision to Colt. Because FN did not file its supplemental protest within 10 days of learning of the Army's revised source selection decision, Colt maintains, the protest is untimely.
Colt also contends that the debriefing exception in section 21.2(a)(2) of our Regulations does not apply in this case because the debriefing FN received on December 18 was not a "required debriefing" as defined by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) sect. 15.506(a)(1), which provides as follows:
An offeror, upon its written request received by the agency within 3 days after the date on which that offeror has received notificationof contract award in accordance with 15.503(b), shall be debriefedand furnished the basis for the selection decision and contract award.
According to Colt, the Army's December 9 letter advising FN of the results of its reevaluation and revised source selection decision was not a "notification of contract award"; rather, FN received the notice of the award decision on September 25. Colt argues that, because FN's December 11 debriefing request was not made within 3 days of the "notification of contract award," the debriefing the Army provided in response to this request was not a "required debriefing," thus rendering the debriefing exception under 4 C.F.R. sect. 21.2(a)(2) inapplicable.
Because we find that FN filed its supplemental protest within 10 days of when it knew, or should have known, of the bases of its supplemental protest, we need not address whether the debriefing exception to our timeliness rules applies here. In this regard, even where a disappointed offeror does not secure a required debriefing, as Colt contends is the case here, it retains the right to file a protest within 10 days after its learns, or should have learned, the basis for protest, provided it has diligently pursued the matter; this includes the right to file a timely protest based on information obtained during a debriefing that was not "required" within the meaning of FAR sect. 15.506(a)(1). See Raith Eng'g & Mfg. Co., W.L.L., B-298333.3, Jan. 9, 2007, 2007 CPD para. 9 at 3.
Here, we find that FN diligently pursued the information that it learned at the debriefing and its protest based on the information learned at the debriefing thus is timely filed. Specifically, FN's supplemental protest challenges the Army's failure to properly evaluate Colt's proposal under the technical and small business participation factors. The December 9 letter merely advised FN of the Army's ratings for the offerors under the various factors and its determination that Colt's proposal represented the best value to the government. It was not until FN received its debriefing on December 18, which included a detailed discussion of the agency's reevaluation and revised selection decision, that FN had the facts needed to reasonably know its bases of protest.[4] Because FN's supplemental protest was filed on December 28, within 10 days of its December 18 debriefing, it is timely.
Past Performance
FN argues that the Army unreasonably evaluated Colt's proposal as "low risk" under the past performance factor. According to FN, based on the terms of the RFP, none of Colt's past performance references should have been considered relevant because they did not involve the manufacture of "belt-fed" machine guns, or indeed, machine guns at all.
Where a solicitation calls for the evaluation of past performance, we will examine the record to ensure that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria and procurement statutes and regulations. Divakar Techs., Inc., B-402026, Dec. 2, 2009, 2009 CPD para. 247 at 5. The evaluation of past performance, by its very nature, is subjective; an offeror's mere disagreement with the agency's evaluation judgments does not demonstrate that those judgments are unreasonable. SDV Telecomms., B-279919, July 29, 1998, 98-2 CPD para. 34 at 2.
Here, Colt submitted three references for evaluation: (1) a contract for the manufacture of M/4/M4A1 carbines, with a value of approximately $478 million; (2) a contract for the manufacture of the M16A4 rifle with a value of approximately $16 million; and (3) a second contract for the manufacture of M4/M4A1 carbines with a value of approximately $6 million. The SSA determined all three references to be relevant since they were of "comparable complexity and value to the proposed effort." AR, Tab III.1, SSDD, at 18.
In documenting his relevance determination, the SSA concluded that the M4/M4A1 and the M16 are considered machine guns because they are weapons which are capable of automatically shooting more than one shot by a single pull of the trigger without having to be manually reloaded.[5] In this regard, the SSA further noted that "the M4A1 carbine is capable of full automatic fire at a rate of approximately 800 rounds per minute from a 30 round detachable box magazine." AR, Tab III.1, SSDD, at 17. Expressly recognizing that the referenced weapons are not "belt-fed" machine guns, the SSA determined that the complexity of a box magazine-fed machine gun, like the M4/M4A1 and M16, "requires a similar attention to strict government technical tolerances and specifications of a belt fed magazine" and further noted that "any effort to manufacture complete small caliber automatic weapons demonstrates greater knowledge and capability than the production of lesser weapons or weapon parts." Id. at 17. According to the SSA, the weapons manufactured by Colt under these contracts "were made and tested to a weapon specification similar to the M240 Machine Gun." Id. at 18.
The SSA also expressly considered the dollar values of the various contracts referenced by Colt as part of his relevance assessment. In this regard, the SSA highlighted the fact that the $478 million M4/M4A1 contract had a "significantly" greater value as compared to the estimated value of the M240 acquisition (approximately $187 million). Id. The SSA again noted that the M4/M4A1 weapon manufactured by Colt is made in accordance with a government-approved technical data package, which involves a "significant degree of complexity." Id. Acknowledging that the other two contracts referenced by Colt were not equivalent in dollar value, the SSA similarly emphasized the complexity associated with the weapons manufactured under these contracts in justifying his determination that they should be considered relevant for the purposes of evaluating Colt's past performance.
FN principally argues that the SSA's findings do not comport with the evaluation criteria established under the RFP, which defined "relevant" as "[g]as operated, belt fed machine guns produced to other Military technical data packages." RFP, sect. L.3. According to FN, the M4/M4A1 and M16 weapons "in general parlance" are not considered machine guns. Protest at 8. FN asserts that, even if they can properly be considered machine guns, they are not "belt-fed," and thus, by the terms of the RFP, Colt's contracts for the manufacture of these weapons should not have been regarded as relevant. Instead, they should have been considered, at most, "somewhat relevant," which was defined to encompass "other small arms weapons, machine gun parts, or experience in producing commercial small arms parts." RFP, sect. L.3. FN further argues that the SSA could not rely on the language in the solicitation indicating that "comparable complexity, size or value to the proposed effort may also be considered in determining relevance" for the purpose of finding Colt's contracts for the M4/M4A1 and M16 weapons relevant. In FN's view, such a finding would render the relevance categories meaningless since it would allow the Army to effectively redefine the specific relevance definitions identified in the RFP.
We find that FN's challenge to the agency's past performance evaluation is based on an unreasonably narrow reading of the SSA's evaluation and the evaluation criteria established under the RFP. First, as established by the record, the SSA expressly recognized the fact that Colt's referenced contracts did not fit precisely within the definition of a belt-fed machine gun under the relevance categories identified in the RFP. Thus, whether the guns manufactured under Colt's M4/M4A1 and M16 contracts are in fact "machine guns" (a term not specifically defined in the RFP) or "belt-fed" weapons, is not relevant to assessing the reasonableness of the SSA's analysis. Rather, the record shows that the SSA based his relevance assessment on the degree to which Colt's contracts for the manufacture of the M4/M4A1 and the M16 weapons were of comparable complexity to the manufacture of the M240 machine gun.
Second, by its terms, the language of the RFP afforded the agency broad discretion in assessing relevance beyond the narrowly defined relevance categories identified by the RFP. In reaching this conclusion, we note that the discretionary language appears immediately after the defined relevance categories and expressly provides that "complexity, size or value to the proposed effort may also be considered in determining relevance." RFP, sect. L.3 (emphasis added). Moreover, recognizing that the agency retained the discretion under the RFP to effectively look beyond the specific relevance categories does not render the defined categories meaningless, as FN asserts. Rather, it is FN's rigid adherence to the defined relevance categories that would effectively read out the discretionary language set forth in the RFP. See Northrup Grumman Info. Tech., Inc., B-401198, B-401198.2, June 2, 2009, 2009 CPD para. 122 at 2 (in order for an interpretation to be reasonable, solicitation must be read as a whole and in a manner that gives effect to all of its provisions). The SSA reasonably understood the RFP language as affording him the overall discretion to consider a multitude of factors in making his final assessment regarding the relevance of offerors' references in addition to the specific relevance categories established by the RFP. Because the agency's evaluation was consistent with the evaluation criteria established by the terms of the RFP, we see no basis to find the agency's past performance evaluation improper as FN has alleged.
FN further argues that it was unreasonable to find Colt's referenced contracts relevant since they are not of comparable complexity.[6] FN believes that the manufacture of the M240 machine gun is significantly more complex as compared to the manufacture of Colt's M4/M4A1 and M16, which are not belt-fed, and notes that this fact was expressly recognized by Colt in its proposal and the solicitation, which specifically defined relevant contracts as involving belt-fed machine guns. While Colt's proposal highlights various similarities and recognizes the differences between the manufacture of the M4/M4A1 and M16 as compared to the manufacture of the M240, Colt's proposal does not indicate, or otherwise suggest, that its activities under its referenced contracts were not of comparable complexity. In addition, FN's reliance on the RFP to support its relevance argument simply rehashes its contention that the SSA's relevance determination was contrary to the terms of the RFP. As explained above, the RFP afforded the Army the discretion to make judgments regarding the relative degree of complexity of a contract as compared to the M240B requirement when assessing relevance. While FN may ultimately disagree with the SSA's assessments regarding the comparable complexity of Colt's references and his determination that they were relevant for the purposes of evaluating Colt's past performance, FN's mere disagreement does not render the SSA's evaluation findings unreasonable.[7]
Technical Evaluation
FN also challenges the agency's evaluation of Colt's proposal under the technical factor. According to FN, Colt proposed to subcontract approximately 80% of the work, yet failed to consistently identify the suppliers/subcontractors it intended to use to perform the contract and, with respect to the suppliers and subcontractors it did identify, Colt, in many instances, did not provide necessary information concerning the resources of these firms. In sum, FN contends that "the SSA simply ignored the fact that Colt did not provide any information demonstrating its suppliers/subcontractors' access to the necessary resources" to perform the contract. Protester's Comments at 8. As a related matter, FN argues that the Army should have further downgraded Colt's proposal based on the schedule risk associated with Colt's failure to identify the suppliers/subcontractors it would use to manufacture the M240B machine gun.
The record reflects that Colt proposed to subcontract the manufacture [DELETED] components of the M240B machine gun while assembling [DELETED]. Colt separately listed each major component of the M240B and described how the component would be manufactured. For example, Colt expressly identified the "receiver" as "the most critical assembly in the manufacture of the [M240B machine gun]" and specifically discusses how its expertise and knowledge is applied to the manufacture and assembly of this component. Colt's Technical Proposal, at 22. Colt discusses the "barrel group" for the M240B and notes its current contract for the manufacture of 22,500 M240 spare barrels, explains that it has established the source plan needed to manufacture the barrels, and identifies the manufacturing processes it is incorporating to the manufacture of this barrel. Colt also identifies the "cover assembly" as a "critical" part, and explained that it would be the primary manufacturer [DELETED] and that it would assemble the components in'house. Colt further provided extensive details regarding the experience and capabilities for two of its critical suppliers [DELETED]. In addition to identifying its overall approach to the major components, Colt provided the Army with a detailed "make/buy" spreadsheet, which identified a specific subcontractor/supplier for every component part of the M240B machine gun as well as lead times for manufacture of the component. Colt further included a "partial listing of suppliers" (32 in total) which Colt was "expecting" to use in the manufacture of the M240B, with hyperlinks to several of the suppliers' websites for further details regarding their capabilities. Id. at 31-33.
In its review of Colt's technical proposal, the Army found Colt's make/buy spreadsheet to be complete and determined that it substantiated its approach to manufacturing the M240B machine gun; however, it found some of the lead times to be "rather aggressive." AR, Tab III.1, SSDD, at 9. The Army also concluded that Colt's subcontracting approach, as set forth in its proposal and make/buy spreadsheet, is a "practical approach to the manufacture of an item as complex as the M240B, which reduces the risk [DELETED]." Id. at 10. As part of its evaluation, the Army noted Colt's plan [DELETED] and found this to be a "reasonable risk reduction method." Id. at 11. The Army also considered Colt's strategic suppliers, their areas of expertise, the summary information on the facilities, equipment, quality system, and key personnel for Colt's most significant supplier as well as general information regarding Colt's second key supplier, and determined that Colt's existing subcontractor base for its current small arms contracts will "facilitate the subcontract performance for the proposed contract." Id. Ultimately, the SSA was "confident that Colt has the necessary technical and engineering skills, production capability, and the staff to produce the M240B MG." Id. at 13. Notwithstanding this confidence, the SSA determined that Colt should receive a "moderate risk" rating since it has not in fact produced an M240B. Id. Based on this record, which reflects the Army's detailed consideration of Colt's proposal, there is no basis to sustain FN's challenge to the technical evaluation of Colt's proposal.
Regarding certain alleged discrepancies associated with Colt's identification of its subcontractor/suppliers, we think FN overstates the importance of any such discrepancies. As reflected in Colt's proposal, the critical aspects of the work were to be performed by Colt and its major subcontractors, all of which are identified and fully described throughout Colt's proposal.[8] To the extent FN highlights the fact that Colt's make/buy spreadsheet includes subcontractors that are not among the 32 "expected" suppliers listed in Colt's technical proposal, this list, by its terms, was only a "partial listing of suppliers," as noted above. Colt's Technical Proposal at 31. Thus, there does not appear to be any discrepancy on the face of Colt's proposal in this regard. FN also contends that Colt's subcontractors/suppliers were not firmly identified, since Colt indicated in its proposal that it would "do another final complete make-buy analysis" at "the time of contract award." Id. at 7. The RFP, however, did not require firms to commit themselves to particular suppliers/subcontractors in their proposals. Rather, it simply asked firms to identify the items and processes that they intended to subcontract. RFP, sect. L.2.b(2)(e). Moreover, Colt added that it believed that [DELETED]. Id. In sum, FN's allegations do not provide a basis for our Office to conclude that the Army acted unreasonably in assigning Colt a "moderate risk" rating under the technical evaluation factor.
Small Business Subcontracting Plan
FN argues that the Army unreasonably evaluated Colt's plan for small business subcontracting as "excellent" and "very low risk." According to FN, Colt's ratings were unjustified because, as Colt indicates in its proposal, it does not have established procedures for achieving its goals and its list of intended small business suppliers was undefined as reflected by inconsistencies in identifying firms when compared to Colt's make/buy analysis.
Under the small business participation factor, a rating of "excellent" was reserved for offerors who proposed to subcontract more than 20% of the work, by dollar value, to small business concerns and where "the offeror's proposal goals and/or actions are substantial and are considered very realistic (very low risk)" considering the proposal and the offeror's "Past Performance Risk history." RFP, sect. M.5. In assessing risk under this factor, the RFP provided for an evaluation of offerors' performance in complying with requirements for the utilization of small business concerns, and for large business offerors, the RFP indicated that the agency would also consider their past performance in complying with FAR clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Id.
As indicated in its proposal, Colt planned to subcontract approximately [DELETED] of the contract effort to small businesses and provided a listing of the specific small business firms that it intended to use to perform the work as well as the specific components or services that each firm would provide. Colt, which was a small business concern itself until 2009, did not have a history of compliance with FAR clause 52.219-9; however, Colt indicated that it has a history of promoting small business utilization, that it maintains a listing of small business suppliers, and that historically it has placed over [DELETED] of its requirements with small business concerns. AR, Tab 17b, Evaluation of Colt's Small Business Participation Plan, at 28-29. Colt further explained that it was "establishing internal efforts to guide and encourage buyers" which included having them attend small business workshops and training programs, as well as monitoring activities to ensure compliance with its subcontracting plan. Id. at 28.
The record reflects that the Army considered Colt's small business plan in detail and reasonably concluded that it warranted an "excellent" rating. In this regard, the Army noted that Colt planned to subcontract a "substantial portion" of the work to small business concerns--specifically noting its plan to subcontract approximately 56% of the contract to small business concerns, which was well in excess of the 20% needed to achieve a rating of excellent. Id. at 3. Moreover, recognizing that Colt did not have a past performance record in complying with FAR clause 52.219-9 given its recent status as a small business, the Army noted that Colt maintained a listing of its small business suppliers and that it had a [DELETED] historical rate of placing requirements with small business concerns. To the extent FN contends that Colt did not deserve an "excellent" rating due to Colt's limited history with implementing small business subcontracting plans, its lack of firm procedures to implement its subcontracting plans, and its [DELETED] small business placement rate, FN's arguments amount to little more than mere disagreement with the agency's evaluation of Colt's proposal under this factor and do not support a basis for sustaining its protest.
Moreover, the discrepancies about which FN complains concerning Colt's inconsistent listing of its small business suppliers under its small business utilization plan as compared with its make/buy analysis, are minimal and consist of at most two firms [DELETED] of the [DELETED] small business firms identified in Colt's small business utilization plan. See id. at 12-14. While these two firms do appear on Colt's small business plan as suppliers, and do not appear on Colt's make/buy analysis spreadsheet, they do in fact appear on Colt's listing of suppliers in its technical proposal. See Colt's Technical Proposal, at 32-33. Given the limited nature of the alleged discrepancy,[9] and the fact that the firms are in fact identified in Colt's technical proposal, we conclude that FN's allegation in this regard does not present a basis for our Office to conclude that the agency's findings were unreasonable or otherwise improper.
Source Selection Decision
As a final matter, FN challenges the SSA's best value tradeoff decision. In this regard, FN argues that the SSA's decision to select Colt's lower-priced proposal was unreasonable because it did not afford any weight to the superiority of FN's proposal under the technical and past performance factors as compared to the proposal submitted by Colt.
It is well-settled that an agency properly may select a lower-rated, lower-priced proposal, even where price is a less important evaluation factor than technical merit, where it reasonably concludes that the price premium involved in selecting the higher-rated proposal is not justified in light of the acceptable level of technical competence available at a lower price. The extent of such tradeoffs is governed only by the test of rationality and consistency with the evaluation criteria. Thus, a protester's disagreement with the agency's determinations as to the relative merits of competing proposals, or disagreement with its judgment as to which proposal offers the best value to the agency, do not establish that the evaluation or source selection was unreasonable. General Dynamics--Ordnance & Tactical Sys., B-401658, B'401658.2, Oct. 26, 2009, 2009 CPD para. 217 at 8.
Here, the record reflects that the SSA performed a detailed examination of the offerors' proposals under each evaluation factor and subfactor identified in the RFP. The record further reflects that the SSA understood and recognized the lower performance risk associated with FN's technical approach and past performance record largely based largely on FN having previously, and successfully, manufactured the M240B machine gun, as compared to the risk posed by Colt, which has not manufactured this weapon, but determined that the lower risk associated with FN's proposal did not warrant a price premium of more than 21%. We see no basis to object to this determination.
The protest is denied.
Lynn H. Gibson
Acting General Counsel
[1] "Very low risk" was defined to mean that there is "very little doubt" regarding an offeror's ability to successfully perform the required effort, while "low risk" and "moderate risk" were defined to mean, respectively, that the agency has "little" or "some" doubt regarding the offeror's ability to successfully perform the contract. RFP, sect. M.3.
[2] While implementing its promised corrective action, the Army stayed performance of Colt's contract.
[3] In its supplemental protest, FN specifically challenged the agency's evaluation of Colt's proposal under the technical and small business participation factors. In its initial protest, FN challenged the agency's failure to reasonably evaluate Colt's past performance.
[4] In reaching this conclusion we reject Colt's assertion that FN was aware of or should have known its bases of protest from documents pertaining to the agency's initial evaluation and selection decision, which FN received in connection with its protest of the Army's initial award decision. The Army represented to our Office and the parties that it intended to perform a reevaluation of the offerors' proposals and make a new selection decision. Based on these representations, it was reasonable for the protester to assume that the initial findings were not reflective of the agency's revised evaluation and new selection decision.
[5] The record reflects that, in concluding that the M4 and M16 are "machine guns," the SSA considered the National Firearms Act of 1934, specifically, 26 U.S.C. sect. 5845(b) (2006), which defines a "machine gun" as follows:
any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machine gun, and any combination of parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.
[6] In its current protest FN argues that the Army unreasonably found Colt's contract for the manufacture of the barrel for the M240/M240C machine gun to be relevant. This argument is a departure from the arguments raised in FN's initial protests, before the agency implemented corrective action, which argued that the Army failed to properly consider Colt's performance on its barrel contract, noting that the barrel is a "critical" component and it "is more relevant than Colt's past contracts for the M4 and M16." Supp. Protest, Oct. 13, 2009, at 8. FN speculated that Colt's performance on its barrel contract had been "so difficult that it is likely that Colt will miss First Article Qualification" and, had the agency properly considered its performance under this contract, it would not have rated Colt's past performance as low risk. Id. at 8-9. Upon receipt of the record in this case--which revealed that the SSA had in fact considered Colt's performance under its M240 barrel contract, that Colt had completed its first article testing early, and that all indications were that the Army was completely satisfied with Colt's performance--FN shifted its stance to argue that it was unreasonable for the agency to have considered Colt's barrel contract relevant and that its performance under this contract could not justify Colt's "low risk" rating. Given FN's shifting views of the significance of Colt's barrel contract, its arguments concerning the agency's consideration of this contract are unpersuasive.
[7] FN further maintains that the Army improperly considered information regarding Colt's performance on other unspecified contracts; that information, which the agency obtained from databases like PPIRS, reflected that Colt did not have any performance problems. The record shows that some of the information in fact pertained to Colt's performance under several of the contracts it referenced in its proposal. To the extent the databases had information about performance under other contracts, it appears from the record that the SSA considered that information as, in effect, a check on the evaluation, looking for any indication that might warrant reconsidering the ratings assigned. In our view, the SSA's general consideration of this information was not improper or otherwise inconsistent with the RFP. To the extent FN argues that the Army's consideration of the information was unfair because it did not consider such information in its evaluation of FN's past performance, the record shows that the Army in fact did do an overall check of the performance databases for FN similar to the check it did with regard to Colt. See AR, Tab III.1, SSDD, at 15-20.
[8] As explained by Colt in its comments, [DELETED] of the work required by the contract would be carried out by Colt itself and four major subcontractors, all of which are among the 32 listed in its proposal and identified throughout its make/buy analysis. Moreover, Colt notes that since award of the contract, it has in fact contracted with [DELETED] subcontractors listed in its technical proposal and [DELETED] of its major subcontractors. Colt also acknowledges that some of its suppliers of minor components or parts are listed in its proposal, but not included in its make/buy analysis. This discrepancy, according to Colt, was due to the fact that the make/buy analysis listed only first-tier subcontractors, while some of the minor suppliers identified in Colt's technical proposal are second-tier suppliers. Colt's Comments at 18-19.
[9] There is nothing in the record to suggest that even if Colt did not intend to use these two firms that its small business participation plan would drop below the 20% threshold required for an "excellent" rating. Rather, much of work appears to be subcontracted to Colt's critical suppliers, [DELETED] both of which are listed as small business concerns.
Oct 27, 2020
Silver Investments, Inc.
We dismiss the protest as untimely because it was filed more than 10 days after the protester knew, or should have known, the basis for its protest.
CareFusion Solutions, LLC
We dismiss the protest.
Open SAN Consulting, LLC
We deny the protest.
Oct 26, 2020
Chronos Solutions, LLC; Inside Realty, LLC; BLB Resources, Inc.
We sustain the protests.
Chronos Solutions, LLC
We deny the protest.
Weston-ER Federal Services, LLC
We sustain the protest.
Oct 23, 2020
Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc.
We deny the protest.
Oct 22, 2020
Academy Medical, LLC
We deny the protest.
Colonna's Shipyard, Inc.
We dismiss the protest in part, and deny it in part.
Knight Point Systems, LLC
We sustain the protest.
Looking for more? Browse all our products here


text:
What the Hell Child is This? lyrics - Chef
What the Hell Child is This? Song Lyrics
Chef: Baby, you know there's a lot of love between us
Sometimes that love goes bad
But other times its so right!
Yeah, I know we've been through some rough waters
But most of the time our thing is off the hook!
I just want to know one thing...
What child is this
You've laid to rest
At my feet
This is not the time.
I know that I'm not responsible
It's white so it cannot be mine.
No, this, this is Christ the King.
With a feeling of relief
I cannot sing.
Haste, haste to bring him laud
The Babe, the Son of Mary.
Mmmmm, Son of Mary!
(Son of Mary)
Little bitty baby!
So, bring him incense, gold, and myrrh
Come peasant king to own Him.
The King of kings, salvation brings,
Let loving hearts enthrone Him.
Raise, raise the song on high
The Virgin sings her lullaby.
Joy, joy, for Christ is born
The Babe, the Son of Mary.
Son of Mary
(Son of Mary)
Little bitty baby
(Little bitty baby, yeah)
I'm gonna lay you down by the yule log
I'm gonna gonna love you right.
Baby, I'm gonna deck your halls
And silent your night!
You'll hear the herald angels sing
When I'm sliding off your bra.
I just can't wait to jingle your bells
And fa la la your la!
(Fa la la your la)
This, this is Christmas Day
A time for lovers to celebrate.
I'm gonna ding dong you merrily on high
Because this is the season for giving!
(Give it to me baby, give it to me baby)
...Season for giving
(Season for giving, give me love!)
...Season for living
(Season for living, give me love!)
...Season for giving
(Season for giving)
...Giving you love
(Give me love!)
...Giving you good love
(Season for good love!)
...Whole lotta love
(Give me love!)
...Making love
(Season for giving)
...By the fire
(Give me love!)
...Whole lotta love
(Season for good love)
...By the fire
(Give me love!)
...Don't need no mistletoe
(Season for giving)
...You've got toes
(Give me love!)
...Whole lotta loving
(Season for good love!)
(Give me love!)
...Jingle bells
(Season for giving, give me love!
...Fa la la your la.
(Season for good love, give me love!)
A-Z Lyrics Universe
Popular South Park: Mr. Hankey's Christmas Classics Songs
Follow us
Lyrics / song texts are property and copyright of their owners and provided for educational purposes.


text:
WWE: Ultimate SmackDown stockApril 3, 2014: 2:06 PM ET
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Paul R. La Monica. Other than Time Warner, the parent of CNNMoney, Abbott Laboratories and AbbVie, La Monica does not own positions in any individual stocks.
Quick! What's the hottest media tech stock of the past few months? Amazon? Netflix? Google?
Nope. Try World Wrestling Entertainment.
Shares of the WWE (WWE) have surged an astonishing 220% in the past year and are up more than 70% in 2014 alone.
But wait. Why am I comparing the WWE to online video giants Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX) and Google (GOOG)? It's because WWE unveiled plans for its own streaming video app at CES in January.
Much of the excitement surrounding the stock has been about what this means for the future of the "sports entertainment" company.
Related: With new online network, WWE hopes to pile-drive its doubters
The WWE historically has generated broadcasting revenue from its deals with TV networks -- such as Comcast's (CMCSA) USA and Syfy -- and through Pay-Per-View events such as this Sunday's WrestleMania 30 extravaganza in New Orleans.
(WrestleMania is the equivalent of the WWE's Super Bowl -- although the WWE no longer regularly uses Roman numerals to promote it like the NFL pompously does.)
But with the launch of the WWE Network in late February, the company is hoping to generate even more sales through a $9.99 per month subscription. Through the subscription -- which carries a six-month requirement -- users can watch all current WWE events ... including WrestleMania.
It's a bold move for the WWE since it takes the company out of the exclusive realm of cable TV (and may alienate cable and satellite providers in the process) and brings its programming to the more rapidly growing world of online video. The WWE also made the savvy decision to not bet on just one streaming video provider.
The WWE Network, in addition to being available on desktops and laptops at its own web site, can be viewed on apps through Apple (AAPL) TV, Microsoft's (MSFT) Xbox, Sony's (SNE) PlayStation, Amazon's Kindle Fire, Google Play and Roku.
The launch of the app is also a bet that more WWE fans would be willing to pay $9.99 every month instead of one-off splurges for big events. The cost to watch WrestleMania on Pay-Per-View is $59.95. The second tier of WWE Pay-Per-View specials tend to cost $44.95.
Related: The WWE Network is one of 5 products pushing the boundaries of TV
Just how many fans will sign up for the network? That remains to be seen. The company hasn't released figures yet. It is widely expected that there will be an announcement Monday about how many people watched WrestleMania on the app.
But investors are taking some money off the table the past few days. The stock was down about 2% Thursday following a 2% drop Wednesday. But the pullback makes sense when you consider that shares have surged as much as they have this year. Plus, the WWE soared 5% on Monday and 2.5% Tuesday.
So what's next for the stock, given all the recent volatility?
The valuation for WWE is higher than a Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka jump off the top of a steel cage. (My wrestling references are pretty much confined to the 1980s, which is when my little brother and I were young lads begging our parents to let us watch WrestleMania. Back then, it was still the WWF.)
All that punch aside, the company is expected to lose money this year and shares trade at 25 times 2015 earnings estimates. That seems a bit rich given that it's unclear the app will be a huge success.
But the WWE does have other things going for it.
Its movie studio, launched in 2002, finally seems to be clicking. It's still a small part of the overall business, but revenues from movies did grow 37% in 2013 as the company has diversified beyond action flicks featuring WWE wrestlers. Its biggest hit last year was "The Call" -- a thriller that starred Oscar winner Halle Berry.
The WWE is also doing a decent job of expanding its presence internationally. Revenue from Asia, Europe and Latin America rose 12% in the fourth quarter from the same period in 2012 while sales were flat year-over-year in North America. The WWE generated more than 26% of its total sales from outside North America in the quarter.
Yes, the WWE is a bit of an unconventional company. It takes risks that often don't pan out. Remember its ill-fated XFL, a failed attempt to compete with the NFL? What? You don't remember. Just Google "He Hate Me." (Or check out this positively ancient-looking story on CNNfn from 2000!)
But in other respects, the WWE is also a conservative company. It's amazingly enough a good bet for income-hungry investors. It pays a dividend that yields a respectable 1.6%.
Finally, there have also been some takeover rumors that have helped boost the stock lately.
The WWE's TV contract with Comcast's NBCUniversal ended in February. WWE shows still air on USA. But there was speculation last month that the WWE and AMC Networks (AMCX) have been in merger talks as a way for WWE to secure a new broadcast deal.
Related: Warren Buffett is Heisenberg?
The rumors are -- for now -- just that. But I wouldn't discount them entirely. While it may seem odd to think that Triple H and John Cena could be owned by the same company that's responsible for Don Draper and Walter White, AMC does offer more than just critical darlings like "Mad Men" and "Breaking Bad."
AMC also airs several reality shows that could be a good fit with WWE content, such as "Comic Book Men," "Freakshow" and "Game of Arms." The latter is a show about professional arm wrestlers.
Now if that's not synergy, feel free to whack me upside the head with a folding chair.
Reader Comment of the Week! The "Cuban Twitter" story is fascinating. It led me to make the following joke about Twitter's sinking stock price ... on Twitter (TWTR) of course. #meta
But my Reader Comment of the Week winner one-upped me.
Well-played. My guess is that former NBA commissioner David Stern would probably short that stock just so he could continue to give the owner of the Dallas Mavericks a reason to complain.


text:
The Best Deals in electronics to help you run your day and your business in the most efficient way possible without hurting your pocket.
Focus on running your business. We'll take care of putting some money back into your bottom line by providing you with the best deals possible for your office supplies.
From IP Phones to Industrial Gloves, we have the best selection of supplies at the best prices to help you run your business and your shop seamlessly...
Look good and feel good with these amazing deals on your favourite health and beauty products. In stock, ready to ship at the best price.
Find everything you need to enjoy your home to the fullest and feel good in the process. From bed covers to camping equipment, the best deals on the web are right here
Items 1-9 of 109
Contact Us
P.O. BOX 47503 Tampa, FL 33646
[email protected]


text:
CPA's 2018 Pre-Tax Season Cloud Computing Checklist
With 60-to-90-hour work weeks during tax season and pressing deadlines for filing or requesting extensions, there's no room for technology troubles. But, inevitably, they crop up—VPN access goes down, shared files don't sync properly or there's latency accessing your accounting software. And of course, this happens when you're at home after already putting in more than 15 hours. What if you... Read More


text:
- Race:
- Monaco Grand Prix
- Championship:
- FIA Formula One World Championship
- Drivers:
- Nick Heidfeld
- |
- Kimi Räikkönen
- |
- Mark Webber
- Circuits:
- Circuit de Monaco
McLaren's upswing in fortunes continued in Monaco as Kimi Raikkonen took his second win of the season to narrow the gap to championship leader Fernando Alonso.
Raikkonen had out-qualified Alonso and led from the start, opening up a gap of over a second by the end of lap one. He had a five-second cushion when Christijan Albers spun his Minardi. The safety car was deployed and it appeared too late for Raikkonen to dive for the pits. In contrast the Renaults of Alonso and Giancarlo Fisichella were able to pit and seemed to have gained an advantage.
However, Raikkonen and the McLaren boffins on the pit all were unconcerned. As long as Raikkonen had a lead of 20 seconds over Alonso when he pitted all would be well. Alonso was delayed behind Jarno Trulli's Toyota after his first pit stop and this further helped Raikkonen who took off to build the lead once more. When he pitted, the Finn led by over 34 seconds. Job done.
Alonso was struggling with his tyres. His hard-compound Michelins were losing grip and that caused him to fall back behind the Williamses of Nick Heidfeld and Mark Webber who clinched his first GP podium.
Alonso was fourth while Michael Schumacher was seventh after shunting his Ferrari into David Coulthard's Red Bull when trying to avoid Albers' stranded car early in the race.


text:
contact us
site map
view cart
Installation Manuals and Spec sheets PDF
> PYOS-60 Minimalist Modern Sensor Soap Dispenser
PYOS-60 Minimalist Modern Sensor Soap Dispenser
Regular price: $462.00
Finish type:
Polished Chrome
Satin Nickel (+110.00)
Oil Rubbed Bronze (+121.00)
Polish Gold (+165.00)
20+ finishes, please call
Power source options::
Battery - Included
AC adapter (+$34.95)
Soap Container Option PYOS System::
800ML (~1 Quart) Included
3.75L (~1 Gallon) (+50.95)
Remote control::
No Thanks I don't need it
Yes, one for many spouts (+$26.95)
Product Description
Perfect match for MAC FAUCETS FA444-63 electronic faucet
POUR YOUR OWN SOAP with this SOLID BRASS automatic sensor soap dispenser, and free yourself from Soap Serfdom. With the competitor's soap dispensers, you're forced into buying their BOTTLED SOAP at a heavy premium, NOT SO with MAC PYOS-60 electronic soap dispenser. Select the soap of your choice from the vendor of your choice, saving both time and money. Selecting MAC PYOS-60 over the vast majority of competitors' electronic soap dispensers could potentially have a tremendous impact in terms of savings on the cost of soap. Study found here: http://www.macfaucets.com/index.php?route=account/download/dnld&download_id=207
This MAC FAUCETS Automatic Soap Dispenser is ideal for bathroom applications where soap dispensers are an intricate component of the room's overall design element. There are 3 key reasons to consider the MAC PYOS-60 over competitors models:
1. Solid brass construction instead of plastic.
2. Available in 20 finishes to match the rest of the bathroom fixtures including MAC Faucets.
3. Matching in style to MAC FAUCETS FA444-63 electronic faucet line. This is a paramount consideration in every bathroom design.
4. Freedom to select the soap of your choice from the vendor of your choice.
5. Noise-free, reliable operation driven by a "peristaltic" pump. "Peristaltic technology" as so reliable and noise-free that it is used extensively for medical applications.
6. Soap portion adjustment, as well as other adjustments are easily accomplished using a hand held remote control (sold separately).
7. Soap bottle and the battery case can be installed away from soap spout for ease of soap refill and battery change.
8. One gallon soap container option for high traffic applications (saves refill time). One gallon soap containers must be placed on a solid platform due to the weight of the soap. Please plan accordingly.
MAC PYOS-60 is a heavy duty soap dispenser designed for heavy traffic applications. It features: Solid Brass Soap Spout Construction (not plastic as with most competing dispensers), Industrial Quality Soap Pump System Generally Used for Medical and Aerospace Applications. A Workhorse. This soap dispenser is designed for above sink installation and use. It is installed in the sink vicinity near the faucet. It is available in battery power, or optional AC power. Soap is refillable from below the counter.
Your purchase will include: Complete Soap Dispenser, 34fl/oz (~1/4 gallon) Soap Bottle, Mounting Hardware, 4 Batteries Pre-installed, 1 year warranty. All the hardware needed for satisfactory installation. Four D cell batteries are contained in a heavy duty battery enclosure, and require minimal know-how to replace.
Suitable for liquid hand soap or lotion, liquid antibacterial soap and other such commercial or residential liquid soaps and lotions commonly used in residential bathrooms and public lavatories. Not suitable for Grit Type Soap (generally used in auto repair shops and on on factory floors). Heavy-creamy soaps or cold weather installation WILL require mixing water with soap upon refill.
** Click on file "PYOS vs. Competition" below for the entire study.
Complete Installation Manual(pdf file)
Rough in Use(pdf file)
Specification Sheet
(pdf file)
PYOS vs. Competition
(pdf file)
Live Assistance Chat
Matching Pair
Luxury Stylish Automatic Faucets
Wall Mounted Automatic Faucets
Automatic Faucets For Vessel Sinks
Industry Standard Faucets
Electronic Soap Dispensers
Flush Valves
Replacement Parts
Reviews and Testimonials
ElectronicFaucets Blog
Magazine Review
Installation Manuals and Spec sheets PDF
Client List
contact us
site map
view cart
Copyright ·2008 ElectronicFaucets.com All Rights Reserved.


text:
BU Abroad 101
- Starts:
- 3:00 pm on Wednesday, April 3, 2013
- Location:
- BU Study Abroad, 888 Commonwealth Avenue (Rear Entrance, behind Panera Bread), 2nd Floor, Room #240
- http://www.bu.edu/abroad/101/
Thinking about studying abroad? Don't know where to start? Let us help! Attend a BU Abroad 101 session to learn how to: choose the program that is the best fit, begin the application process, finance your study abroad experience and plan your academics abroad.


text:
Lesson Plans: Complete lesson plans utilizing complementary Project WET activities and resources—includes Flipped Lessons!
Educator Publications: Project WET's award-winning Curriculum and Activity Guide 2.0, and other Educator Guides full of activities about watersheds, water quality, floods and water conservation, plus maps, posters and more.
Books for Students: There are over 40 full-color activity booklets about a range of water-related topics in the Kids in Discovery series plus children's story books—great classroom resources!
Make a Splash Water Festivals: Make a Splash festivals are a fun way to pack in learning about water. Learn how to host a Make a Splash festival at your school or find a festival near you!
Support Project WET in the Classroom: Donate a Water and Sustainability Kit to your favorite teacher.
Workshops / Trainings: Find out who offers Project WET workshops near you.
View Map
October 21, 2020 - 6:30pm
Project WET Workshop:
Maps and Posters: Looking to decorate your classroom with fun, eye-catching educational artwork? Resources like Project WET's Water Cycle poster or watershed maps are just what you need!
DiscoverWater.org: A free classroom tool to teach kids about water. Interactive activities, quizzes and activities for students, and Science Notebooking pages, printables and resources for teachers. Correlated to Common Core standards.
Water Cycle Game: Play The Blue Traveler and learn how water travels around, above and below the surface of our planet through this fun game!
Online Training: Get trained in Guide 2.0 via a self-paced, learner-driven online course, when an in-person workshop is not available in your area.
Water Education Portal: Share ideas, lesson plans and join discussions about activities and water related topics. Project WET national and state standard correlations are available here.
Webinars: Online learning events about a range of water related topics. Attend a live event or view an archived webinar.
Keep Your Water Clean: Take action in your community with a water quality pet waste pick-up campaign. Use Project WET's Water Quality and dog waste bags.


text:
kamran ullah paracha tarnabi Comments
No recent activity found.
kamran ullah paracha tarnabi's Posts
No recent activity found.
|7:47am Aug 27, 2019
|Anonymous shared Malaria - Interactive resource to explore data on the use of insecticide-treated nets
|10:43am Jun 5, 2019
|Anonymous shared Malaria SBCC Evidence Database
|8:56am Sep 14, 2020
|Anonymous shared What Does the Research Suggest Is Best Practice in Pedagogy for Remote Teaching?
|12:54pm Jul 2, 2020
|Anonymous shared Tackling COVID-19's Hidden Crisis: Violence Against Children
|6:42am Aug 27, 2019
|Anonymous shared New interactive resource to explore data on the use of insecticide-treated nets
|3:38am Jan 7, 2019
|Anonymous shared Current Challenges and Proposed Solutions to the Effective Implementation of the RTS, S/AS01 Malaria Vaccine Program in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review
|10:31am Aug 18, 2020
|Anonymous shared Opportunities: Ethical considerations (UNICEF); Community Engagement (WHO)
|5:16am Jul 2, 2020
|Anonymous shared Ending Violence against Children and COVID-19: Policy Brief
|11:23am Jul 2, 2019
|Anonymous shared Improving Development Outcomes Through Social and Behavior Change Communication: Applying a Governance Lens
|3:17am Dec 4, 2018
|Anonymous shared Africa CDC issues guidance to Member States to improve detection of outbreaks and other public health threats
|10:14am Aug 6, 2020
|Anonymous shared Using Environmental Nudges to Improve Handwashing with Soap among School Children
|10:22am Sep 25, 2020
|Anonymous shared Structural Coercion in the Context of Community Engagement in Global Health Research Conducted in a Low Resource Setting in Africa
|8:50am Jun 5, 2019
|Anonymous shared Malaria Social And Behavior Change Communication Evidence Literature Review
|5:59am Sep 23, 2020
|Anonymous shared Evaluating Approaches to Designing Effective Co-Created Hand-Hygiene Interventions for Children in India, Sierra Leone and the UK
|1:15pm Jul 20, 2020
|Anonymous shared Formative Research: Understanding Fatherhood in South Africa


text:
What are your favourite clothes?
DukeRadioOwl replied on Greece Permalink
My favorite clothes are trousers
IcyMetal9 replied on France Permalink
my favorite clothes is a dress
DJDinosaurViolet replied on Singapore Permalink
my favourite is jeans.
CaptainGoldSwan replied on Ukraine Permalink
My favourite clothes are sandals and dresses.
SilverPopChef replied on Russia Permalink
My favourite clothes is shorts!!!
LadyZooAngel replied on Kazakhstan Permalink
i like sandals .
YellowHorseWow replied on Ecuador Permalink
i like this game
FriendlyForestFly replied on India Permalink
I am the first one to play this GAME !!!!!!!


text: Caterpillar OEM Solutions has a proven, high-performance and durable platform for specialty machine solutions. Ranging from standard to long wheel base rear frames, Cat® articulated truck bare chassis support a wide variety of applications. Through direct interaction with Caterpillar, Cat dealers and OEMs are prepared to work with customers worldwide to provide a total machine solution.


text:
We all have special events, traditions and even "chores" we need to do to get ready? What's your "to-do" list look like?
Well, I am in really good shape!
- Cards are done and mailed
- House is decorated inside and out
- Gifts are all purchased and wrapped
- Packages are mailed to family far away
- Fruitcake is baked
- Menus are planned
Still to be done:
- Need to buy a few more stocking stuffers
- Food shopping and cooking
- Cookie baking
- More movies to watch and songs to hear!


text:
Does the NFL have a drinking problem?
- Jerry Brown's death marks the third time since 1998 that an NFL player killed another person because of suspected DUI.
IRVING, Texas — Since January 2000, NFL players have been arrested at least 624 times on various charges, including 42 times this year, according to data compiled by USA TODAY Sports.
Of those 624 arrests, 177 (28%) were arrested because they were suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Despite the league's various attempts to stop the problem, it remains the single-biggest criminal issue in the NFL.
Nothing else comes close. Nothing else has been more deadly.
Dallas Cowboys linebacker Jerry Brown became the latest victim early Saturday when police say teammate Josh Brent drove drunk, hit a curb and flipped his car, killing Brown, who was riding with him.
"We've all done it (driven intoxicated)," San Diego Chargers linebacker Takeo Spikes said Sunday. "But it's to a point now where maybe you were ignorant and didn't know any better or felt you were invincible. We've had enough of death to show us this is what you do not do."
In some kind of cosmic alignment, the accident Saturday happened on the same road — about 1½ miles away — from the national headquarters of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, an NFL partner in the fight against DUIs.
"I've been in those circumstances where I drove where I was under the influence," Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker Larry Foote said. "We have to get a hold of the alcohol. Guys won't want to hear that. But that's the problem. Too much alcohol, getting drunk, you're out of control"
Brown's death marked the third time since 1998 that an NFL player killed another person because of suspected DUI. Brent's arrest also marked the 18th time this year that an NFL player has been arrested on suspicion of DUI — up from seven in 2011 and not far behind the worst NFL DUI years in recent history: 20 in 2006 and 19 in 2009. On average, NFL players are arrested for DUI about 13-14 times a year.
The NFL has noted various efforts to stem the problem, including discipline, education and even chauffeur services available to players through the players union. All they have to do is call for a ride.
"The program is there and I don't know why every player in the league wouldn't use it," Kansas City Chiefs defensive end Shaun Smith said. "I've used it before when I've been out, and I'm sure I'll use it again. Personally, I'm not going to put myself or anyone else at risk by driving drunk. You just wish everyone felt that way."
The numbers persist in part because it's a league full of rambunctious, wealthy young men who love to party almost as much as they love to drive fancy cars. NFL players fall into the most at-risk demographic for drinking and driving, with males ages 21-34 responsible for 42% of all fatal DUI crashes.
And yet the NFL is better behaved compared to the general population. Out of about 2,000 NFL players per season, including team practice squads, 14 DUI arrests make for a rate of 0.7%.
By contrast, males ages 20-24 and 25-29 each have a DUI rate of double that, at 1.6% and 1.4%, respectively, according to FBI statistics for last year.
The league still recognizes it has a problem on its hands, especially as it tries to repair its image as it relates to crime and player safety. Just one week earlier, Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher shot and killed his girlfriend, then himself. The night before the murder-suicide, Belcher was found asleep in his car outside the residence of another female friend. The police suspected he had been drinking and warned him about driving home. He went inside, avoiding a DUI before a different tragedy unfolded the next morning at his house.
One week later, another player is dead from an all-too-familiar cause. In 1998, St. Louis Rams defensive end Leonard Little killed another motorist while driving drunk. In 2009, Cleveland Browns receiver Donte Stallworth drove drunk and killed a pedestrian.
In 2003, Cowboys cornerback Dwayne Goodrich struck three men with his BMW. Two died. Goodrich pleaded guilty to negligent criminal homicide and wasn't released from custody until last year. He said he had a couple of drinks earlier that night, but he was not found guilty of DUI.
In the case of Brent, 24, this marks his second DUI arrest after being sentenced to probation for a 2009 DUI arrest when he was in college at Illinois.
Brett Bivans, a senior vice president at the International Center for Alcohol Policies, said rigorous enforcement is needed to prevent this. He recommends ignition interlock devices that are put on a car's dashboard to measure blood-alcohol concentration from the driver's breath. If it measures too much, the car won't start.
"We are considering that," Cowboys consultant Calvin Hill told USA TODAY Sports.
If players insist on partying and won't take a taxi afterward, it might be the only thing that'll work.
Ultimately the problem is an issue of" individual responsibility," MADD CEO Debbie Weir said.
Contributing: Jarrett Bell in Cincinnati, Jim Corbett in Pittsburgh, John Perrotto in Cleveland.


text:
June 17, 2002 - Peace Corps Press Release: Peace Corps Closing Programs in the Baltic States
Peace Corps Online
Peace Corps News
Peace Corps Headlines - 2002
06 June 2002 Peace Corps Headlines
: June 17, 2002 - Peace Corps Press Release: Peace Corps Closing Programs in the Baltic States
Admin1 (admin)
Tuesday, June 18, 2002 - 12:43 pm
Edit Post
Peace Corps Closing Programs in the Baltic States
Read and comment on this Press Release from the Peace Corps on the closing ceremonies for the programs in Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania at:
Ceremonies to Mark Peace Corps' Closing of Programs in the Baltic States
This link was active on the date it was posted. PCOL is not responsible for broken links which may have changed.
Ceremonies to Mark Peace Corps' Closing of Programs in the Baltic States
Washington, D.C., June 17, 2002—After ten years of partnership with the people of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the Peace Corps will commemorate the programs' closures with ceremonies this week.
"The closure of these programs has been planned for several years, reflecting each country's impressive success during the transition from Communist rule to democratic government and open economies," said Gaddi Vasquez, Director of the Peace Corps.
To celebrate the occasion, each country will have a ceremonial closing of post: Latvia's ceremony will occur June 19, Estonia's takes place June 20 and Lithuania will hold its ceremony June 21. About 200 returned volunteers, current volunters and their co-workers and former staff are expected to participate in these ceremonies.
Prime Minister Siim Kallas of Estonia and Prime Minister Aldris Berzins of Latvia will be the key note speakers at their respective ceremonies. Minister of Education Monkevicius will represent the government of Lithuania. Judy Van Rest, Regional Director for Europe, Mediterranean, and Asia, will represent the Peace Corps at each of these ceremonies.
The programs in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were started in 1992, shortly after formal independence from the Soviet Union was completed. These were the first of the former Soviet Republics to invite Peace Corps volunteers to be involved in their transition. A total of 555 people served as volunteers in the three countries: 198 in Latvia, 194 in Lithuania, and 163 in Estonia. The volunteers worked as TEFL teachers and as advisors to small enterprise development centers and in non-governmental organizations.
During the past 41 years, 165,000 Americans have served in the Peace Corps.
Click on a link below for more stories on PCOL
Some postings on Peace Corps Online are provided to the individual members of this group without permission of the copyright owner for the non-profit purposes of criticism, comment, education, scholarship, and research under the "Fair Use" provisions of U.S. Government copyright laws and they may not be distributed further without permission of the copyright owner. Peace Corps Online does not vouch for the accuracy of the content of the postings, which is the sole responsibility of the copyright holder.
This story has been posted in the following forums:
: Headlines; Peace Corps - Overseas Programs; COS - Lativa; COS - Lithuania; COS - Estonia
Add a Message
This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.