quantitative bus final

This is the Critical Assignment. 

See the attached PDF file (Due: Day 4 by 11:59pm)

Assignment Possible Points: 200 

Make sure your case study report includes the following structures: (1) Introduction, (2) Data Presentation, (3) Model Specification, (4) Interpretation of Results, (5) Integration of Biblical Principle, and (6) Policy Recommendations & Conclusion.

Introduction – Paper must define the problem scope and outline the objectives of the analysis in a clear, concise, and professional manner (1 page)

Data Presentation: Paper must present a summary of data in an accurate and professional manner, and provide accurate interpretation of the data. The calculation of cost for nuts in three mixes should be provided accurately. (1 page)

Model Specification: Paper must specify the appropriate linear programming model in an accurate and professional manner. Provide details & accurate equations for objective functions, constraints and decision variables and their descriptions.(3 pages)

Interpretation of Results: Paper must provide a clear, concise, consistent and accurate summary of results from linear programming models. The results should be based on answer reports, and sensitivity reports (shadow price, allowable increase & allowable decrease, etc). The interpretations must be understandable to the general public.  (2 pages)

Policy Recommendations & Conclusions: Paper must address policy recommendations and/or   implications in the business world in a professional manner. In other words, students must provide a clear recommendation and plan of action that CJ Food, Inc. must take in their future decision making process, based on the results from a linear programming model(s). (2 pages)

Integration of Biblical Principle: Paper must identify and integrate biblical principles into the decision making process in an appropriate and insightful manner (1 page)

Also, refer to the following rubric for this assignment

	Exemplary	Accomplished	Developing	Beginning
Dimension 1: Introduction CLO – 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 SLO – 9.1, 9.3. 1.3	Points Range:18 (9%) - 20 (10%) Paper defines the problem scope and outlines the objectives of the analysis in a clear, concise, and professional manner	Points Range:16 (8%) - 17 (8.5%) Paper defines the problem, scope and outlines the objectives of the analysis mostly in clear, concise, and professional manner	Points Range:14 (7%) - 15 (7.5%) Paper defines the problem and scope, but fails to outline the objectives of the analysis	Points Range:0 (0%) - 13 (6.5%) Paper does not define the problem, scope and outline the objectives of the analysis
Dimension 2: Data Presentation CLO – 1.1 SLO -1.1, 9.1	Points Range:27 (13.5%) - 30 (15%) Paper presents summary of data in an accurate and professional manner, and provides accurate interpretation of the data	Points Range:24 (12%) - 26 (13%) Paper presents summary of data mostly in an accurate and professional manner, and provides accurate interpretation of the data with minor errors	Points Range:21 (10.5%) - 23 (11.5%) Paper presents summary of data in an acceptable manner, but interpretation of the data contains major errors	Points Range:0 (0%) - 20 (10%) Paper does not present summary of data
Dimension 3: Model Specification CLO – 1.1, 2.1 SLO -1.5, 9.2, 9.3	Points Range:36 (18%) - 40 (20%) Paper specifies appropriate statistical or/and linear programming model in an accurate and professional manner and provides accurate equations and a detailed description of decision variables	Points Range:32 (16%) - 35 (17.5%) Paper specifies appropriate statistical or/and linear programming model mostly in an accurate and professional manner and provides accurate equations and a detailed description of decision variables.	Points Range:28 (14%) - 31 (15.5%) Paper specifies appropriate statistical or/and linear programming model in an acceptable manner, and provides a detailed description of decision variables. However, paper provides erroneous equations	Points Range:0 (0%) - 27 (13.5%) Paper either does not specify statistical or/and linear programming model or specifies model in an unacceptable manner. No equation and description of decision variables were provided
Dimension 4: Interpretation of Results CLO -1.2, 2.2, 2.3 SLO -1.1, 1.2, 9.2, 9.3	Points Range:36 (18%) - 40 (20%) Paper provides a clear, concise, consistent and accurate summary of results from statistical or linear programming models and uses words that could be understandable to the general public	Points Range:32 (16%) - 35 (17.5%) Paper provides a fairly clear, concise, consistent and accurate summary of results from statistical or linear programming models with minor errors, and uses words that could be understandable to the general public	Points Range:28 (14%) - 31 (15.5%) Paper provides summary of results from statistical or linear programming models, but with significant number of errors, and interpretations are not understandable to the general public	Points Range:0 (0%) - 27 (13.5%) Paper does not provide summary of results from statistical or linear programming models
Dimension 5: Integration of Biblical Principle CLO – 2.3 SLO -10.1, 10.2	Points Range:18 (9%) - 20 (10%) Paper identifies and integrates biblical principles into the decision making process in an appropriate and insightful manner	Points Range:16 (8%) - 17 (8.5%) Paper identifies and integrates biblical principles into the decision making process mostly in an appropriate and insightful manner	Points Range:14 (7%) - 15 (7.5%) Paper identifies and integrates biblical principles into the decision making process mostly in an appropriate and insightful manner	Points Range:0 (0%) - 13 (6.5%) Paper does not identify and integrate biblical principles into the decision making process
Dimension 6: Policy recommendations & Conclusion CLO - 1.1, 2.2, 2.3 SLO -1.1, 1.2, 9.2, 9.3, 11.1,11.2	Points Range:27 (13.5%) - 30 (15%) Paper addresses policy recommendations/implications in a business world in a professional manner, and provides clear and concise conclusions	Points Range:24 (12%) - 26 (13%) Paper addresses policy recommendations/implications in a business world in a fairly professional manner, and provides clear and concise conclusions	Points Range:21 (10.5%) - 23 (11.5%) Paper addresses policy recommendations/implications in a business world, but they are not relevant to the results. Conclusions are inconsistent and unclear.	Points Range:0 (0%) - 20 (10%) Paper does not address policy recommendations/implications and provide any conclusions.
Dimension 7: Quality of Writing CLO – 1.2, 2.2, 2.3 SLO – 1.1, 1.2, 1.5	Points Range:18 (9%) - 20 (10%) Paper demonstrates smooth transitions between sentences and paragraphs with no typos and grammatical errors, and satisfies APA standards	Points Range:16 (8%) - 17 (8.5%) Paper demonstrates fairly smooth transitions between sentences and paragraphs with some typos and grammatical errors, and satisfies APA standards	Points Range:14 (7%) - 15 (7.5%) Paper demonstrates shaky transitions between sentences and paragraphs with major typos and grammatical errors, and satisfies APA standards	Points Range:0 (0%) - 13 (6.5%) Transitions between sentences and paragraph are very shaky, and paper is extremely difficult for a reader to understand with multiple typos and grammatical errors. APA standards were not met