Case Study: National Infrastructure Protection Plan

Points: 25

Case Study

Criteria

Unacceptable Below 70% F

Fair 70-79% C

Proficient 80-89% B

Exemplary 90-100% A

1. Analyze authorities, roles, and responsibilities Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed authorities, roles, and responsibilities

Partially analyzed authorities, roles, and responsibilities

Satisfactorily analyzed authorities, roles, and responsibilities

Thoroughly analyzed authorities, roles, and responsibilities

2. Analyze how to manage risk Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed how to manage risk

Partially analyzed how to manage risk

Satisfactorily analyzed how to manage risk

Thoroughly analyzed how to manage risk

3. Determine methods for organizing and partnering for CIKR Protection Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely determined methods for organizing and partnering for CIKR Protection

Partially determined methods for organizing and partnering for CIKR Protection

Satisfactorily determined methods for organizing and partnering for CIKR Protection

Thoroughly determined methods for organizing and partnering for CIKR Protection

4. Ensure an Effective, Efficient Program Over the Long Term Weight: 25%

Did not submit or incompletely ensured an Effective, Efficient Program Over the Long Term

Partially ensured an Effective, Efficient Program Over the Long Term

Satisfactorily ensured an Effective, Efficient Program Over the Long Term

Thoroughly ensured an Effective, Efficient Program Over the Long Term

5. 3 references Weight: 5%

No references provided

Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices.

Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.

Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.

6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10%

More than 6 errors present

5-6 errors present

3-4 errors present

0-2 errors present