| Category | Assignment | Subject | Education |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Tunku Abdul Rahman University Of Management And Technology (TAR UMT) | Module Title | BBBD3123 ESG & Sustainability |
| Word Count | 1000-1500 Words |
|---|---|
| Assessment Type | written report |
| Assessment Title | INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT : ANALYZING MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENT GRANTS FOR ESG INITIATIVES |
INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT : ANALYZING MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENT GRANTS FOR ESG INITIATIVES
The objective of this assignment is to conduct an in-depth analysis of one grant from the provided list of Malaysian government grants aimed at promoting ESG and sustainability initiatives among SMEs.
1. Grant Selection
Select one grant from Image 1.0 below that focuses on ESG and sustainability. Ensure that your selection is informed and relevant to your interests or field of study. Image 1.0 – List of Local Funding
2. Grant Description
Illustrate the chosen grant, including its name, purpose, and what it specifically funds or supports.
3. Background Of The Grant
Investigate the background of the grant by outlining why the grant was established, its historical context, and the need it aims to address within the sustainability sector.
4. Target Beneficiaries
Explain who the grant is targeting and the types of businesses or projects that are intended to benefit from the grant.
5. Eligibility And Application Process
Identify the eligibility criteria required for applicants to qualify for the grant and the application process (in flow chart format), including necessary documentation, deadlines, and any assessment criteria used to award the grant.
6. Student’s Opinion
Analyse the potential impact of the grant on promoting ESG and sustainability initiatives and relate your own opinion regarding the effectiveness of the grant, including its strengths and potential areas for improvement.
7. References And Citations
All sources used for researching the grant must be cited using a consistent citation style. Provide the origin of the information, including any official government pages, reports, or publications that detail the grant. Use of at least THREE (3) different sources, including at least one government source or official publication related to the grant.
A written report of 1000-1500 words covering all the sections listed above.
a. Plagiarism occurs when a person copies or reproduces another person’s words and ideas and presents them as his or her own without proper acknowledgment. Thus, plagiarism can take the form of reproduction without acknowledgment from published or unpublished works of others including materials downloaded from computer files and the Internet.
b. Students’ work submitted for assessment is accepted on the understanding that it is the student’s effort without falsification of any kind. Cheating or plagiarism will not be tolerated. Any student found to plagiarise or cheat in any part of their assignment will cause their assignment to be rejected and further be subject to appropriate punishment.
c. Students must submit a digital copy of their assignment to the Turnitin systemfor plagiarism assessment. If the assignment draft exhibits a plagiarism rate exceeding 24%, students are obligated to make the necessary revisions.
a. The written assignment must be submitted on Week 11 to your tutor. Failure to comply with the deadline would cause the assignment to be rejected.
b. Turnitin submission will be available on Week 10.
c. Marked assignments will be returned by Week 14.
d. Except for extenuating circumstances, students who FAIL TO SUBMIT their coursework by the stipulated deadline shall be subject to the late submission penalty.
(a) Late 1 to 3 days after the deadline of submission: minus 10 marks
(b) Late 4 to 7 days after the deadline of submission: minus 20 marks
(c) Late more than 7 days after the deadline of submission: 0 marks
APPENDIX 3 – INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT ASSESSMENT RUBRIC
| No. | Criteria | Excellent | Good | Average | Poor | Marks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Description and Background (20 marks) | Provides a comprehensive description and in-depth background of the grant with exceptional clarity. (16-20 marks) | Provides a clear description and background with minor gaps in detail. (11-15 marks) | Provides a satisfactory description and background with some relevant information. (6-10 marks) | Provides a vague or incomplete description and background of the grant. (0-5 marks) | |
| 2 | Target Beneficiaries (20 marks) | Precisely identifies and thoroughly describes the target beneficiaries of the grant. (16-20 marks) | Identifies and describes the target beneficiaries with minor inaccuracies. (11-15 marks) | Generally identifies and describes the target beneficiaries with some gaps. (6-10 marks) | Fails to accurately identify or describe the target beneficiaries. (0-5 marks) | |
| 3 | Eligibility and Application (20 marks) | Detailed analysis of eligibility criteria and a comprehensive outline of the application process with outstanding clarity. (16-20 marks) | Clear analysis of eligibility criteria and a solid outline of the application process with slight omissions. (11-15 marks) | Adequate coverage of eligibility and application process with noticeable gaps. (6-10 marks) | Poor or incorrect details on eligibility and application process. (0-5 marks) | |
| 4 | Critical Analysis and Opinion (20 marks) | Insightful and well-supported analysis and opinion of the grant’s potential impact with strong reasoning. (16-20 marks) | Good analysis and opinion with some supportive reasoning and evidence. (11-15 marks) | Basic analysis and opinion with generalized reasoning and minimal evidence. (6-10 marks) | Little to no critical analysis or opinion, or it is unsupported or irrelevant. (0-5 marks) | |
| 5 | References and Citations (10 marks) | Uses a diverse range of relevant sources effectively, with all citations in the correct format. (9-10 marks) | Uses a good range of relevant sources with minor citation errors. (7-8 marks) | Uses an adequate range of sources with some citation errors. (5-6 marks) | Uses insufficient or irrelevant sources with numerous citation errors. (0-4 marks) | |
| 6 | Writing Quality (10 marks) | The report is exceptionally well-written, organized, and free of errors. (9-10 marks) | The report is well-written with good organization and few errors. (7-8 marks) | The report has a satisfactory structure and writing, with some errors. (5-6 marks) | The report is poorly written, disorganized, and filled with errors. (0-4 marks) |
Stuck BBBD3123 Assignment? Deadlines Are Near?
Hire Assignment Helper Now!If you are struggling with your BBBD3123 ESG & Sustainability Report Assignment? Be stress-free! AI-free Malaysia Assignment Helper is here for you. We assure you that our report-writing service will make you productive and help you achieve high grades in your academic year. A free list of assignment samples written by PhD experts is also provided here that can help you boost your study power and check the quality of the research paper. So contact us today and get your high-quality assignment!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
