Background: Evaluate relevant research for practice literature – Synthesize the findings from research related to the practice problem and evidence-based practice solutions as identified in the integrative review of the literature. Studies need not be replications of previous studies, but must address the same practice problem and evidence-based practice solutions. Must be in APA format, (6th ed.) and include reference listing.
3. Project Goal (s)/Objectives: Goal(s) should be overarching with specific objectives for each goal. The objectives should be stated in feasible & measureable terms (SMART)
Government Gazett (2006). Forceful conduct at home Bill, 2006. Recouped July 22, 2009 from http://www.kubatana.net/docs/legisl/dom_viol_bill_060630.pdf Help control (2008). Forceful conduct at home and Abuse: Help, Treatment, Intervention, and Prevention Retrieved July 24, 2009 from http://www.alumbo.com/article/32544-The-Long-Arm-Of-Domestic-Violence.html Michigan Prosecuting Attorney Associations (2008). Loss Rights. Recuperated July 20, 2009 from http://www.michiganprosecutor.org/Victim.htm Michigan State Police (2009). Injurious conduct at home Awareness. Recuperated July 20, 2009 from http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1589_1711_4577 - ,00.html Women Web (2009). Injurious conduct at home, The Effect of Abuse. Recuperated July 25, 2009 from http://www.womensweb.ca/ruthlessness/dv/effects.php Women Web (2009). Injurious conduct at home, Getting Help. Recuperated July 25, 2009 from http://www.womensweb.ca/ruthlessness/dv/help.php.  EWHC 1190 (Admin), 19 May 2017 Sir Wyn Williams The High Court has held that a neighborhood specialist had not been qualified for return to or pull back their choice that the petitioner was qualified for vagrancy help under Pt 7, Housing Act 1996. The specialist had, in substance, settled on a ultimate conclusion with regards to the obligation owed to the petitioner, despite the way that they had made a neighborhood association referral. The confirmation did not build up that a "basic slip-up of reality" had been made which would have qualified them for return to that choice and, besides, the expert had neglected to give motivations to legitimize doing as such. Alice Richardson of Arden Chambers showed up for the inquirer. Presentation The inquirer, a 31-year-old Romanian national, moved to the UK for work in October 2013. In September 2015, while on vacation in Romania, he was associated with a genuine auto crash which left him wheelchair-bound and unfit to work. In August 2016, he connected as destitute to Waltham Forest LBC who concluded that he was not qualified for help under s.185, Housing Act 1996. In December 2016, the petitioner made a new application to the litigant specialist. On January 30, 2017, the litigant acknowledged that the inquirer was destitute, qualified for help, in need require and not purposefully destitute but rather found that he didn't have a nearby association with its region yet had a neighborhood association with Waltham Forest. The respondent alluded the inquirer's application to Waltham Forest LBC, as per s.198, 1996 Act. On February 8, 2017, the respondent prompted the inquirer that Waltham Forest LBC had declined to acknowledge the referral on the premise that he was not qualified for help. The respondent likewise exhorted him that the referral had been pulled back. On February 10, 2017, the petitioner was issued with a new s.184 choice letter advising him that he was not qualified for vagrancy help. The Claim The petitioner looked for legal audit on three grounds. (1) The disavowal of the choice of January 30, 2017, was ultra vires. The litigant had finished its enquiries and settled on an official choice which was great to him. The litigant was not qualified for return to that choice. Specifically, the respondent's dependence on Porteous v West Dorset DC  HLR 30, CA, was mixed up on the grounds that the litigant was not able recognize a reality about which it had been mixed up. (2) The litigant had neglected to give motivations to the renouncement. (3) The litigant was in rupture of s.200(1) in neglecting to secure settlement pending the result of the referral. The claim was recorded as a facilitated "moved up" authorization and substantive hearing. The litigant restricted authorization, depending on R v Brent LBC ex p Sadiq (2001) 33 HLR 47, QB, on the premise that the petitioner had an elective cure by method for statutory audit and region court request under ss.202-204. In connection to ground 1, the respondent contended that it had not settled on an official choice on the grounds that there had been a neighborhood association referral and in this manner, applying Crawley BC v B (2000) 32 HLR 636, CA, it was qualified for return to the choice. In the option, the respondent had committed a basic error of reality and, applying Porteous, it had been qualified for pull back the choice. The Decision The judge held that the court holds a lingering circumspection to engage a case for legal audit even where elective cures are accessible. The interests of equity for the situation and the requirement for productive transfer of lawful question directed firmly toward the conclusion that authorization ought to be conceded. Crawley BC v B gives wide help to the suggestion that a neighborhood expert is qualified for return to a choice which has been conveyed to a candidate for lodging help with conditions where either (an) it has not finished its enquiries under s.184 of the Act, or (b) it has settled on no official conclusion with regards to the idea of the obligation it owes to a candidate. Nonetheless, for this situation plainly the respondent had finished its enquiries and that the litigant had settled on a choice as to its obligation under the Act. As the High Court held in R v Southwark LBC ex p Dagou (1996) 28 HLR 72, QB, a neighborhood association referral was basically "an executional execution of a full lodging obligation" and the respondent had, in substance, settled on a ultimate conclusion with regards to the obligation owed. The confirmation did not set up an essential misstep of certainty with respect to the respondent which had driven it to its choice of January 30, 2017. Decency requested that the litigant was under an obligation to give motivations to legitimize its view that it was qualified for settle on the choice conveyed in the letter of February 10, 2017, and it had neglected to do as such. The Defendant had owed the obligation under s.200(1) of the Act from January 30, 2017, and kept on owing that obligation until the point when determination of the referral issue. MGMT-4001-Section 1 Canadian Tire Corporation, Limited Strategic Analysis Organization Overview Canadian Tire Corporation, Limited is a retail firm in Canada that offers an extensive variety of items including home items, games and relaxation extras, and car items. Some of the stores keep running by the organization likewise offer nourishment items and toys. The primary retail activities keep running by the organization include: Canadian Tire, which is the center business and runs vehicle repair carports in all stores; at that point there is the Canadian Tire Petroleum; PartSource, which has some expertise in the offer of extras and extra parts for vehicles a garments retailer known as Mark's; FGL Sports, then again, runs stores that retail sportswear and general donning merchandise. The organization's central command are in Toronto, Ontario. (wikipedia.org, 2018) The organization runs various divisions the greatest being the Canadian Tire Retail that takes part in the offer of an extensive variety of stock including vehicle parts and frill, housewares, and brandishing merchandise. The organization likewise runs an online store that was propelled in 2000. Through the online stage, clients can arrange their favored products online after which they are conveyed to them. PatSource is another division of the organization that has some expertise in the retail of car parts in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. The organization additionally runs a money related administrations division that works the Canadian Tire Bank. Different divisions incorporate Canadian Tire Petroleum, Mark's, FGL Sports Ltd, and Nelly Hansen (wikipedia.org, 2018) Canadian Tire Corporation Mission and Vision The organization's present mission is to guarantee clients, workers and investors' lives are enhanced by the administrations offered by advancing dynamic lives and solid living through its games items retail business, and the offering of significant worth in all items including clothing, vehicle parts, and monetary administrations. The organization's vision is to keep up advancement and development in the entirety of its organizations by accomplishing incredible outcomes and impacting individuals in numerous positive ways every day (Diana's E-Portfolio, 2014). Canadian Tire Strategic Objectives 1. Achievement of feasible development through the reinforcing of the organization's brands and the improvement of the client encounter by extending internet business and upgrade of the brilliant store arrange (CTC, 2018) 2. Increase operational productivity in center business by concentrating on the procedures of stock acquirement, and the streamlining of item arrangement in 2018 (CTC, 2018). Investigation of the Mission, Vision, and Strategic Objectives From the qualities of a decent statement of purpose, unmistakably a statement of purpose should say something about the sort of items and administrations offered and the kinds of clients focused on. This can be unmistakably observed from Canadian Tire's statement of purpose as it characterizes the items and administrations advertised. By specifying items and administrations, there is a circuitous reference to the clients focused as games frill would target individuals inspired by sports, auto parts would target individuals owning vehicles, and money related administrations would center around individuals in the corporate area who are in all likelihood intrigued by issues to do with fund and access to credit. The vision, then again, ought to uncover what the organization sees itself in future. The vision explanation exhibited fulfills this foundation in that it is centered around something worth being thankful for that the organization wishes to convey into what's to come. That is advancement. Shrewd Analysis of the Strategic Objectives Particular: Both key goals are particular in that they unmistakably recognize precisely what ought to be centered around in driving the organization's aggressiveness. For instance, the main target focuses to internet business, and shrewd store organizes as courses through which client experience can be improved. Quantifiable: While the second target is quantifiable the first does not give a reasonable technique by which brands can be reinforced consequently it isn't quantifiable. >GET ANSWER