You work in the accounting department of an investment management firm and a portfolio manager has asked for your advice on estimating the fair values of the following asset classes
- Common Stocks
- Real Estate
4.Timber Investments which receive cash flow from the sales of timber
5.Private Equity Funds
- liquid asset-backed securities
Discuss what advice you would provide the portfolio manager on estimating the fair values of each of the above asset classes including how you would characterize the inputs you identify as Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 assets. (Modified from Wahlen et al. 9th edition).
response needs to be (150 – 200 words).
2nd part (continuation of first part)…M3D2
After reading through your discussion the portfolio manager emails you the following note:
“Thanks for your input regarding estimating the value of the various asset classes. I have been examining the goodwill balance of one of the companies in my value index portfolio and I noticed that as the creditworthiness of the company improved the earnings of the company decreased and asset values decreased due to fair value accounting and changes in goodwill. I don’t understand how this would happen”. Write a response to the portfolio manager discussing the relationship between fair value accounting and changes in goodwill and asset values and corporate earnings.
econd, several stakeholders identified the requirement for victim consent for an informal adjustment as a barrier to diversion at the point of intake. While it is certainly important to respect a victim’s right to be heard regarding a potential diversion decision, stakeholders expressed concern that some intake officers are not as invested in creating diversion opportunities for young people and are not skilled at conveying the documented benefits of diversion for the youth, the victim, and the broader community from a public safety perspective. DJS has acknowledged these barriers and is currently working to remedy them in several ways. For example, DJS is in the process of developing a new clear, objective diversion policy and a quality assurance process for diversion decisions. DJS is also exploring better training for intake staff and the addition of a new family and peer support specialist for Baltimore City. Among other duties, this staff person would be responsible for outreach to victims in support of diversion efforts. Third, many stakeholders suggested that intake officers may not always consider whether a young person is already receiving existing services or supports that could be adjusted or enhanced in lieu of informal adjustment or formal processing. Stakeholders noted that many youth are often involved with services through multiple public systems and providers and that layering more on top of those services may actually impair the ability of those supports to achieve their intended effect. Many individuals suggested that more rigorous exploration of a young person’s current services and supports would help support increased use of diversion at intake. Trends in DJS intake data support the hypothesis that there may be significant variability in diversion practices at DJS intake, both within Baltimore City and between Baltimore City and the rest of the state. As mentioned above, DJS Intake received 1,783 referrals in Baltimore City in FY 2018. As shown in Figure 1, 16% of these cases were resolved at intake, 6% were “informaled” (placed on pre-court or informal supervision), while 78% of cases were “formaled” (authorized for a formal petitio>GET ANSWER