5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct. 5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

8.0 %Paragraph Development and Transitions Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed. Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident. Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other. A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose. There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.

7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

5.0 %SWOT Analysis A SWOT analysis is not presented. A SWOT analysis is presented, but is largely incomplete. A SWOT analysis is presented, but the details of the SWOT are not realistic, or are not relevant to the proposal presented. A SWOT analysis is presented, the details of the SWOT are relevant to the proposal presented. Some details of the analysis are not realistic for the proposal. A SWOT analysis is presented. The analysis is insightful, and the details of the SWOT are relevant and realistic for the proposal.

5.0 %Recommend Sample Program Budget A sample program budget is not presented. A sample program budget is presented, but the budget is largely incomplete. A sample program budget is presented, but the budget is not realistic to the proposal presented. A sample program budget is presented, the budget is realistic to the proposal presented but lacks some minor details to fully implement. A sample program budget is presented, the budget is realistic to the proposal presented and contains details to support full implementation.

20.0 %Propose Modifier, New Prevention or Intervention Program No modifier, new prevention or intervention program is suggested. Reference is made to a modifier, new prevention or intervention program. No evidence or details are offered for support. A modifier, new prevention or intervention program is suggested. Some evidence is provided for support, but suggestion lacks support to demonstrate relevance to local public health issue presented. A modifier, new prevention or intervention program is suggested. Evidence is provided that generally demonstrates support and relevance to local public health issue presented. A modifier, new prevention or intervention program is suggested. Suggestion is applicable to the public health issue and community. Strong evidence is provided for support.

20.0 %Identify Current Environmental Risk Assessment Methods Applicable to Public Health Issues Current environmental risk methods applicable to public health issues are not identified. Some environmental risk methods are referenced; the environmental risk methods are not current, or are not applicable to public health issues. General environmental risk methods applicable to public health issues are identified; most environmental risk methods are current and applicable to public health issues. Environmental risk methods applicable to public health issues are identified; environmental risk methods are current and applicable to public health issues, but more supporting detail is needed. Environmental risk methods applicable to public health issues are clearly identified; environmental risk methods are current, applicable and highly relevant to public health issues.

3 Satisfactory 79.00% 4 Good 87.00% 5 Excellent 100.00% Vector-related diseases presented are relevant to the local community. Claims are partially substantiated using information from state public health and environmental quality departments for the local community health concerns. More relevant evidence is needed for support. Vector-related diseases presented are relevant to the local community. Claims are generally substantiated using information from state public health and environmental quality departments for the local community health concerns. Vector-related diseases are relevant to the local community. Claims are strongly substantiated using information from state public health and environmental quality departments for the local community health concerns.