Nonprofit Organizations as Ideal Type of Socially Responsible and Impact Investors

Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) as mission-driven organizations could profit from investing in stocks diametrically opposed to their mission, as they serve as a perfect hedge. Earning more income from oil or tobacco companies when there is a greater need for ecological interventions or cancer research might help effectively fighting the cause. We show the flaw in this logic as in its optimal state, this strategy is at most a financial zero-sum game. However, as NPOs strive at creating net value by aiming at a most effective mission-accomplishment, socially responsible and impact investments may offer a better way of doing so. We present NPOs as an ideal type of a socially responsible and impact investor and give the corresponding formal economic reasoning. For mission-driven organizations only the combination of financial and mission-based goals allows for an effective, goal-oriented financial decision-making. The full application of this logic is what is broadly understood under the term of mission investing (MI). Based on a theoretic introduction, we present a formalized way of analyzing multidimensional tradeoffs in the case of NPOs being mission-driven investors. This formalization will supply NPOs with a tool that enables them to capture their investments’ financial and mission-based impact and therefore the full benefit of responsible and impact-driven investments

Clinical utility of one versus two faecal immunochemical test samples in the detection of advanced colorectal neoplasia in symptomatic patients

The utility of faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) in assessment of symptomatic patients with lower gastrointestinal symptoms has not been well explored. The aims of this study were to evaluate the diagnostic yield for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) in symptomatic patients using the first of two FIT samples (FIT/1) and the higher concentration of two FIT samples (FIT/max). METHODS: Samples from two consecutive bowel motions from 208 symptomatic patients who required colonoscopy were analysed using the HM-JACKarc analyser (Kyowa Medex Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). Patients were categorised into two groups: patients with any ACRN and individuals with other diagnoses or normal colonoscopy. RESULTS: Colonoscopy detected ACRN in 29 patients. In these patients, FIT/1 and FIT/max were significantly higher than in patients with low-risk adenoma (p=0.006 and p=0.024), other findings (p=0.002 and p=0.002) and normal colonoscopy (p<0.001 and p<0.001). The areas under the curves (AUC) of FIT/1 and FIT/max were 0.71 and 0.69, respectively. Undetectable FIT/1 rules out 96.6% of ACRN and the specificity was 10.6%. Increasing the FIT/1 cut-off to 10 μg Hb/g faeces, sensitivity and specificity were 34.5% and 87.2%, respectively. Similar results were obtained using FIT/max with 20 μg Hb/g faeces cut-off, providing a sensitivity and specificity of 34.5% and 85.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Undetectable FIT is a good strategy to rule-out ACRN in symptomatic patients. The diagnostic yield of collecting two samples for FIT can be achieved with one sample, but a lower faecal haemoglobin concentrations (f-Hb) cut-off is required

An evaluation of the SENTiFIT 270 analyser for quantitation of faecal haemoglobin in the investigation of patients with suspected colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: An evaluation of SENTiFIT® 270 (Sentinel Diagnostics, Italy; Sysmex, Spain) analyser for the quantitation of faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) was performed. METHODS: The analytical imprecision, linearity, carry over and f-Hb stability were determined. Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy was performed on 487 patients. RESULTS: Within-run and between-run imprecision ranged 1.7%-5.1% and 3.8%-6.2%, respectively. Linearity studies revealed a mean recovery of 101.1% (standard deviation, 6.7%) for all dilutions. No carry over was detected below 7650 μg Hb/g faeces. Decay of f-Hb in refrigerated samples ranged 0.2%-0.5% per day. f-Hb in patients with advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) (colorectal cancer [CRC] plus advanced adenoma [AA]) were significantly higher than from those with a normal colonoscopy. Sensitivity for ACRN at f-Hb cutoffs from 10 to 60 μg Hb/g faeces ranged from 28.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.7%-37.2%) to 46.5% (95% CI, 38.1%-55%), the specificity ranged from 85% (95% CI, 82.3%-87.3%) to 93.2% (95% CI, 91.2%-94.8%), positive predictive values for detecting CRC and AA ranged from 11.6% (95% CI, 7.6%-17.2%) to 20.6% (95% CI, 13.3%-30.3%) and from 34.7% (95% CI, 28.1%-42%) to 42.3% (95% CI, 32.4%-52.7%), respectively, and the negative predictive value for ACRN ranged from 90.2% (95% CI, 87.9%-92.2%) to 88.4% (95% CI, 86%-90.4%). Using two samples per patient sensitivity increased with a slight decrease in specificity. CONCLUSIONS: The analytical and clinical performances of SENTiFIT assay demonstrate a specific and accurate test for detecting ACRN in symptomatic patients and those undergoing surveillance. KEYWORDS: adenoma; analyser evaluation; colorectal cancer; faecal haemoglobin; faecal immunochemical tes

Modeling specific action potentials in the human atria based on a minimal reaction-diffusion model

We present an effective method to model empirical action potentials of specific patients in the human atria based on the minimal model of Bueno-Orovio, Cherry and Fenton adapted to atrial electrophysiology. In this model, three ionic are currents introduced, where each of it is governed by a characteristic time scale. By applying a nonlinear optimization procedure, a best combination of the respective time scales is determined, which allows one to reproduce specific action potentials with a given amplitude, width and shape. Possible applications for supporting clinical diagnosis are pointed out.Comment: 16 pages, 8 figure

Update of the Navy Contract Writing Guide

MBA Professional ReportThe purpose of this MBA Project is to provide a comprehensive update of the Navy Contract Writing Guide. The project was conducted with the sponsorship and assistance of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition. The now out of date guide was originally written in 1996 in an effort to reduce problem disbursements as related to contract wording and organization. Extensive research, incorporating interviews, websites, periodicals, and texts, was employed to make the guide current. It has been reorganized to address issues and solutions in the same order in which the forms used by contracting officers and administrators have them listed. New issues have been raised since the original writing of this guide and are now incorporated with their recommended solutions. Individuals new to Naval contracting or those who have decades of experience will find the information provided useful to the efficient and effective writing and administration of government contracts.http://archive.org/details/updateofnavycont1094534235Second Lieutenant, United States Air ForceCaptain, United States Marine CorpsApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited