Explore BrainMass
Share

Evaluating Eligibility Rules

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Write a paper in APA format with references in which you analyze eligibility rules for the American National Red Cross

What are the types of eligibility rules used by the agency?
Do you notice any possible stigmatization or off-targeted benefits?
Do you notice any trade-offs? Overwhelming costs, overutilization, or underutilization? Explain your answer.
Do you notice any weak rules? Explain your answer.
In your judgment, are the eligibility rules fair and sufficient? Explain your answer.

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 12:05 am ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/business/managing-diversity/evaluating-eligibility-rules-216472

Solution Preview

Write a paper in APA format with references in which you analyze eligibility rules for the American National Red Cross

What are the types of eligibility rules used by the agency?

There are different types of eligibility rules used by the American National Red Cross. First are the rules that clearly state that the American National Red Cross does not discriminate against age, ethnicity, economic lass or social class. Next are the blood donation eligibility rules. General guidelines are provided and these rules give specifics like the person must be healthy, at least 17 years old or 16 years if allowed by the state law. The weight of the person must be 110 points and must not have donated within last 8 weeks or double red cells during the last 16 weeks (American Red Cross 2008),. These general rules define what healthy is and this means that the person can perform normal activities. In addition, there is a discussion with the donor, there is blood testing before the blood donation process takes place. However, donating for self use requires a medical prescription (American Red Cross 2008).

There is a disclaimer that says that the list of circumstances is not complete. Specially trained technical staff discusses the condition of the donor in private. The American National Red Cross claims that most of the eligibility rules are specified by the Food and Drug Administration. Other rules are set by the doctors at blood centers. The Eligibility rules claims American National Red Cross are devised to protect the donor and the receiver of the blood (American Red Cross 2008).
In the rules are ...

Solution Summary

This explanation provides you a comprehensive argument relating to Evaluating Eligibility Rules

$2.19
See Also This Related BrainMass Solution

The purpose of this document is to further investigate the internal infrastructure within NCAA's use of the "No Agent 12.3.2.1" rule and the "Restitution" rule. Andy Oliver was suspended from the baseball league as a result of having his attorney/agent present during contract negotiations which is prohibited from the baseball league, Oliver claims that both rules have not been enforced by the league and other baseball players, and are otherwise null and void, the courts ruled in agreement with Oliver's claim. The objective of this document is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of both arguments in order to test the theory of "Breach of Contract" and to test the validity of both rules ("No Agent" and "Restitution")in order to determine if they are relevant in accordance with the college baseball league in today's culture and the prevalence of agents in the industry or are the rules invalid and should be shun from the NCAA as a rule to utilize.

Research questions/Hypotheses-

? Should the "No Agent" and "Restitution" rule be considered invalid and/or unenforceable?

? Is the "No Agent" and "Restitution" rule null and void?

? Should the "No Agent" rule be enforced? If so, should violators be punished?

Background literature to support research

Main theme/purpose-

The purpose of this document is to further investigate the internal infrastructure within NCAA's use of the "No Agent 12.3.2.1" rule and the "Restitution" rule. Andy Oliver was suspended from the baseball league as a result of having his attorney/agent present during contract negotiations which is prohibited from the baseball league, Oliver claims that both rules have not been enforced by the league and other baseball players, and are otherwise null and void, the courts ruled in agreement with Oliver's claim. The objective of this document is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of both arguments in order to test the theory of "Breach of Contract" and to test the validity of both rules ("No Agent" and "Restitution")in order to determine if they are relevant in accordance with the college baseball league in today's culture and the prevalence of agents in the industry or are the rules invalid and should be shun from the NCAA as a rule to utilize.

Research questions/Hypotheses-

? Should the "No Agent" and "Restitution" rule be considered invalid and/or unenforceable?

? Is the "No Agent" and "Restitution" rule null and void?

? Should the "No Agent" rule be enforced? If so, should violators be punished?

Background literature to support research

In this article, the supporting research was regarding the sports league which provides information as to why they feel it is necessary for professionals and collegiate sports entities to disregard the "No Agent" rule for the reason that during the drafting period individuals will need legal representation in order to compare and contrast various offers and to make the right decisions based on that candidates specifics of what's best for them.
In the article, the author compared the following leagues and illustrated why the "No Agent" rule is invalid:

? MLB

? NFL

? NBA

In the article were quotes from noted professionals in opposition to the "No Agent" rule.

? Major League Executives

? American League Scouting Director

? Vanderbilt coach Tim Corbin president of the American Baseball Coaches Association.

Law cases pertaining to the "No Agent" rule:

? Bloom v. NCAA

? NCAA v. Tarkanian

? Federal Antitrust Law Under Section I of the Sherman Act "Prohibits unreasonable restraints of trade."

? NCAA v. Board of Regents

? Smith v. United States

? McCormack v. NCAA

? Banks v. United States-challenged the "no agent" and "no draft" rule.

Methodology

The court tested whether or not Oliver had a standing for a claim of Breach of Contract in reference to the Bloom v.
NCAA case which illustrates that the NCAA violated the duty of good faith and fair dealing through arbitrary (unreliable) and capricious (illogical) action as a third party beneficiary to the contract between NCAA and OSU.

View Full Posting Details