Task 6

[HD]

Discussions for task 6 of the CDEF scenario.

[Jared]

So... we're supposed to address the "general direction and magnitude" of tax changes per employed person. However, we do not need to calculate tax.

tf?

[Jared]

HOW

[Katherine Garner]

It's based on your recommendations. So if you recommend changing a certain assumption, how would that affect the calculated tax rate? You can go back to your sensitivity tests to see the magnitude of impact.

[Jared]

That's a good approach. Hadn't thought of it. Thanks.

[Jason]

Does anyone know what they mean by "recommend reports that should be produced"? 

I'm not sure the markers would be looking for when they say reports. 

[Katherine Garner]

Glad you mentioned this, Jason. I totally forgot to write that part of task 6...But yeah, I don't have a good idea for the report yet.

[Jared]

Talking to coworkers around my office (and they MMR'd for the record), they said that the SOA wasn't looking for anything specific.

I approached it as:

Prevent what happened in task 6 from happening again.

[JL]

Does the question mean "what kind of reports should be produced to provide warnings?"

[Eduardo Sebayan]

How long is everyone's task 6 so far? It's shaping to be one of the shorter tasks for me.

I was also commenting, with a sentence or two, when the assumption closely tied to experience, and so that no assumption change is needed. It did not explicitly say to do this, but it seems like a standard thing to do if you're analyzing actual vs expected for assumption updates.

Thoughts?

[JL]

Agreed. I changes about 5 assumptions

[Jared]

My task 6 is 450 words. That might be on the shorter side, since my overall submission is 5,600 words (so far)

I'm not too nervous about length though, I passed the IA with 4,000 words if I don't include "showing my work" in word count.

[Katherine Garner]

I'm at 6500 words but still don't have my exec summary, task 6 report or the additional asset. I'm assuming my final product will be about 7500-8000 words. I don't understand how those people on the FAP Grading Spreadsheet have like 12000 words lol. 

[JL]

I think i will be in the 6000-6500 range, dont know what else to add. 

[Jason]

Hmm I'm still a bit confused about the reports... Say for example I notice an assumption was really different from the experience. I recommended to update the model assumption so that it better captures how the real experience behaves and monitor that assumption in the near future but unsure what kind of report is still needed for that assumption.

Do these reports have a generic name (ie. Gain/Loss analysis report)? I'm pretty sure this task is related to module 8 but I can't seem to find anything related to reports in Module 8 as well.

[JL]

i thought the report has nothing to do with the assumptions, but just the fund returns. such as "what kind of reports needed for fund return?" maybe i misunderstood that. any ideas?

[Katherine Garner]

I'm reading the "Communicating Results" article from module 8. Since task 6 is technically an internal email, maybe it's suggesting we are supposed to develop a report to communicate the results with CDEF? 

[Jason]

JL I would think that the assumptions would have an impact on the fund return one way or the other. As an extreme example, if the real experience growth rate was 50 times higher than the modelled growth, the fund would probably be depleted very fast.

[angelo Mastrangelo]

1) For reports to be produced, you think mentioning that we can monitor what goes into the fund (contributions), and what goes out of the fund (tuition payments and expenses) is the proper approach?, We can then compare actual to expected for each to get an idea of how the fund is performing. The asset statements can tell us a lot of information about what is actually happening (even the fund rate of return which we can compare to expected). I am thinking of something like using the asset statements to prepare reports summarizing contributions, tuition payments, fund performance and expenses. Each can be a different report. 

2) My other thought is using reports relating to Cascadia as a whole, like reports relating to immigration, student success rates, and CPI to help infer that our assumptions aren't accurate anymore without performing a full experience study. 

Both approaches are different and I am not sure who they are referring to when the say "reports that should be produced"... who is producing them! What do you think is the correct approach, 1) or 2) or other?

[Jason]

Angela I think it makes more sense to go with approach #1 since those are all things we worked on previously. If you do go with approach #1, would you just recommend creating something like "Contribution Report Summary" and explain what it consists of?

[angelo Mastrangelo]

I would explain what information is contained in each report and how this information can used used to monitor the fund i.e. compare our expectations to the results of these reports. This will tell us whether the fund is performing as intended. 

[Anika]

I wonder if "significantly" is good enough for magnitude, since we are told not to recalculate... what else can be said??

[Kevin]

I compared my results with the sensitivity testing that I did in prior memorandom. i.e. It should be at least x% impact according to my sensitivity testing earlier.