這是我們在2017年為美國佛羅里達州南佛羅里達大學的學生創作的一篇醫學類essay，以The Solution to the YO Programme in Hartford: Rebuilding Authority and Trust through Policy Making and Implementation為題，全文900字，開篇introduction先介紹文章研究主體的一個大概情況，讓讀者了解case的主題。
In the case, Hartford is a low-income area that suffers from a poor education and a strong mismatch between skills required in jobs and of local workers. Meanwhile, the Department of Labour has launched the Youth Opportunity programme, which aims to provide resources for an all-around development of youth in poor areas. With a strong desire to gain the grant, Hartford sets up an organisation made up of representatives from multi-agencies. Principles for setting up the organisational structure are established, but are soon broken due to conflicts of different interests. Distrust thus gets spread among counterparts involved in the business. This leads to a low spirit and motivation in the organisation, which ultimately causes chaos. The case vividly illustrates how poor policy making and implementation delivery could result in ineffectiveness and inefficiency in public governance. This paper will firstly assess the management challenge facing the YO programme in Hartford and then make tactic recommendations to tackle these issues.
之後闡述文章要分析和解決的問題是什麼，並且通過各種觀點來分析問題並且得出結論，結論需要有相關的知識點作為支撐，所以需要大量的reference，在這方面需要花費大量的時間，並且要求作者要有很好的吸收消化能力，才能分解這些內容。
The primary issue is the ambiguous structural leadership role within the organisation. This problem has in fact come to being dating back to the early process of application for the grant when parties involved are setting up the Governance Structure. At that time, the PROGRESS was supposed to be the operator of the programme, while CRWDB was responsible for applying for the grant and overseeing the operation afterwards. However, after compromise, the Executive Leadership Team took the leadership role in the end, although the trust level within the team was undesirable. Although they had come to an agreement with MOU, the team was not playing the role of Bridges, as Hoffman (2009) points out, channelling between a specific set of concerns within the organisation and the rest of the network. Each member only spoke out for his own interests while neglecting the remaining parties.
One of the example of this structural problem happened on the day when Hartford was granted the money, but CRWDB took a large amount of money to cover its own overhead cost without reaching out to the other members in the ELT team. This was an obvious neglect of the principles and authority, yet no one took the leadership role to stop such infringement. Collaboration within the organisation was lost in the end. The same structural problem was also reflected in the process of procurement, when both PROGRESS and CRWDB said they were the decision-maker for choosing the training service provider. An immediate result was that the public did not trust the organisation, and sense of authority was lost. The operational stage witnessed the same issue as well. There was a time when the operational team wanted to take the executive role of the programme, which was supposed to be owned by the programme director. Even after Brown was appointed as the programme director and PROGRESS as the programme operator, they had no right in deciding a new location for the programme centre, even when the Southern centre was facing serious problem in fundraising and a lack of facilities.
最後再給出recommendation也就是conclusion，告訴讀者所得出的結論是什麼，在這個部分我們選擇用邏輯性比較強的遞進方式來展示，具體分享如下。
Firstly, reassuring parties involved of their respective roles as listed in the Memorandum of Understanding. In particular, to ensure Brown of her leadership role in the daily affairs, PROGRESS of operational subcontractor, i.e. managing service delivery, UWCA of the role as evaluating the performance through setting up a community advisory board with members from all parties involved in targeted areas of the programme including local service provider and the public.
Secondly, redesigning the training programme and choosing the proper provider. The goal is to cover leadership development, citizenship, community service and recreation activities, whereas the current one only focused on basic life skills. By designing a programme that targets the young and hires the right tutors to conduct these activities, there would be more student engagement and enrolment is thus expected to rise.
Thirdly, providing holistic training for the internal staff to both official and unofficial YO workers. The purpose is to making them well understood of the programme and their respective roles. In addition, hire more dedicated staff to recruit potential students so that development specialists could be devoted to trainings. By levelling up the whole team to a higher professional level, the working staff would feel more confident and motivated in their daily work.
Finally, investing in infrastructure establishment. Speeding up the construction for the south centre, and purchase enough facilities at both centres and satellites.