Sample Content 5

Sample Content 1

Sample Content 8

1 Column (with images)

• 

  Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content.Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content.

2 Column (80/20)

• Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content.Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content.Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content.Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content.Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content. Replace this with your content.Replace this with y

• Related content here.

Action Memo

CLASSIFICATION//HANDLING RESTRICTION              Month DD, YYYY

Double slash separates classification from handling restrictions (e.g. CLASSIFICATION//NOFORN/NODIS)

ACTION MEMO FOR CHOOSE AN ITEM

FROM:            Bureau – Name

SUBJECT:      (SBU) Use the Normal Capitalization Convention for Document Title  (Titles must be portion-marked.)

BLUF:            (SBU) Include maximum four lines stating the bottom line up front.  Use Times New Roman 12-pt font and 1-inch margins throughout the body of the document and Times New Roman 10-pt for headers and footers.

Recommendation(s)

(SBU) That you succinctly state the specific action requested of the principal.  Include a decision date at least five business days after the document is submitted; this requirement is firm.  If a five-day window is not possible, bureaus must obtain approval from the S/ES front office or principal’s special assistants prior to submitting the document in Everest and must provide a compelling justification for the shorter timeline in the background section.  (Approve/Disapprove by MM/DD/YY)  Leave two lines of space after the recommendation.

[If recommending multiple items]

(SBU) That you:

1. Succinctly state specific actions requested of the principal.(Approve/Disapprove by MM/DD/YY)
2. Split memos should make clear which bureau(s) recommend and oppose each decision.Example:Bureau A recommends you approve an action.Bureau B opposes.(Approve/Disapprove by MM/DD/YY)
3. Alternatively, Bureau B recommends you approve a different action.Bureau A opposes.(Approve/Disapprove by MM/DD/YY)Leave two lines of space after the last recommendation.

Background

(SBU) Use short, concise sentences in the active voice.  Summarize relevant background, important updates, interagency or Congressional views, options for resolution, and implications of those options.  There is a firm two-page limit for Action Memos.

(SBU) While each action memo will be different, consider the following critical elements:

• ●Identify how recommendation/options align with – or would require adjustments to – current policies.
• ●Clearly explain the differences between options or why alternative approaches are not recommended.Explain how any risks (financial, policy, reputational, etc.) or negative consequences would be mitigated.
• ●Note differences of view among stakeholders, where applicable.
• ●Where additional resources (financial, personnel, security, etc.) are required to implement a decision, indicate whether they are available or would need to be identified. Clear with M, DGHR, BP, and F as needed.
• ●Indicate any follow-on action (e.g., planning, engagements, etc.) or any subsequent decisions for S that may be required.

(U) Clearly identify any legislative or other deadlines associated with the decision.  If the issue is particularly complex, you can attach brief additional background.  Drafters should clear with all bureaus with equities in the issue.

(U) Do not use Action Memos to recommend a principal’s participation in a call, meeting, or event – use the Invitation Memo template instead.  DO use Action Memos to request domestic or international travel, and provide justification in the background section.

Attachment(s):

Tab 1 – Supporting Document [if signature is recommended, list signature item as Tab 1]

Tab 2 – Additional Supporting Document [tabs should only be numbered when there are two or more attachments]

When uploading to Everest, please input each recommendation from the Action Memo separately and include a brief description of each recommendation.

The drafter should include a separate page with approval, drafter, and clearance information.  Classification markings and page numbers may continue onto the clearance page.

Approved:       [Bureau] – [Name] [Enter initials of approving principal]

                        Bureau’s front office MUST approve the memo.

Drafted:          [Bureau/Office] – [Name], ext. 7-1234 and home/cell:  ###-###-####

                        The drafter must include his/her full name, telephone extension, and after hours contact information.

Cleared:           D:  [name]                               [required clearance]

P:  [name]                                                        [required clearance]

S/P:  [name]                                                     [required clearance]

Other clearances as necessary, depending on subject matter covered.

Types of clearances

(OK)                            [Means they cleared]

(Info)                           [Means paper was sent for informational purposes only]

(Info by Request)        [Only if specified by clearer]

(No response)              [Means clearance was requested but not received by deadline]

Sample Content 2

Sample Content

Sample Content 10

Sample Content 6

Force Majeure

Introduction

Sample Content 3

Dress Code Policy

Legal Brief

Sample Brief—Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 1 Cranch 137 (1803)

FACTS:  William Marbury was one of President Adams’ “midnight appointments.” All of the necessary paperwork and procedures were completed to secure his appointment as a justice of the peace for Washington, D.C., but Secretary of State John Marshall – himself a midnight appointee to a somewhat more exhalted judicial position – failed to deliver his commission.  Upon assuming the presidency, Jefferson ordered his Secretary of State – James Madison – not to deliver the commission.  Under authority of the Judiciary Act of 1789, Marbury sued to ask the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus to force Madison to deliver the commission.

ISSUES: 1) Does Marbury have a right to this commission?  2) If he has a right, is there a remedy at law to realize it?  3) If there is a remedy, is it one that can issue from the Supreme Court? 

HELD:  1) Yes.  2) Yes. 3) No.

REASONING  (Marshall for a 6-0 Court):

To 1.  Because Marbury’s commission was signed by the President and sealed by the Secretary of State, he has a legal right to the commission.

To 2.  Because the signing and sealing completed the appointment process, denial of the commission is a violation of the law.  In a government of laws, a violation of the law creates a governmental responsibility to remedy the violation.  A writ of mandamus is such a remedy.

To 3. The Constitution is the “supreme law of the land” (Art. VI).  As such, it is “superior” and  “fundamental and paramount.”  It establishes “certain limits” on the power of the government it creates.  This includes the Congress.  Without such limits, “it would be giving to the legislature a practical and real omnipotence.”  Thus, “a legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law.”

            “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”  When a case comes to the Supreme Court, the Court must decide that case according to the law.  If “ordinary” (statutory) legislation conflicts with the limits imposed on government by the Constitution, the fundamental law must govern the ordinary.   If the legislature passed an act that the Constitution forbids – like a tax on interstate sales, an ex post facto law, or a treason conviction based on something other than two witnesses or a confession in court – the courts would have to strike it down.  Otherwise, the Constitution would not limit government.  Courts have this power because they decide cases under law; judges take an oath to uphold the Constitution, and this is part of that function.

            Following these principles, Marbury cannot receive a mandamus from the Court.  The Constitution creates two categories of jurisdiction for the Supreme Court – original and appellate.  Congress, under Article III, has the power to regulate appellate jurisdiction; no such power, however, is given for the regulation of original jurisdiction.  The latter is completely and exclusively defined by Article III – it cannot be added to or taken away from.  The provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 which added matters of mandamus to the original jurisdiction of the Court, therefore, is beyond the power given to Congress by the people in the Constitution.  Having no legitimate jurisdiction over this matter, the Court cannot provide Marbury with the remedy he seeks.

DECISION:  Dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

DISSENTS:  None 

SIGNIFICANCE:  Marshall, relying heavily on “logical reasoning” and little constitutional text, read the power of judicial review over acts of the national government into American constitutional law.  This power was extended over the actions of state governments in Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee (1816) and state courts in Cohens v. Virginia (1819), and is 1) the source of most of the authority the Court has come to know, and 2) the focal point of the ultimate debate about the Court’s proper constitutional role: should it exercise this power frequently (activism) or sparingly (restraints).

Live Education Results

Policy - General

Public Non-Discrimination Notice

Termination Letter

Dear

Further to our meeting of (date) I (regretfully) confirm that your employment with us is terminated with effect from (date)/with immediate effect.

As stated at our meeting the reason(s) for terminating your employment with us is/are as follows:

• (Employer must clearly state reasons - transgressions and relevant policies if applicable)
• (Employer must clearly state previous warnings, informal, formal, written etc., and circumstances and person's response and subsequent behaviour/performance for each warning.)

(Clearly state requirements regarding return of documentation, equipment, car, submission of final expenses claims, and any other leaving administration issues.)

(Clearly state actual leaving date, requirement or otherwise to serve period of notice, holiday pay, and other pay and pension details.)

(Clearly state the position regarding the employee's right of appeal, and state the appeal process and timescales.)

(Optional sign-off, for example: Thank you for your past efforts and all the best for your future endeavours.)

Yours, etc.

name and position

(Optionally and recommended: attach, at the foot of the letter refer to, a copy of your written disciplinary process, and also attach and refer to copies of written/printed evidence gathered during the employee's case. This enables employees to understand clearly the case against them, and also the process and their rights during the disciplinary process, which are central to the principles of the employment dispute regulations.)

(Optional section at foot of letter, requiring person to sign, confirming receipt of the letter and any attachment(s), by way of returning a signed copy of this letter.)

Tobacco Free Workplace Policy

Weapon-Free Workplace Policy

SSE Style Example

Sample Content 4

Cybersecurity

Foreign Service & Diplomacy

Foreign Service Closing

Military & Diplomacy

Three Pillars of US Security Strategy

Up or Out System

US Foreign Service

US Global Leadership

Value of Foreign Service

HRH Royal Highness

Minister

PM - Prime Minister

President

Sample Content 7

Sample Content 9