Several questions must be asked in order for the international development organisation's recommendation for the government of Tagus to promote a variety of millet rich in vitamin A to successfully yield the result of combatting vitamin A deficiencies. Considering the costliness of the new product it is essential to prove that this recommendation is well researched and based on sound logic. The following questions would likely bolster the logical validity of the recommendation.
First, the organisation needs to consider whether the new strain of millet that is higher in vitamin A is suitable to the climate of the nation of Tagus. While this is likely true as millet is already a staple food in Tagus, it is possible that the conditions in which the new breed of millet was engineered and harvested can not be replicated in the real environment of Tagus. It is likely that the biological engineers that created the new breed of millet carefully curated specific conditions for the new strain of millet to flourish in. For example, they may have watered the millet twice a day and had precisely 8 hours of artificial sunlight in the greenhouses where they were curated. These conditions would be impossible to replicate in Tagus, particularly when you account for how impoverished the nation is. Local farmers may be unable to access a clean water supply to curate the new strain of millet, which might fail as a crop as a result. The development organisation would need to test and prove that the new breed of millet could grow equally as well as the existing strain before recommending its adoption. If it could be grown equally as well as the existing variety then it is more likely that local farmers would adopt the new strain.
Second, the organisation would need to prove that in all other regards the new strain of millet is a fair substitute for the existing variety. This would involve testing factors like the taste, nutritional value and crop yield of the new product to show that it is a good replacement for the existing variety. For instance, if the new millet had less fibre and was less filling than the existing variety, it would be a poor substitute and should not be recommended given that the people of Tagus rely on millet as a staple food source.
Third, the organisation would need to answer the question of whether the subsidy for the seeds would fully compensate farmers. If the subsidy is insufficient to cover the cost of the new seeds and the existing variety was still cheaper, then it is extremely unlikely that the recommendation would be supported by the government of Tagus. Furthermore, it should be established whether the cost per crop yield was fully justified by the subsidy. If one seed of new millet only grew half as much seed as the original variety, the subsidy will need to account for this and would have to cover the entire cost of adopting the new variety.
Finally, the development organisation would need to provide an answer to the question of "does it matter if vitamin A levels are low in the nation of Tagus?" If the development organisation cannot illustrate why vitamin A is integral to reaching development goals then it is unlikely that the recommendation will be supported by the government and people of Tagus. This 'why factor' is extremely important in deciding whether the recommendation is likely to have a predicted result as it influences how likely the people of Tagus are to bother adapting to the new type of millet if there is no significant reason to do so.
If the development organisation can successfully answer the above questions it is more likely that they will have a positive reaction to their recommendation to introduce a new breed of vitamin A rich millet to address vitamin A deficiencies in the nation of Tagus. Without evidence to show that the development organisation has researched these questions, it is unlikely that their recommendation will garner significant results.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 237, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'A deficiency' or simply 'deficiencies'?
Suggestion: A deficiency; Deficiencies
... yield the result of combatting vitamin A deficiencies. Considering the costliness of the new ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1052, Rule ID: EQUALLY_AS[1]
Message: Don't say 'equally as'. You can use either 'equally' or 'as' on its own. When comparing two nouns, use 'just as'.
Suggestion: equally; as; just as
...that the new breed of millet could grow equally as well as the existing strain before reco...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1146, Rule ID: EQUALLY_AS[1]
Message: Don't say 'equally as'. You can use either 'equally' or 'as' on its own. When comparing two nouns, use 'just as'.
Suggestion: equally; as; just as
...ding its adoption. If it could be grown equally as well as the existing variety then it is...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 366, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun filling is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...f the new millet had less fibre and was less filling than the existing variety, it w...
^^^^
Line 7, column 46, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
..., the organisation would need to answer the question of whether the subsidy for the seeds would fully c...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 122, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'A level' or simply 'levels'?
Suggestion: A level; Levels
...tion of 'does it matter if vitamin A levels are low in the nation of Tagus?' I...
^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... is no significant reason to do so. If the development organisation can succes...
^^
Line 11, column 228, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'A deficiency' or simply 'deficiencies'?
Suggestion: A deficiency; Deficiencies
...itamin A rich millet to address vitamin A deficiencies in the nation of Tagus. Without evidenc...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, if, may, second, so, still, then, third, well, while, for example, for instance, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 38.0 19.6327345309 194% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 32.0 12.9520958084 247% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 80.0 55.5748502994 144% => OK
Nominalization: 34.0 16.3942115768 207% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3317.0 2260.96107784 147% => OK
No of words: 672.0 441.139720559 152% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.93601190476 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.09145979004 4.56307096286 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97136476329 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 204.123752495 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.372023809524 0.468620217663 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1057.5 705.55239521 150% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 30.0 22.8473053892 131% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.1621943989 57.8364921388 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 150.772727273 119.503703932 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.5454545455 23.324526521 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.04545454545 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.44737875453 0.218282227539 205% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143661515385 0.0743258471296 193% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0821419906659 0.0701772020484 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.246284980318 0.128457276422 192% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578601362634 0.0628817314937 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 14.3799401198 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.3550499002 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 98.500998004 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 12.3882235529 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.1389221557 126% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.