The table and charts detailed below give information about the police budget in 2017 and 2018 in on area of Britain. The table illustrates where the money came from and the charts show how it was distributed
The table details the sources of funding for the police and the pie charts show the distribution of this budget. Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that the contributions of all sources increased, though local taxes displayed the greatest funding growth. In terms of spending, there was a marked increase in technology funding, buildings and transport was unchanged, and salaries declined though this category continued to represent the vast majority of the budget.
In 2017, the national government contributed 175.5 million pounds, slightly below the number for the following year (177.8m). Local taxes, in contrast, were lower overall in both years but grew considerably from £91.2 million to £102.3 million. Other sources, such as grants, were largely unchanged, rising slightly from 38 to 38.5 million. The total figure grew by 13.9m to 318.6m.
In terms of budgetary allocation, 75% of the budget was devoted to salaries in 2017 and this figure declined to 69% the following year. Money for technology nearly doubled, going from 8% to 14%, while spending on buildings and transport was unaltered at 17% in each year surveyed.
- It is important for everyone including young people to save money for their future To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 78
- The diagram details the process of producing olive oil Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The graph below shows transport preferences among young people from different countries Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The graph below shows transport preferences among young people from different countries Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The charts show the sources of electricity produced in 4 countries between 2003 and 2008 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 150, Rule ID: WERE_VBB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'where' or 'we'?
Suggestion: where; we
... year 177.8m. Local taxes, in contrast, were lower overall in both years but grew co...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, look, so, while, in contrast, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 975.0 965.302439024 101% => OK
No of words: 184.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29891304348 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68302321012 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70954846474 2.65546596893 102% => OK
Unique words: 116.0 106.607317073 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.630434782609 0.547539520022 115% => OK
syllable_count: 268.2 283.868780488 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0605643783 43.030603864 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.333333333 112.824112599 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4444444444 22.9334400587 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.23603664747 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.181711234395 0.215688989381 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0749905211902 0.103423049105 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0954396373928 0.0843802449381 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114725331913 0.15604864568 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0609231363714 0.0819641961636 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.2329268293 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 61.2550243902 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 11.4140731707 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.06136585366 113% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 40.7170731707 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.