The evaluation showed is based on certain criteria you will see them in the attachment called the chairmen report rubric

The evaluation showed is based on certain criteria you will see them in the attachment called the chairmen report rubric
The rubric contains three parts for the evaluation:
1.Timeliness: is how closed the time between the chairmen report and the auditor report (Time of the signature the closest the better, which mean more credited. 4 indicate excellent which means the shortest time, 3 very good, 2 good, and 1 satisfactory. Please dont forget to mention both dates specifically, to see the gap between the dates.

2.Past Information: is about what they did, the information he mentioned about the past events and their operating income..Etc. The past information should be evaluated based on the number of sentences. The sentence that talks about the past should be counted and then see if they are balanced with the future information or not if they are balance they get 4 , if less you will see from the chairman report rubric, how much should they get.
3. Future Information: is whether the chairman talked about the future and there expectation, verbs such as will, expect, shall, next year, etc. which are related to a future statements should be counted based on the number of sentences and then also compare it with the number of sentence for the past information to know what the rate to be given for this criteria. For instance, if the chairman talked 90% about the future that indicated that the information is not relevant and that they have something bad they did they want to hide. Another scenario could be if they did not talked about the future this is also bad and so on.

The information of the past and the future should be almost balanced and they reflect relevance and transparency which is an ethical aspect that shows more attention to the quality of the information not the quantity.
The task:
Is to evaluate the chairman report and to cover the 3 criteria that are mentioned above.
Each criterion should be evaluated and explained very well, in details and specify WHY? They got that ranking (Support it with evidence) and try to convince the reader.
Another thing you should focus on is that you should talk about the 3 criteria equally, dont talk about one and give less attention on the other.