ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 9. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan. SCHEDULE 5
Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.
Review Protocol A narrative description of how the Claims Review was conducted and what was evaluated.
Review of Submittals A/E and ODR review is only for conformance with the design concept and the information provided in the Contract Documents. Responses to submittals will be in writing. The approval of a separate item does not indicate approval of an assembly in which the item functions. The approval of a submittal does not relieve the Contractor of responsibility for any deviation from the requirements of the Contract unless the Contractor informs the A/E and ODR of such deviation in a clear, conspicuous, and written manner on the submittal transmittal and at the time of submission, and obtains the A/E’s and Owner’s written specific approval of the particular deviation.
Ongoing Review and Revisions As set forth in Section 35.7, the Parties have agreed to the coordination and exchange of data and information under this Agreement to enhance system reliability and efficient market operations as systems exist and are contemplated as of the Effective Date. The Parties expect that these systems and the technology applicable to these systems and to the collection and exchange of data will change from time to time throughout the term of this Agreement. The Parties agree that the objectives of this Agreement can be fulfilled efficiently and economically only if the Parties, from time to time, review and, as appropriate, revise the requirements stated herein in response to such changes, including deleting, adding, or revising requirements and protocols. Each Party will negotiate in good faith in response to such revisions the other Party may propose from time to time. Nothing in this Agreement, however, shall require any Party to reach agreement with respect to any such changes, or to purchase, install, or otherwise implement new equipment, software, or devices, or functions, except as required to perform this Agreement.
Annual Negotiations Negotiations will be conducted each year according to the ground rules as mutually agreed upon prior to negotiations. Ground Rules (see APPENDIX F - GROUND RULES) used at the previous year's sessions will serve as the basis for discussing any changes before adopting ground rules for the current negotiating sessions. Such ground rules mutually agreed upon shall assist in the orderly process for negotiations.
Additional Information for Product Development Projects Outcome of product development efforts, such copyrights and license agreements. • Units sold or projected to be sold in California and outside of California. • Total annual sales or projected annual sales (in dollars) of products developed under the Agreement. • Investment dollars/follow-on private funding as a result of Energy Commission funding. • Patent numbers and applications, along with dates and brief descriptions. Additional Information for Product Demonstrations: • Outcome of demonstrations and status of technology. • Number of similar installations. • Jobs created/retained as a result of the Agreement.
TIMELINESS OF BILLING SUBMISSION The parties agree that timeliness of billing is of the essence to this Contract and recognize that the City is on a fiscal year. All xxxxxxxx for dates of service prior to July 1 must be submitted to the City no later that the first Friday in August of the same year.
000 APPLICATION FOR PROJECT AGREEMENT 1.100 Any Company desiring to enter into a Project Agreement for Maintenance by Contract, must appear before the General Presidents' Committee (hereinafter the "Committee") for purposes of review and orientation and present to the Committee written evidence of the Owner's intent to engage that Company in the performance of maintenance service for a minimum period of one full year, subject to the usual termination clauses in such contracts.
Additional RO Review Criteria (1) In addition to the requirements in Subparagraph 34A, the RO must:
