Annual Implementation Review and Meeting Sample Clauses

Annual Implementation Review and Meeting. The Parties will review the Annual Report described in Section 11.4 above for the purposes of evaluating the implementation of the HCP/NCCP during the preceding year and the adequacy of the overall progress being made towards reaching the conservation goals of the HCP/NCCP, utilizing HabiTrak or a Geographic Information System-based system that is transferable to HabiTrak. Items to be considered in the evaluation include, but are not limited to, all contributions towards the assembly of the Preserve System, such as public lands, private mitigation lands, land donations, land acquisitions, and management activities undertaken or proposed on habitat lands. Habitat management activities undertaken or proposed will also be discussed. The Parties will also review all available reports and recommendations from Science Advisors, Land Management Agencies, the Independent Conservation Assessment Team, and others involved in preserve management and monitoring as described in Chapter 8.3.7 of the HCP/NCCP. If, based on this information, Wildlife Agencies determine that adequate progress towards implementation of the HCP/NCCP is not being achieved, Wildlife Agencies shall provide their findings and the basis for such findings in writing to the Permittees; and the Parties will take the actions specified in the HCP/NCCP and this Agreement to remedy that situation. If Wildlife Agencies determine that adequate progress towards implementation of the HCP/NCCP is being achieved, but that it is nevertheless not providing sufficient protection to the Covered Species, the Wildlife Agencies shall provide their findings and the basis for such findings in writing to the Permittees; and then the Parties shall work cooperatively and take appropriate actions consistent with the HCP/NCCP and this Agreement (such as altering management activities or redirecting mitigation and acquisition) in order to remedy the situation. Once each year, the Implementing Entity and any other Permittee that wishes to participate shall meet with Wildlife Agencies to review and coordinate implementation of the HCP/NCCP.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Annual Implementation Review and Meeting

  • 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.

  • Business Review Meetings In order to maintain the relationship between the Department and the Contractor, each quarter the Department may request a business review meeting. The business review meeting may include, but is not limited to, the following: • Successful completion of deliverables • Review of the Contractor’s performance • Review of minimum required reports • Addressing of any elevated Customer issues • Review of continuous improvement ideas that may help lower total costs and improve business efficiencies.

  • Validation Review In the event OIG has reason to believe that: (a) Good Shepherd’s Claims Review fails to conform to the requirements of this CIA; or (b) the IRO’s findings or Claims Review results are inaccurate, OIG may, at its sole discretion, conduct its own review to determine whether the Claims Review complied with the requirements of the CIA and/or the findings or Claims Review results are inaccurate (Validation Review). Good Shepherd shall pay for the reasonable cost of any such review performed by OIG or any of its designated agents. Any Validation Review of Reports submitted as part of Good Shepherd’s final Annual Report shall be initiated no later than one year after Good Shepherd’s final submission (as described in Section II) is received by OIG. Prior to initiating a Validation Review, OIG shall notify Good Shepherd of its intent to do so and provide a written explanation of why OIG believes such a review is necessary. To resolve any concerns raised by OIG, Good Shepherd may request a meeting with OIG to: (a) discuss the results of any Claims Review submissions or findings; (b) present any additional information to clarify the results of the Claims Review or to correct the inaccuracy of the Claims Review; and/or (c) propose alternatives to the proposed Validation Review. Good Shepherd agrees to provide any additional information as may be requested by OIG under this Section III.D.3 in an expedited manner. OIG will attempt in good faith to resolve any Claims Review issues with Good Shepherd prior to conducting a Validation Review. However, the final determination as to whether or not to proceed with a Validation Review shall be made at the sole discretion of OIG.

  • Training Plan Within 90 days after the Effective Date, Good Shepherd shall develop a written plan (Training Plan) that outlines the steps Good Shepherd will take to ensure that: (a) all Covered Persons receive adequate training regarding Good Shepherd’s CIA requirements and Compliance Program, including the Code of Conduct and (b) all Relevant Covered Persons receive adequate training regarding: (i) the Federal health care program requirements regarding eligibility for hospice services upon initial admission, recertification for continued stay, and for Continuous Care, Respite Care, and General Inpatient Care; (ii) the role of physicians in making eligibility determinations; (iii) the accurate coding and submission of claims; (iv) policies, procedures, and other requirements applicable to the documentation of medical records; (v) the personal obligation of each individual involved in the claims submission process to ensure that such claims are accurate; (vi) applicable reimbursement statutes, regulations, and program requirements and directives; (vii) the legal sanctions for violations of the Federal health care program requirements; and (viii) examples of proper and improper eligibility determinations, documentation, and claims submission practices. The Training Plan shall include information regarding the training topics, the categories of Covered Persons and Relevant Covered Persons required to attend each training session, the length of the training, the schedule for training, and the format of the training. Within 30 days of the OIG’s receipt of Good Shepherd’s Training Plan, OIG will notify Good Shepherd of any comments or objections to the Training Plan. Absent notification by the OIG that the Training Plan is unacceptable, Good Shepherd may implement its Training Plan. Good Shepherd shall furnish training to its Covered Persons and Relevant Covered Persons pursuant to the Training Plan during each Reporting Period.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances

  • Review Meetings During the review meetings the Project Managers shall discuss progress made by the Contractor in the performance of this Contract. Each party shall provide a status report, as desired by a Project Manager, listing any problem or concern encountered since the last meeting. Records of such reports and other communications issued in writing during the course of Contract performance shall be maintained by each party.

  • Review Protocol A narrative description of how the Claims Review was conducted and what was evaluated.

  • Utilization Review We review health services to determine whether the services are or were Medically Necessary or experimental or investigational ("Medically Necessary"). This process is called Utilization Review. Utilization Review includes all review activities, whether they take place prior to the service being performed (Preauthorization); when the service is being performed (concurrent); or after the service is performed (retrospective). If You have any questions about the Utilization Review process, please call the number on Your ID card. The toll-free telephone number is available at least 40 hours a week with an after-hours answering machine. All determinations that services are not Medically Necessary will be made by: 1) licensed Physicians; or 2) licensed, certified, registered or credentialed health care professionals who are in the same profession and same or similar specialty as the Provider who typically manages Your medical condition or disease or provides the health care service under review. We do not compensate or provide financial incentives to Our employees or reviewers for determining that services are not Medically Necessary. We have developed guidelines and protocols to assist Us in this process. Specific guidelines and protocols are available for Your review upon request. For more information, call the number on Your ID card or visit Our website at xxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.

  • Review Meeting i. Either the BCTF or BCPSEA may request in writing a meeting to review the issues in a provincial matters grievance that has been referred to arbitration.

  • Project Implementation Manual The Recipient, through the PCU, shall: (i) take all action required to carry out Parts 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2, 3.1(b), 3.2, 3.3 and 4 (ii) of the Project in accordance with the provisions and requirements set forth or referred to in the Project Implementation Manual; (ii) submit recommendations to the Association for its consideration for changes and updates of the Project Implementation Manual as they may become necessary or advisable during Project implementation in order to achieve the objective of Parts 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2, 3.1(b), 3.2, 3.3 and 4(ii) of the Project; and (iii) not assign, amend, abrogate or waive the Project Implementation Manual or any of its provisions without the Association’s prior agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any of the provisions of the Project Implementation Manual is inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail and govern.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.