APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION‌‌ 1. EVALUATION CRITERIA Sample Clauses

APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION‌‌ 1. EVALUATION CRITERIA. The Project Narrative describes what you intend to do with your project and includes the Evaluation Criteria in Sections A-E below. Your application will be reviewed and scored according to the quality of your response to the requirements in Sections A-E.  In developing the Project Narrative section of your application, use these instructions, which have been tailored to this program.  The Project Narrative (Sections A-E) together may be no longer than 40 pages.  You must use the five sections/headings listed below in developing your Project Narrative. You must indicate the Section letter and number in your response, i.e., type “A-1”, “A-2”, etc., before your response to each question. You may not combine two or more questions or refer to another section of the Project Narrative in your response, such as indicating that the response for B.2 is in C.7. Only information included in the appropriate numbered question will be considered by reviewers. Your application will be scored according to how well you address the requirements for each section of the Project Narrative.  The number of points after each heading is the maximum number of points a review committee may assign to that section of your Project Narrative. Although scoring weights are not assigned to individual bullets, each bullet is assessed in deriving the overall Section score.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION‌‌ 1. EVALUATION CRITERIA. The Project Narrative describes what you intend to do with your project and includes the Evaluation Criteria in Sections A-D below. Your application will be reviewed and scored according to your response to the requirements in Sections A-D. In developing the Project Narrative section of your application, use these instructions, which have been tailored to this program. • The Project Narrative (Sections A-D) together may be no longer than 10 pages. You must use the four sections/headings listed below in developing your Project Narrative. You must indicate the Section letter and number in your response, i.e., type “A-1”, “A-2”, etc., before your response to each question. You do not need to type the full criterion in each section. You only need to include the letter and number of the criterion. You may not combine two or more questions or refer to another section of the Project Narrative in your response, such as indicating that the response for B.2 is in C.7. Only information included in the appropriate numbered question will be considered by reviewers. Your application will be scored according to how well you address the requirements for each section of the Project Narrative. • The number of points after each heading is the maximum number of points a review committee may assign to that section of your Project Narrative. Although scoring weights are not assigned to individual bullets, each bullet is assessed in deriving the overall Section score. • Any cost sharing proposed in your application will not be a factor in the evaluation of your response to the Evaluation Criteria.
Sample 1

Related to APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION‌‌ 1. EVALUATION CRITERIA

  • Additional RO Review Criteria (1) In addition to the requirements in Subparagraph 34A, the RO must:

  • Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)

  • 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.

  • Claims Review Methodology a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject to the Quarterly Claims Review.‌

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

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • 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.

  • 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

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion 4. READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not increase your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for the life of the contract, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIPS, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from the “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, with any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they may apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@xxxx-xxx.xxx 8 Choice of Law clauses with TIPS Members If the vendor is awarded a contract with TIPS under this solicitation, the vendor agrees to make any Choice of Law clauses in any contract or agreement entered into between the awarded vendor and with a TIPS member entity to read as follows: "Choice of law shall be the laws of the state where the customer resides" or words to that effect. 9

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!