A&S Review Panel Program Sample Clauses

A&S Review Panel Program a. MCAAP/MCBOA and MCPS agree to jointly operate an A&S Review Panel Program. This program is a mechanism for maintaining system-wide quality control ensuring that all administrators responsible for leadership are functioning at or above the high MCPS standards of performance. It provides intensive assistance for any administrator who has not yet achieved that standard or who falls below acceptable standards. Assistance and review are provided to both experienced MCPS administrators in need of significant improvement and novice administrators in their first year in a new position. b. There are a number of A&S Review Panels based on the role of the administrators receiving assistance and review. c. MCPS and MCAAP/MCBOA may identify representatives to serve as observers to the panel and its operations. d. The A&S PGS Review Panel Program is by definition and design, a collaborative effort between MCAAP/MCBOA and MCPS. In the event that one of the parties determines that this program fails to live up to the purposes and collaborative principles for which it was established, the A&S PGS Implementation Team will meet with the superintendent and the president of MCAAP/MCBOA to review options and attempt to address concerns. If consensus cannot be reached, MCAAP/MCBOA can discontinue its involvement in the program with 90 days’ notice. MCPS may continue to fund positions in the budget associated with the evaluation system, but it may not refer to the program as the A&S PGS Review Panel Program. e. A&S PGS Review Panel Responsibilities: (1) Reviews quarterly updates provided to them on the progress of administrators receiving support. (2) Panel members may provide suggestions for support in helping the administrator meet standard. (3) The panel makes final recommendations to the superintendent when appropriate. f. A&S PGS Review Panel Decisions: (1) If the supervisor and the consulting principal/mentor agree that the administrator meets standard, the administrator returns to the professional growth cycle. (2) If the supervisor and the consulting principal/mentor agree that the administrator has not met standard or they could not agree if the administrator met standard, they will present their findings to the A&S PGS Review Panel. The administrator will also have the opportunity to present information to the A&S PGS Review Panel. After consideration of all information, the A&S PGS Review Panel makes a recommendation to the superintendent. g. Rights and Responsibili...
Sample 1See All (7)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
A&S Review Panel Program. 1. MCAAP/MCBOA and MCPS agree to jointly operate an A&S Review Panel Program. This program is a mechanism for maintaining system-wide quality control ensuring that all admin- istrators responsible for leadership are functioning at or above the high MCPS standards of performance. It provides intensive assistance for any administrator who has not yet achieved that standard or who falls below acceptable standards. Assistance and review are provided to both experienced MCPS administrators in need of significant improvement and novice administrators in their first year in a new position. 2. There are a number of A&S review panels based on the role of the administrators receiving assistance and review. 3. MCPS and MCAAP/MCBOA may identify representatives to serve as observers to the panel and its operations. 4. The A&S PGS Review Panel Program is by definition and design, a collaborative effort between MCAAP/MCBOA and MCPS. In the event that one of the parties determines that this program fails to live up to the purposes and collaborative principles for which it was established, the A&S PGS Implementation Team will meet with the Superintendent and the President of MCAAP/ MCBOA to review options and attempt to address concerns. If consensus cannot be reached, MCAAP/MCBOA can discontinue its involvement in the program with 90 days’ notice. MCPS may continue to fund positions in the budget associated with the evaluation system, but it may not refer to the program as the A&S PGS Review Panel Program.
Sample 1Sample 2
A&S Review Panel Program a. MCAASP/XXXXX and MCPS agree to jointly operate an A&S Review Panel Program. This program is a mechanism for maintaining system- wide quality control, ensuring that all administrators responsible for leadership are functioning at or above the high MCPS standards of performance. It provides intensive assistance for any administrator who has not yet achieved that standard or who falls below acceptable standards. Assistance and review are provided to both experienced MCPS administrators in need of significant improvement and novice administrators in their first year in a new position. b. The A&S PGS Review Panel Program is, by definition and design, a collaborative effort between XXXXXX/XXXXX and MCPS. In the event that one of the parties determines that this program fails to live up to the purposes and collaborative principles for which it was established, the A&S PGS Implementation Team will meet with the superintendent and the president of XXXXXX to review options and attempt to address concerns. If consensus cannot be reached, MCAASP can discontinue its involvement in the program with 90 days’ notice. MCPS may continue to fund positions in the budget associated with the evaluation system, but it may not refer to the program as the A&S PGS Review Panel Program.
Sample 1

Related to A&S Review Panel Program

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

  • Program Review The State ECEAP Office will conduct a review of each contractor’s compliance with the ECEAP Contract and ECEAP Performance Standards every four years. The review will involve ECEAP staff and parents. After the Program Review, the State ECEAP Office will provide the contractor with a Program Review report. The contractor must submit an ECEAP Corrective Action Plan for non-compliance with ECEAP Performance Standards. The Plan must be approved by the State ECEAP Office.

  • Claims Review Population A description of the Population subject to the Claims Review.

  • Claims Review Report The IRO shall prepare a Claims Review Report as described in this Appendix for each Claims Review performed. The following information shall be included in the Claims Review Report for each Discovery Sample and Full Sample (if applicable).

  • Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.

  • Quality Assurance Program An employee shall be entitled to leave of absence without loss of earnings from her or his regularly scheduled working hours for the purpose of writing examinations required by the College of Nurses of Ontario arising out of the Quality Assurance Program.

  • Claims Review The IRO shall perform the Claims Review annually to cover each of the five Reporting Periods. The IRO shall perform all components of each Claims Review.

  • Staffing Plan The Board and the Association agree that optimum class size is an important aspect of the effective educational program. The Polk County School Staffing Plan shall be constructed each year according to the procedures set forth in Board Policy and, upon adoption, shall become Board Policy.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances 1. If FEMA determines that the entire scope of an Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances in Appendix B of this Agreement, with determinations for Tier II Allowances being made by SOI-qualified staff, FEMA shall complete the Section 106 review process by documenting this determination in the project file, without SHPO review or notification. 2. If the Undertaking involves a National Historic Landmark (NHL), FEMA shall notify the SHPO, participating Tribe(s), and the NPS NHL Program Manager of the NPS Midwest Regional Office that the Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances. FEMA shall provide information about the proposed scope of work for the Undertaking and the allowance(s) enabling FEMA’s determination. 3. If FEMA determines any portion of an Undertaking’s scope of work does not conform to one or more allowances listed in Appendix B, FEMA shall conduct expedited or standard Section 106 review, as appropriate, for the entire Undertaking in accordance with Stipulation II.B, Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings, or Stipulation II.C, Standard Project Review. 4. Allowances may be revised and new allowances may be added to this Agreement in accordance with Stipulation IV.A.3, Amendments. B. Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration. Not later than thirty (30) calendar days after issuance of the final audit report, CONSULTANT may request a review by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by ALAMEDA CTC will excuse CONSULTANT from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT and subconsultants’ contracts, including cost proposals and ICRs, may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an AGREEMENT Audit, an Incurred Cost Audit, an ICR Audit, or a certified public accountant (“CPA”) ICR Audit Workpaper Review. If selected for audit or review, the AGREEMENT, cost proposal and ICR and related workpapers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR Audit Workpaper Review it is CONSULTANT’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s workpapers including making copies as necessary. The AGREEMENT, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by CONSULTANT and approved by ALAMEDA CTC to conform to the audit or review recommendations. CONSULTANT agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by ALAMEDA CTC at its sole discretion. Refusal by CONSULTANT to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state, or local governments have access to CPA workpapers, will be considered a breach of contract terms and cause for termination of the AGREEMENT and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.

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