Assessing Noncompliance Events. For a Noncompliance Event, the number of Noncompliance Points specified for that Noncompliance Event will be assessed in accordance with Section 5 (Noncompliance Events) of Exhibit 14 (Payment Mechanism).
Assessing Noncompliance Events Sample Clauses
Related to Assessing Noncompliance Events
HIPAA Compliance If this Contract involves services, activities or products subject to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), the Contractor covenants that it will appropriately safeguard Protected Health Information (defined in 45 CFR 160.103), and agrees that it is subject to, and shall comply with, the provisions of 45 CFR 164 Subpart E regarding use and disclosure of Protected Health Information.
Reports of unusual occurrence The Contractor shall, during the Maintenance Period, prior to the close of each day, send to the Authority and the Authority’s Engineer, by facsimile or e- mail, a report stating accidents and unusual occurrences on the Project Highway relating to the safety and security of the Users and Project Highway. A monthly summary of such reports shall also be sent within 3 (three) business days of the closing of month. For the purposes of this Clause 15.4, accidents and unusual occurrences on the Project Highway shall include:
DBE/HUB Compliance The Engineer’s subcontracting program shall comply with the requirements of Attachment H of the contract (DBE/HUB Requirements).
FERPA Compliance In connection with all FERPA Records that Contractor may create, receive or maintain on behalf of University pursuant to the Underlying Agreement, Contractor is designated as a University Official with a legitimate educational interest in and with respect to such FERPA Records, only to the extent to which Contractor (a) is required to create, receive or maintain FERPA Records to carry out the Underlying Agreement, and (b) understands and agrees to all of the following terms and conditions without reservation:
OFAC Compliance (a) Tenant represents and warrants that (a) Tenant and each person or entity owning an interest in Tenant is (i) not currently identified on the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List maintained by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury (“OFAC”) and/or on any other similar list maintained by OFAC pursuant to any authorizing statute, executive order or regulation (collectively, the “List”), and (ii) not a person or entity with whom a citizen of the United States is prohibited to engage in transactions by any trade embargo, economic sanction, or other prohibition of United States law, regulation, or Executive Order of the President of the United States, (b) none of the funds or other assets of Tenant constitute property of, or are beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, by any Embargoed Person (as hereinafter defined), (c) no Embargoed Person has any interest of any nature whatsoever in Tenant (whether directly or indirectly), (d) none of the funds of Tenant have been derived from any unlawful activity with the result that the investment in Tenant is prohibited by law or that the Lease is in violation of law, and (e) Tenant has implemented procedures, and will consistently apply those procedures, to ensure the foregoing representations and warranties remain true and correct at all times. The term “
GAAP Compliance Contractor maintains an adequate system of accounting and internal controls that meets Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
OSHA Compliance To the extent applicable to the services to be performed under this Agreement, Contractor represents and warrants, that all articles and services furnished under this Agreement meet or exceed the safety standards established and promulgated under the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Law (Public Law 91-596) and its regulations in effect or proposed as of the date of this Agreement.
ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Contractor agrees to submit written quarterly reports to H-GAC detailing all transactions during the previous three (3) month period. Reports must include, but are not limited, to the following information:
Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.
Payment of Non-compliance Penalties j) Subject to Clause (i) above, the Service Provider shall pay the Non-compliance Penalty indicated in the Non-compliance Penalty Certificate within 10 (ten) Business Days of Transnet issuing a valid Tax Invoice to the Service Provider for the amount set out in that certificate. If Transnet does not issue a valid Tax Invoice to the Service Provider for Non-compliance Penalties accrued during any relevant period, those Non-compliance Penalties shall be carried forward to the next period.
