Claims review or audit Sample Clauses

Claims review or audit. 6.1.1 In addition to the powers of the Minister’s powers under the PDCAA, MHSAL may, at its option and at any time, conduct a review or audit the accounts and records of the PHARMACY OWNER relating to any Claim submitted by the PHARMACY OWNER to determine whether the PHARMACY OWNER has complied with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 6.1.2 Any review or audit will be conducted by MHSAL’s auditors, inspectors or representatives in accordance with the following provisions and at the times and in conformance with the relevant provisions of the Manual: (a) MHSAL will provide the PHARMACY OWNER with advance notice of any review or audit and MHSAL’s auditors, inspectors or representatives will endeavor to conduct the review or audit within the time frames set out in the Manual; (b) the scope and coverage of any review or audit shall be determined by the Minister and may take the form of any one or more of the processes set out in the Manual;
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Claims review or audit

  • 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.

  • 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).

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

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

  • Grievance Committee The Hospital will recognize a Grievance Committee composed of the Chief Xxxxxxx and not more than (as set out in Local Provisions Appendix) employees selected by the Union who have completed their probationary period. A general representative of the Union may be present at any meeting of the Committee. The purpose of the Committee is to deal with complaints or grievances as set out in this Collective Agreement. The Union shall keep the Hospital notified in writing of the names of the members of the Grievance Committee appointed or selected under this Article as well as the effective date of their respective appointments. A Committee member shall suffer no loss of earnings for time spent during their regular scheduled working hours in attending grievance meetings with the Hospital up to, but not including arbitration. The number of employees on the Grievance Committee shall be determined locally.

  • Claims and Review Procedure In the event that any claim for benefits that must initially be submitted in writing to the Board of Directors, is denied (in whole or in part) hereunder, the claimant shall receive from First Charter a notice of denial in writing within 60 days, written in a manner calculated to be understood by the claimant, setting forth the specific reasons for denial, with specific reference to pertinent provisions of this Supplemental Agreement. Any disagreements about such interpretations and construction shall be submitted to an arbitrator subject to the rules and procedures established by the American Arbitration Association. The arbitrator shall be acceptable to both First Charter and the Executive (or Beneficiary); if the parties cannot agree on a single arbitrator, the disagreement shall be heard by a panel of three arbitrators, with each party to appoint one arbitrator and the third to be chosen by the other two. No member of the Board of Directors shall be liable to any person for any action taken under Article VIII except those actions undertaken with lack of good faith.

  • Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.

  • Post Review With respect to each contract not governed by paragraph 2 of this Part, the procedures set forth in paragraph 4 of Appendix 1 to the Guidelines shall apply.

  • 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.

  • Completion of Review for Certain Review Receivables Following the delivery of the list of the Review Receivables and before the delivery of the Review Report by the Asset Representations Reviewer, the Servicer may notify the Asset Representations Reviewer if a Review Receivable is paid in full by the Obligor or purchased from the Issuer in accordance with the terms of the Basic Documents. On receipt of such notice, the Asset Representations Reviewer will immediately terminate all Tests of the related Review Receivable, and the Review of such Review Receivables will be considered complete (a “Test Complete”). In this case, the related Review Report will indicate a Test Complete for such Review Receivable and the related reason.

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