COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS Sample Clauses

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. Where permitted by terms of the award and Federal law, the may enter into collaborative arrangements with other organizations to jointly carry out activities with Forest Service funds available under this agreement/award.

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. 6.1 Institution may apply to Pearson, by completing the application form set out on the Pearson website, to make arrangements for the delivery of its Higher Nationals Qualifications to collaborative partner institutions in England, Wales and Ireland, in accordance with the UK Quality Code for Higher Education guidance on collaborative provision. Pearson may approve or refuse approval at its sole discretion. 6.2 If Pearson approves the appointment of a collaborative partner the Institution will be responsible for: the management of its collaborative provision in accordance with Pearson guidance and with the UK Quality Code for Higher Education expectations on collaborative provision; ensuring that the collaborative partner has the necessary physical and human resources to deliver the Institution’s Higher National Qualification; establishing monitoring procedures to secure the quality of provision by its collaborative partner; and including new collaborative partners and their courses in their annual submission of Schedule 2.

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. Where permitted by terms of the award and federal law, Subrecipient may enter into collaborative arrangements with other organizations to jointly carry out activities with Forest Service funds available under this award. Subrecipient must obtain approval in writing from GreenLatinos before entering into any collaborative arrangements using Forest Service funds. GreenLatinos will not approve any subaward arrangements between Subrecipient and other organizations. Collaborative arrangements are to be restricted to contractual agreements as set forth by the procurement standards in 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart D.

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. If the nature of the proposed project requires collaboration or subcontractual ar- rangements with other research sci- entists, corporations, organizations, agencies, or entities, the applicant must identify the collaborator(s) and provide a full explanation of the nature of the collaboration. Evidence (i.e., let- ters of intent) should be provided to as- sure reviewers that the collaborators involved have agreed to render this service. In addition, the proposal must indicate whether or not such a collabo- rative arrangement(s) has the potential for conflict(s) of interest.

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. T he IA’s designation of a DIHC and determination of the scope of the supervised group of such DIHC 9. Under section 95C of the IO, where the IA is appointed as the group supervisor of an insurance group (in accordance with the principles adopted by the International Association of Insurance Supervisors), the IA has the power to designate an insurance holding company within such insurance group as a DIHC. Section 95D of the IO sets out the default members of the supervised group of a DIHC, and the IA is empowered thereunder to include or exclude an entity as a member of the supervised group. 10. Without limiting the IA’s discretion to exercise the powers under sections 95C and 95D of the IO, the IA hereby acknowledges that as a general principle, its intention is not to designate an HKMA regulated entity as a DIHC under section 95C of the IO, and not to include an HKMA regulated entity as a member of the supervised group of a DIHC under section 95D(3) of the IO. In the (albeit unlikely) event, therefore, that: (a) the IA proposes to designate an HKMA regulated entity (which is also an insurance holding company) as a DIHC under section 95C of the IO; (b) upon a designation referred to in paragraph 10(a) above, another HKMA regulated entity will become a member of the supervised group of the DIHC by reason of such HKMA regulated entity being a default member of the prospective supervised group within the meaning of section 95D(1) of the IO; (c) upon a designation referred to in paragraph 10(a) above, the supervised group of the DIHC is a sub-group within a wider financial group of which another HKMA regulated entity is a member (even though such HKMA regulated entity will not be a member of the supervised group of the DIHC); or (d) the IA proposes to exercise its power under section 95D(3) of the IO to include an entity which is an HKMA regulated entity as a member of the supervised group of a DIHC, the IA will consult with the MA, prior to the IA commencing the designation or inclusion process, as the case may be, and if the designation or inclusion proceeds as the IA proposed, the IA will maintain close dialogue with the MA throughout such process. 11. Without limiting the IA’s discretion to exercise the powers under section 95C of the IO, in the event that the IA proposes to designate an insurance holding company (not being an HKMA regulated entity) as a DIHC under section 95C of the IO, and on designation: (a) this will result in an HKMA regulated entity...

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. The University has considerable experience of strategic and operational management of collaborative work through its leadership of the Aimhigher and Higher Futures Lifelong Learning Network, and other joint initiatives with the University of Sheffield. Arrangements will be developed with the University of Sheffield to set up appropriate joint bodies to oversee the monitoring and evaluation of collaborative activity. The University's responsibilities and contribution to particular initiatives and activities will be developed and managed through the institutional framework outlined above.

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. 6.1 Institution may apply to Pearson, by completing the application form set out on the Pearson website, for approval to make arrangements for the delivery of its Higher Nationals Qualifications to collaborative partner institutions. Pearson may approve or refuse approval at its sole discretion. 6.2 If Pearson approves the appointment of a collaborative partner the Institution will be responsible for: the management of its collaborative provision in accordance with Pearson guidance; ensuring that the collaborative partner has the necessary physical and human resources to deliver the Institution’s Higher National Qualification; establishing monitoring procedures to secure the quality of provision by its collaborative partners; and d) including new collaborative partners and their courses in their annual submission of Schedule 2.

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. 6.1 The Institution may apply to Pearson to include new collaborative partners, by completing the application form set out on the Pearson website, for the delivery of its Higher National Qualifications under licence to collaborative partner institutions in the UK and overseas, in accordance with the UK Quality Code for Higher Education guidance on collaborative provision. Pearson may approve or refuse approval at its sole discretion. In accordance with clause 2, Institution shall not sub-license any Higher National Qualifications or Higher National Trade Marks to a collaborative partner, unless Pearson provides its prior written approval, which approval may be withheld in Xxxxxxx’x sole discretion. Any approved collaborative partner shall be bound by the terms of this Agreement. 6.2 If Pearson approves the appointment of a collaborative partner the Institution will be responsible for: a) the management of its collaborative provision in accordance with Pearson guidance and with the UK Quality Code for Higher Education expectations on collaborative provision; b) ensuring that the collaborative partner has the necessary physical and human resources to deliver the Institution’s Higher National Qualification; c) establishing monitoring procedures to secure the quality of provision by its collaborative partner; d) including new collaborative partners and their courses in their annual submission of Schedule 2; and, e) all acts and omissions of an approved collaborative partner.

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. SOLAS Apprenticeship Services believes in the concept of working together with our stakeholders in pursuing quality assurance and in striving for continuous improvement. 3.4.1 Education Training Boards There are 16 Education and Training Boards that deliver phase 2 of the craft apprenticeship programme. As such, they are responsible for the operational delivery of the validated programme supported by SOLAS Craft Apprenticeship Services Quality Assurance. Additionally, collaborating providers must implement their own QQI approved QA system for those aspects of apprenticeship delivery that are not covered by SOLAS (i.e., assessment events etc.) ETB also employ a network of SOLAS Authorised Officers who register employers/apprentices on SOLAS behalf in addition to carrying out the monitoring of registered employers (see 2.11 and also appendix 4 on their role and responsibilities) ETB’s may also carry out other administrative functions regarding apprenticeship. These duties are detailed in the Apprenticeship Guidelines which have been developed in collaboration with the ETBs. The Apprenticeship Guidelines are reviewed every three years and updated in collaboration with the Authorised Officers at each Authorised Officer Advisory Network meeting. The approved Apprenticeship Guidelines documentation is published and uploaded to the Apprenticeship Services intranet portal. SOLAS and ETBs enter into a Service Level Agreement (henceforth SLA) for the provision of accountable governance and management of quality assured apprenticeship support activities performed by the SOLAS Authorised Officers and administrative backup services performed by the ETB apprenticeship administrative team. See appendix 6. The emphasis of the agreement is a partnership which enables a collaborative approach to the quality assured service delivery and continuous quality improvement activities. An example of an SLA can be viewed at Appendix 6 while the agreed Apprenticeship Guidelines defines the parameters of the support activities. 3.4.2 Institute of Technology/Technological University There are 5 Technological Universities (henceforth TU) and 1 Institute of Technology (henceforth IoT) that deliver phase 4 and 6 of the craft apprenticeship. Similar to the ETB’s they are responsible for the operational delivery of validated programmes supported by SOLAS Craft Apprentices Services Quality Assurance . Additionally, TUs and the IoT must implement their own QQI approved QA system for those asp...

COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. 4.1 Each Partner will contribute financially to the staffing and running costs of the Collaborative as described in Schedule 6, subject to the provisions of Clause 13. 4.2 The Host Authority shall appoint staff of suitable expertise and qualification who shall be responsible for the Services to be provided by the Collaborative on behalf of the Partners subject to the provisions of Clause 13. 4.3 Nothing in this Agreement shall prejudice or affect the Partners’ power to determine and apply eligibility criteria for the purposes of assessment under the NHS & Community Care Act 1990.