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.
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.
Compliance Review During the Term, Developer agrees to permit the GLO, HUD, and/or a designated representative of the GLO or HUD to access the Property for the purpose of performing Compliance-Monitoring Procedures. In accordance with GLO Compliance-Monitoring Procedures, the GLO or HUD will periodically monitor and audit Developer’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, the CDBG-DR Regulations, the CDBG Multifamily Rental Housing Guidelines, and any and all other Governmental Requirements during the Term. In conducting any compliance reviews, the GLO or HUD will rely primarily on information obtained from Developer’s records and reports, on-site monitoring, and audit reports. The GLO or HUD may also consider other relevant information gained from other sources, including litigation and citizen complaints. 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION (a) Developer agrees to the following. (i) Developer shall not receive, store, dispose, or release any Hazardous Materials on or to the Property; transport any Hazardous Materials to or from the Property; or permit the existence of any Hazardous Material contamination on the Property. (ii) Developer shall give written notice to the GLO immediately when Developer acquires knowledge of the presence of any Hazardous Material on the Property; the transport of any Hazardous Materials to or from the Property; or the existence of any Hazardous Material contamination on the Property, with a full description thereof. (iii) Developer will promptly, at Developer’s sole cost and expense, comply with any Governmental Requirements regarding the removal, treatment, or disposal of such Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Material contamination and provide the GLO with satisfactory evidence of such compliance. (iv) Developer shall provide the GLO, within thirty (30) days of demand by the GLO, financial assurance evidencing to the GLO that the necessary funds are available to pay for the cost of removing, treating, and disposing of such Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Material contamination and discharging any assessments that may be established on the Property as a result thereof. (v) Developer shall insure that all leases, licenses, and agreements of any kind (whether written or oral) now or hereafter executed that permit any party to occupy, possess, or use in any way the Property or any part thereof include an express prohibition on the disposal or discharge of any Hazardous Materials at the Property and a provision stating that failure to comply with such prohibition shall expressly constitute a default under any such agreement. (vi) Developer shall not cause or suffer any liens (including any so-called state, federal, or local “Superfund” lien relating to such matters) to be recorded against the Property as a consequence of, or in any way related to, the presence, remediation, or disposal of Hazardous Materials in or about the Property. (b) DEVELOPER SHALL, AT ALL TIMES, RETAIN ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE PRESENCE, HANDLING, TREATMENT, STORAGE, TRANSPORTATION, REMOVAL, OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON THE PROPERTY. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY EVENT OF DEFAULT OCCURS OR CONTINUES, WHETHER THE GLO EXERCISES ANY REMEDIES IN RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY, OR SUCH SITUATION RELATED TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WAS CAUSED BY OR WITHIN THE CONTROL OF DEVELOPER OR THE GLO, DEVELOPER SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY, AND HOLD HARMLESS THE GLO AND ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES, SUITS, ACTIONS, CLAIMS, DEMANDS, PENALTIES, DAMAGES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, INTEREST, PENALTIES, FINES, AND MONETARY SANCTIONS), LOSSES, COSTS, AND EXPENSES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS) THAT MAY: (i) NOW OR IN THE FUTURE (WHETHER BEFORE OR AFTER THE CULMINATION OF THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT) BE INCURRED OR SUFFERED BY THE GLO BY REASON OF, RESULTING FROM, IN CONNECTION WITH, OR ARISING IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER FROM THE BREACH OF ANY WARRANTY OR COVENANT IN THIS SECTION OR THE INACCURACY OF ANY REPRESENTATION OF DEVELOPER IN RELATION TO THIS AGREEMENT;
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.
Performance Reviews The Employee will be provided with a written performance appraisal at least once per year and said appraisal will be reviewed at which time all aspects of the assessment can be fully discussed.
Performance Review Where a performance review of an employee’s performance is carried out, the employee shall be given sufficient opportunity after the interview to read and review the performance review. Provision shall be made on the performance review form for an employee to sign it. The form shall provide for the employee’s signature in two (2) places, one (1) indicating that the employee has read and accepts the performance review, and the other indicating that the employee disagrees with the performance review. The employee shall sign in only one (1) of the places provided. No employee may initiate a grievance regarding the contents of a performance review unless the signature indicates disagreement. An employee shall, upon request, receive a copy of this performance review at the time of signing. An employee’s performance review shall not be changed after an employee has signed it, without the knowledge of the employee, and any such changes shall be subject to the grievance procedure of this Agreement. The employee may respond, in writing, to the performance review. Such response will be attached to the performance review.
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
Midterm Review The Recipient shall: (a) carry out jointly with the Association, no later than 24 months after the Effective Date, a midterm review to assess the status of Project implementation, as measured against the performance indicators referred to in Section II.A.1 (a) of Schedule 2 to this Agreement. Such review shall include an assessment of the following: (i) overall progress in Project implementation; (ii) results of monitoring and evaluation activities; (iii) annual work plans and budgets;
Periodic Review The General Counsel shall periodically review the Procurement Integrity Procedures with OSC personnel in order to ascertain potential areas of exposure to improper influence and to adopt desirable revisions for more effective avoidance of improper influences.
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.