Comparing Internal to External Candidates Sample Clauses

Comparing Internal to External Candidates a. Qualifications developed by the Administration prior to the posting, shall not be discriminatory, unreasonable or excessive and shall be germane to the position. A current bargaining unit member who does not have a marginal or poor evaluation shall be placed in the position if he/she meets the posted qualifications, including satisfactorily completing any standardized assessments required of the position.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Comparing Internal to External Candidates

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan

  • Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)

  • Internal Control Effective control and accountability must be maintained for all cash, real and personal property, and other assets. Grantee must adequately safeguard all such property and must provide assurance that it is used solely for authorized purposes. Grantee must also have systems in place that provide reasonable assurance that the information is accurate, allowable, and compliant with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2 CFR 200.303.

  • Project Monitoring Reporting Evaluation A. The Project Implementing Entity shall monitor and evaluate the progress of its activities under the Project and prepare Project Reports in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.08(b) of the General Conditions and on the basis of indicators agreed with the Bank. Each such report shall cover the period of one

  • STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is an NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram with the exception of the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”) to be completed by the LEA, and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by XXX xxxxxxxx to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. XXX shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by XXX.

  • HHS Single Audit Unit will notify Grantee to complete the Single Audit Determination Form If Grantee fails to complete the form within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of notice, Grantee maybe subject to sanctions and remedies for non-compliance.

  • Evaluation Period Customer’s right to use the Services on a Trial Basis are time-limited and will terminate immediately upon the earlier of (i) the trial end date as specified in an Order Form or other document executed by the parties regarding such trial, or (ii) the start date of when Customer purchases a right to use such Services on a non-Trial Basis, or (iii) the date when QuoVadis terminates Customer’s right to use the Services on a Trial Basis (which QuoVadis may do at any time in its sole discretion). Customer must cease using the Services on a Trial Basis upon any such termination.

  • Completion of Evaluation Cycle 1. The summative evaluation rating shall be based upon a preponderance of the evidence, assessed in a holistic manner, that is aligned to the Ohio Educator Standards. Only evidence gathered during the walkthroughs and formal observations that are conducted for the current school year may be used.

  • Internal Controls The Company shall maintain a system of internal accounting controls sufficient to provide reasonable assurances that: (i) transactions are executed in accordance with management’s general or specific authorization; (ii) transactions are recorded as necessary in order to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP and to maintain accountability for assets; (iii) access to assets is permitted only in accordance with management’s general or specific authorization; and (iv) the recorded accountability for assets is compared with existing assets at reasonable intervals and appropriate action is taken with respect to any differences.

  • Evaluation, Testing, and Monitoring 1. The System Agency may review, test, evaluate and monitor Grantee’s Products and services, as well as associated documentation and technical support for compliance with the Accessibility Standards. Review, testing, evaluation and monitoring may be conducted before and after the award of a contract. Testing and monitoring may include user acceptance testing. Neither the review, testing (including acceptance testing), evaluation or monitoring of any Product or service, nor the absence of review, testing, evaluation or monitoring, will result in a waiver of the State’s right to contest the Grantee’s assertion of compliance with the Accessibility Standards.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.