Content of Reviews Sample Clauses

Content of Reviews. A. PDR and CDR: BATC shall conduct “delta” reviews. These reviews will document the design changes between WV2 and WV3. These design reviews (PDR and CDR) shall include information and documentation typical of aerospace industry reviews, such as:
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Content of Reviews. 1. Reviews shall include a written self-appraisal, a description of short and long-term goals and the strategies necessary to implement them, and a peer review. For teaching faculty it shall also include student feedback, student outcomes and assessment and classroom visitation and as may be arranged by the department in advance, a formal observation of the performance of professional duties by Counselors, Librarians, and ASC faculty (through formal observations of counselors in sessions with any student(s)) shall only be with the applicable student’s prior consent as given to the Counselor; and
Content of Reviews a. Design Reviews shall include that information and documentation typical of aerospace industry reviews, such as:

Related to Content of Reviews

  • Review The practitioner reviews the treatment plan and discusses, when appropriate, case circumstances and management options with the attending (or referring) physician. The reviewer consults with the requesting physician when more clarity is needed to make an informed coverage decision. The reviewer may consult with board certified physicians from appropriate specialty areas to assist in making determinations of coverage and/or appropriateness. All such consultations will be documented in the review text. If the reviewer determines that the admission, continued stay or service requested is not a covered service, a notice of non-coverage is issued. Only a physician, behavioral health practitioner (such as a psychiatrist, doctoral-level clinical psychologist, certified addiction medicine specialist), dentist or pharmacist who has the clinical expertise appropriate to the request under review with an unrestricted license may deny coverage based on medical necessity.

  • 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 of Reviews The RIRs shall send a request for review to the Operator per email, where they shall specify the areas they request a review for. The Operator must comply with the request by providing the requested information within working days. The review may include an onsite inspection. In this case the RIRs and the Operator must agree on a specific date for the inspection to take place, which may not be later than sixty calendar days from the date of the request.

  • Reviews (a) During the term of this Agreement and for 7 years after the term of this Agreement, the HSP agrees that the LHIN or its authorized representatives may conduct a Review of the HSP to confirm the HSP’s fulfillment of its obligations under this Agreement. For these purposes the LHIN or its authorized representatives may, upon 24 hours’ Notice to the HSP and during normal business hours enter the HSP’s premises to:

  • Periodic Reviews During January of each year during the term hereof, the Board of Directors of the Company shall review Executive's Annual Salary, bonus, stock options, and additional benefits then being provided to Executive. Following each such review, the Company may in its discretion increase the Annual Salary, bonus, stock options, and benefits; however, the Company shall not decrease such items during the period Executive serves as an employee of the Company. Prior to November 30th of each year during the term hereof, the Board of Directors of the Company shall communicate in writing the results of such review to Executive.

  • Right of Review Once Lessor shall have finally determined said Operating, Utility and Energy or Real Estate Tax Costs at the expiration of a Lease Year, then as to the item so established, Lessee shall only be entitled to dispute said charge as finally established for a period of six (6) months after such charge is finally established, and Lessee specifically waives any right to dispute any such charge at the expiration of said six (6) month period.

  • Termination of Review If a Review is in process and the Notes will be paid in full on the next Payment Date, the Servicer will notify the Asset Representations Reviewer and the Indenture Trustee no less than ten days before that Payment Date. On receipt of notice, the Asset Representations Reviewer will terminate the Review immediately and will not be obligated to deliver a Review Report.

  • 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.

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