Evaluation and selection process - FP7 SEC Sample Clauses

Evaluation and selection process - FP7 SEC. Among the findings were that the evaluation and selection process overall works well, with evidence that high quality projects have been selected. Another finding was that it was appropriate to base the selection procedures for FP7 SEC on wider DG RTD procedures32 already in place that have evolved over successive Framework Programmes. This helped to avoid reinventing the wheel. Since the outset of the programme, some modifications have been made to the procedures for evaluating proposals, in particular, the transition to ‘remote evaluation’. Originally, projects were assessed by evaluators physically present with hard copy versions of applications. Now, proposals are reviewed by independent evaluators separately who receive a copy of the proposal electronically. Remote evaluation was viewed as having improved efficiency, without undermining the quality of the application screening and evaluation process. Evaluators are still called to Brussels for the consensus meeting, and for projects that are sensitive and involve classified information. The external evaluators receive appropriate training on how the detailed evaluation process should be carried out. Other questions relating to the evaluation and selection process include the extent to which beneficiaries found the application process user-friendly. Overall, most beneficiaries felt that the application process had run smoothly, although some larger consortia were concerned about the amount of administrative and financial information that has to be collected from partners (this cannot be avoided however, unless there are changes to the EU Financial Regulation). Guidance for applicants was viewed as useful and detailed, however it was pointed out that a shorter guidance document could be produced for SMEs and end-users containing simplified information. Public entities potentially interested in taking part in FP7 SEC have very little time and it would help to secure their participation if there were a simplified procedure for them to take part in the programme.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Evaluation and selection process - FP7 SEC

  • Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.

  • Application and Selection (1) Application for professional development leave shall contain an appropriate outline of the project or work to be accomplished during the leave.

  • Project Monitoring Reporting and Evaluation The Recipient shall furnish to the Association each Project Report not later than forty-five (45) days after the end of each calendar semester, covering the calendar semester.

  • Committee Composition and Selection 1. The committee shall be comprised of eight members as follows: • five Teachers • three administrators

  • Recruitment and Selection Swedish Medical Center will recruit and hire the most qualified applicants to meet the staffing needs of the Center and thereafter transfer, promote, and retain such persons as employees. All such actions and decisions shall comply with the Center’s desire to promote from within whenever qualified candidates are identified, interested, and available.

  • EVALUATION AND MONITORING The ORGANIZATION agrees to maintain books, records and other documents and evidence, and to use accounting procedures and practices that sufficiently and properly support the complete performance of and the full compliance with this Agreement. The ORGANIZATION will retain these supporting books, records, documents and other materials for at least three (3) calendar years following the year in which the Agreement expires. The COUNTY and/or the State Auditor and any of their representatives shall have full and complete access to these books, records and other documents and evidence retained by the ORGANIZATION respecting all matters covered in and under this Agreement, and shall have the right to examine such during normal business hours as often as the COUNTY and/or the State Auditor may deem necessary. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, and records of matters covered by this Agreement. These access and examination rights shall last for three calendar years following the year in which the Agreement expires. The COUNTY intends without guarantee for its agents to use reasonable security procedures and protections to assure that related records and documents provided by the ORGANIZATION are not erroneously disclosed to third parties. The COUNTY will, however, disclose or make this material available to those authorized by/in the above paragraph or permitted under the provisions of Chapter 42.56 RCW without notice to the ORGANIZATION. The ORGANIZATION shall cooperate with and freely participate in any other monitoring or evaluation activities pertinent to this Agreement that the COUNTY finds needing to be conducted.

  • Selection of projects and financial parameters 4.1 Open calls and availability of funds (including number of calls, duration of calls, and estimated size):

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • 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

  • Billing and Payment Procedure for Forest Products Delivered The State will compute and forward to Purchaser a billing statement of charges for forest products delivered during the billing period at the delivered rate shown in P- 028.2 clause. After receipt of the billing statement, Purchaser’s payment must be received by the Department of Natural Resources on or before the due date shown on the billing statement. Purchaser agrees to make payment, payable to the Department of Natural Resources. Failure to pay on time for forest products delivered is considered a breach of contract. Included with the billing statement will be a summary report for the billing period compiled by the State or their log and load reporting service. The State will adjust final xxxxxxxx to account for any State approved payment reductions. P-080 Payment Account Refund Advance payments made under P-045 or P-045.2 remaining on account above the value for the charges shall be returned to Purchaser within 30 days following the final report of charges. Refunds not made within the 30 day period will accrue interest at the interest rate, as established by WAC 000-000-000, computed on a daily basis until paid.

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