Evaluation Factors for RESEARCH Sample Clauses

Evaluation Factors for RESEARCH. Proposals The following five factors will be used to evaluate RESEARCH proposals. Factors 1 through 5 are rated equally. a. The overall technical merit of the proposed science products and services, including their relevance to the overall goals and objectives of ESE and the ability to meet identified needs of the broad (or a targeted segment of the) Earth system science research community towards addressing NASA Earth System science priorities. b. The competence and relevant experience of the proposed Earth system science researchers included on the team as an indication of their ability to carry the proposed activity to a successful conclusion. Past performance will be considered in the evaluation. a. Identification of the user community, including any multiple segments, and the needs for products, information, knowledge, and services. b. The degree of understanding of the targeted user community and their requirements as documented in the proposal. c. Proposed methodologies of working with the users and assessment of effectiveness of such partnerships throughout the lifetime of the proposed project. d. The likely flexibility and responsiveness of the proposed REASoN project capabilities to meet evolving user needs as evidenced by the discussion of the approach to this issue in the proposal. a. Proposes innovative software/hardware solutions to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of NASA Earth science data and information management activities b. Describes process for selecting and describing data format and content. c. Describes the level of services (e.g., timeliness, quality, quantity, availability) of proposed products and services; and anticipated customers. d. Describes the metrics for evaluating the progress in implementing the proposed products or services; self assessments (and customer assessments) of the usage, quality, timeliness, and value of the products and services. e. Describes interface standards and protocols for data and information archive, distribution, processing as appropriate. f. Identifies candidate software to be considered for reuse in the proposed projects as-well-as potential software available for subsequent reuse. g. Describes extent to which proposed products and services provide insight or capabilities for evolution of ESE data systems. h. Identifies non-proprietary cost data to be provided to SEEDS cost estimation model development effort.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Evaluation Factors for RESEARCH

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans. B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below. C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows: i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus. ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals. D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. The Choate Team will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • 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.

  • Annual Evaluations The purpose of the annual evaluation is to assess and communicate the nature and extent of an employee's performance of assigned duties consistent with the criteria specified below in this Policy. Except for those employees who have received notice of non-reappointment pursuant to the BOT- UFF Policy on Non- reappointment, every employee shall be evaluated at least once annually. Personnel decisions shall take such annual evaluations into account, provided that such decisions need not be based solely on written faculty performance evaluations.

  • PROGRESS EVALUATION Engineer shall, from time to time during the progress of the Engineering Services, confer with County at County’s election. Engineer shall prepare and present such information as may be pertinent and necessary, or as may be reasonably requested by County, in order for County to evaluate features of the Engineering Services. At the request of County or Engineer, conferences shall be provided at Engineer's office, the offices of County, or at other locations designated by County. When requested by County, such conferences shall also include evaluation of the Engineering Services. County may, from time to time, require Engineer to appear and provide information to the Williamson County Commissioners Court. Should County determine that the progress in Engineering Services does not satisfy an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, then County shall review same with Engineer to determine corrective action required. Engineer shall promptly advise County in writing of events which have or may have a significant impact upon the progress of the Engineering Services, including but not limited to the following: A. Problems, delays, adverse conditions which may materially affect the ability to meet the objectives of an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, or preclude the attainment of Project Engineering Services units by established time periods; and such disclosure shall be accompanied by statement of actions taken or contemplated, and County assistance needed to resolve the situation, if any; and B. Favorable developments or events which enable meeting goals sooner than anticipated in relation to an applicable Work Authorization’s or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto.

  • Independent Evaluation Buyer is experienced and knowledgeable in the oil and gas business. Buyer has been advised by and has relied solely on its own expertise and legal, tax, accounting, marketing, land, engineering, environmental and other professional counsel concerning this transaction, the Subject Property and value thereof.

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

  • Student Evaluation a. The President of the College or the President’s designee shall be responsible for administering the student evaluation process. b. Student evaluation packets for each class containing instruments and instructions shall be distributed to each faculty member by the first week of December during the fall semester and by the last week in April during the spring semester. c. It is expressly agreed that the faculty member being evaluated shall not be present in the classroom when the student evaluation is being administered and that all instruction to students with regard to such student evaluation shall be included in writing on the instrument, provided further that the designated unit or non-unit professional shall return the student evaluation directly to the President of the College or the President’s designee. The administering of the student evaluation shall be the responsibility of the President of the College or the President’s designee who shall determine who among unit or non-unit professionals shall administer such student evaluation. Student evaluations shall be valid only if signed by the student; provided, however, that faculty members shall not be entitled to the identity of the student responding unless such student evaluation is used as a basis for dismissal or other disciplinary action and such will be communicated to the students. d. The data from the student evaluation shall be tabulated and copies sent to the President of the College or the President’s designee. The raw data shall be retained by the College for a period of one (1) year during which time the faculty member shall have access thereto upon written request. e. The President of the College or the President’s designee shall review the tabulated data and shall forward a data summary to the faculty member by January 23 for the fall semester and by June 15 for the spring semester. f. The faculty member shall have seven (7) working days in which to respond to such data.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and xxxx them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • Evaluation Period Until 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on August 16, 2002 (the "Evaluation Period"), Purchaser and its authorized agents and representatives (for purposes of this Article V, the "Licensee Parties") shall have the right, subject to the right of any Tenants, to enter upon the Real Property at all reasonable times during normal business hours to perform an inspection of the Real Property, the Improvements and the Personal Property. Purchaser will provide to Seller notice (for purposes of this Section 5.1(a), an "Entry Notice") of the intention of Purchaser or the other Licensee Parties to enter the Real Property at least 24 hours prior to such intended entry and specify the intended purpose therefor and the inspections and examinations contemplated to be made and with whom any Licensee Party will communicate. At Seller's option, Seller may be present for any such entry and inspection. Purchaser shall not communicate with or contact any of the Tenants or any of the Authorities without the prior written consent of Seller, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. If Purchaser shall elect to communicate with any of the Authorities and Seller consents thereto, Purchaser shall give Seller prior notice thereof, and Seller and Seller's representatives shall have the right, but not the obligation, to attend, and participate in, all such meetings. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, no so-called Phase II environmental physical testing or sampling shall be conducted during any such entry by Purchaser or any Licensee Party upon the Real Property without Seller's specific prior written consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or unduly delayed. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE with respect to the provisions of this Section 5.1.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!