Evaluation Committee 16.2.1 The Association and the Board agree to establish a standing joint Evaluation Development Committee for the purpose of regularly reviewing the effectiveness of the policy, procedure and process, including the evaluation instrument, for the evaluation of teachers in the District and to provide recommendations to the Superintendent and Board by April 30.
Evaluation Process
A. The immediate supervisor will meet with an employee at the start of their review period to discuss performance expectations. The employee will receive copies of their performance expectations as well as notification of any modifications made during the review period. Employee work performance will be evaluated during probationary, trial service and transition review periods and at least annually thereafter. Notification will be given to a probationary or trial service employee whose work performance is determined to be unsatisfactory.
B. The supervisor will discuss the evaluation with the employee. The employee will have the opportunity to provide feedback on the evaluation. The discussion may include such topics as:
1. Reviewing the employee’s performance;
2. Identifying ways the employee may improve their performance;
3. Updating the employee’s position description, if necessary;
4. Identifying performance goals and expectations for the next appraisal period; and
5. Identifying employee training and development needs.
C. The performance evaluation process will include, but not be limited to, a written performance evaluation on forms used by the Employer, the employee’s signature acknowledging receipt of the forms, and any comments by the employee. A copy of the performance evaluation will be provided to the employee at the time of the review. A copy of the final performance evaluation, including any employee or reviewer comments, will be provided to the employee. The original performance evaluation forms, including the employee’s comments, will be maintained in the employee’s personnel file.
D. If an employee disagrees with their performance evaluation, the employee has the right to attach a rebuttal.
E. The performance evaluation process is subject to the grievance procedure in Article 30. The specific content of a performance evaluation is not subject to the grievance procedure.
F. Performance evaluations will not be used to initiate personnel actions such as transfer, promotion, or discipline.
Study Population Infants who underwent creation of an enterostomy receiving postoperative care and awaiting enterostomy closure: to be assessed for eligibility: n = 201 to be assigned to the study: n = 106 to be analysed: n = 106 Duration of intervention per patient of the intervention group: 6 weeks between enterostomy creation and enterostomy closure Follow-up per patient: 3 months, 6 months and 12 months post enterostomy closure, following enterostomy closure (12-month follow-up only applicable for patients that are recruited early enough to complete this follow-up within the 48 month of overall study duration).
Joint Union/Management Committee It shall be appropriate for either the Union or the University to request that a Joint Union/Management committee be convened, with Environmental Health and Safety as a participating member, to discuss health and safety concerns and to explore options for addressing those concerns through appropriate training or other approaches.
Joint Steering Committee Promptly after the Effective Date, the Parties will form a Joint Steering Committee (the “JSC”) composed of an equal number of employees of each of Curis and Genentech, but in no event to exceed four (4) members from each Party. The JSC shall determine the specific goals for the Collaboration, shall manage the ongoing research conducted under the Collaboration in accordance with the Research Plan, shall monitor the progress and results of such work, and shall oversee and coordinate the development and commercialization of Compounds (other than Collaboration Products); provided, however, that the JSC shall not have decision-making authority with respect to the development and commercialization of Collaboration Products, which shall be governed by the CSC. The presence of at least one (1) representative of each Party shall constitute a quorum for the conduct of any JSC meeting. All decisions of the JSC shall require unanimous approval, with the representatives of each Party collectively having one (1) vote, provided in the event of a deadlock, the issue shall be referred to the Chief Executive Officer of Curis and the Senior Vice President of Research of Genentech, or their respective designees, who shall promptly meet and attempt in good faith to resolve such issue within thirty (30) days. If such executives cannot resolve such matter, then Genentech shall have final decision-making authority with regard to decisions regarding the Collaboration (including, without limitation, the JSC’s designation of a Compound as either a Lead Product or Excluded Product); provided, however, that in no event shall Genentech have the right or power to take any of the following actions without the approval of Curis’ representatives on the JSC:
(a) approve the initial Research Plan (an outline of which has been agreed upon by the Parties as of the Effective Date);
(b) amend or modify this Agreement or the Research Plan;
(c) resolve any such matter in a manner that conflicts with the provisions of this Agreement (including, without limitation, the Research Plan);
(d) make any decision with respect to the development or commercialization of Curis Products; or
(e) make any decision with respect to the prosecution, maintenance, defense or enforcement of any Curis Patents. The JSC shall meet at such frequency as the JSC agrees, except that, until the filing of the first IND for a Lead Product utilizing Systemic Delivery in a Major Market, the JSC shall meet on at least a quarterly basis. Meetings of the JSC, and JSC dispute resolution meetings between Curis’ Chief Executive Officer and Genentech’s Senior Vice President of Research (or their designees), may be conducted by videoconference, teleconference or in person, as agreed by the Parties, and the Parties shall agree upon the time and place of meetings. A reasonable number of additional representatives of a Party may attend meetings of the JSC in a non-voting capacity. The JSC shall exist for so long as either any work is being conducted under the Research Plan or any Compound is being developed or commercialized by Genentech, Curis, or any of their respective Affiliate(s) or sublicensee(s) in any Major Market. The JSC shall also be responsible for designating one or more representatives of each Party with expertise in patent law (which individuals need not be members of the JSC) to oversee intellectual property matters relating to the Collaboration, subject to the provisions of Article 10, and such patent committee shall coordinate with and report to the JSC.
Evaluator Any person designated by a superintendent who has primary or supervisory responsibility for observation and evaluation. The superintendent is responsible for ensuring that all Evaluators have training in the principles of supervision and evaluation. Each Educator will have one primary Evaluator at any one time responsible for determining performance ratings.
i) Primary Evaluator shall be the person who determines the Educator’s performance ratings and evaluation.
ii) Supervising Evaluator shall be the person responsible for developing the Educator Plan, supervising the Educator’s progress through formative assessments, evaluating the Educator’s progress toward attaining the Educator Plan goals, and making recommendations about the evaluation ratings to the primary Evaluator at the end of the Educator Plan. The Supervising Evaluator may be the primary Evaluator or his/her designee.
Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)
Coordinator 6.4.1 The Coordinator shall be the intermediary between the Parties and the Funding Authority and shall perform all tasks assigned to it as described in the Grant Agreement and in this Consortium Agreement.
6.4.2 In particular, the Coordinator shall be responsible for: - monitoring compliance by the Parties with their obligations - keeping the address list of Members and other contact persons updated and available - collecting, reviewing and submitting information on the progress of the Project and reports and other deliverables (including financial statements and related certification) to the Funding Authority - preparing the meetings, proposing decisions and preparing the agenda of General Assembly meetings, chairing the meetings, preparing the minutes of the meetings and monitoring the implementation of decisions taken at meetings - transmitting promptly documents and information connected with the Project,, - administering the financial contribution of the Funding Authority and fulfilling the financial tasks described in Section 7.3 - providing, upon request, the Parties with official copies or originals of documents which are in the sole possession of the Coordinator when such copies or originals are necessary for the Parties to present claims. If one or more of the Parties is late in submission of any project deliverable, the Coordinator may nevertheless submit the other parties’ project deliverables and all other documents required by the Grant Agreement to the Funding Authority in time.
6.4.3 If the Coordinator fails in its coordination tasks, the General Assembly may propose to the Funding Authority to change the Coordinator.
6.4.4 The Coordinator shall not be entitled to act or to make legally binding declarations on behalf of any other Party or of the consortium, unless explicitly stated otherwise in the Grant Agreement or this Consortium Agreement.
6.4.5 The Coordinator shall not enlarge its role beyond the tasks specified in this Consortium Agreement and in the Grant Agreement. [Option: 6.5 Management Support Team (Optional, where foreseen in Grant Agreement or otherwise decided by the consortium) The Management Support Team shall be proposed by the Coordinator. It shall be appointed by the General Assembly and shall assist and facilitate the work of the General Assembly. The Management Support Team shall provide assistance to the Coordinator for executing the decisions of the General Assembly. It shall be responsible for the day-to-day management of the Project.] [Option: 6.6 External Expert Advisory Board (EEAB) (Optional, where foreseen in Grant Agreement or otherwise decided by the consortium) An External Expert Advisory Board (EEAB) will be appointed and steered by the Executive Board. The EEAB shall assist and facilitate the decisions made by the General Assembly. The Coordinator is authorised to execute with each member of the EEAB a non-disclosure agreement, which terms shall be not less stringent than those stipulated in this Consortium Agreement, no later than 30 days after their nomination or before any confidential information will be exchanged, whichever date is earlier. The Coordinator shall write the minutes of the EEAB meetings and prepare the implementation of the EEAB's suggestions. The EEAB members shall be allowed to participate in General Assembly meetings upon invitation but have not any voting rights.]
Project Steering Committee 1. For a sound implementation and management of the project, a steering committee shall be set up in line with provisions of the programme manual.
2. The steering committee is the decision-making body of the project and it shall be composed by representatives of the LP and all PPs duly authorised to represent the respective LP and PP institutions. It shall be chaired by the LP and it shall meet on a regular basis. Associated partners shall be invited to take part in the steering committee in an advisory capacity. External key stakeholders may also be invited to take part to one or more meetings in an observer/advisory capacity.
3. The steering committee shall at least:
a. be responsible for monitoring and validating the implementation of the project and the achievement of the planned results as in the approved application form;
b. perform the financial monitoring of the project implementation and to decide on any budget modifications as in § 11 of this agreement;
c. monitor and manage deviations of the project implementation;
d. decide on project modifications (e.g. partnership, budget, activities, and duration) if needed;
e. be responsible for the settlement of any disputes within the partnership (as stipulated in § 22 of this agreement).
4. Further aspects, including the creation of sub-groups or task forces, may be set out in the rules of procedure of the steering committee.
Evaluation Procedure The procedural requirements set forth in this agreement which conform with and provide specificity to the statutory obligations established by Ohio Rev. Code § 3319.111 and § 3319.112.
