Test Results The employer, upon request from an employee or former employee, will provide the confidential written report issued pursuant to 4.9 of the Canadian Model in respect to that employee or former employee.
Evaluation of Tenders 33.1 The Procuring Entity shall use the criteria and methodologies listed in this ITT and Section III, Evaluation and Qualification criteria. No other evaluation criteria or methodologies shall be permitted. By applying the criteria and methodologies, the Procuring Entity shall determine the Lowest Evaluated Tender. This is the Tender of the Tenderer that meets the qualification criteria and whose Tender has been determined to be:
a) substantially responsive to the tender documents; and
b) the lowest evaluated price.
33.2 Price evaluation will be done for Items or Lots (contracts), as specified in the TDS; and the Tender Price as quoted in accordance with ITT 14. To evaluate a Tender, the Procuring Entity shall consider the following:
a) price adjustment due to unconditional discounts offered in accordance with ITT 13.4;
b) converting the amount resulting from applying (a) and (b) above, if relevant, to a single currency in accordance with ITT 31;
c) price adjustment due to quantifiable nonmaterial non-conformities in accordance with ITT 29.3; and
d) any additional evaluation factors specified in the TDS and Section III, Evaluation and Qualification Criteria.
33.3 The estimated effect of the price adjustment provisions of the Conditions of Contract, applied over the period of execution of the Contract, shall not be considered in Tender evaluation.
33.4 Where the tender involves multiple lots or contracts, the tenderer will be allowed to tender for one or more lots (contracts). Each lot or contract will be evaluated in accordance with ITT 33.
Evaluation 1. The purposes of evaluation provisions include providing employees with feedback, and employers and employees with the opportunity and responsibility to address concerns. Where a grievance proceeds to arbitration, the arbitrator must consider these purposes, and may relieve on just and reasonable terms against breaches of time limits or other procedural requirements.
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.
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.
Positive Test Results In the event an employee tests positive for drug use, the employee will be provided, in writing, notice of their right to explain the test results. The employee may indicate any relevant circumstance, including over the counter or prescription medication taken within the last thirty (30) days, or any other information relevant to the reliability of, or explanation for, a positive test result.
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.
Audit Results If an audit by a Party determines that an overpayment or an underpayment has occurred, a notice of such overpayment or underpayment shall be given to the other Party together with those records from the audit which support such determination.
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.
2. Grantee agrees to cooperate fully and provide the System Agency and its representatives timely access to Products, records, and other items and information needed to conduct such review, evaluation, testing, and monitoring.
Evaluation of Students Acknowledging the District’s adopted grading system, the teacher shall maintain the right and responsibility to determine grades and other evaluation of a student. No grade or evaluation shall be changed except by the teacher with the approval of the building administrator.
