Evaluation Rebuttal Sample Clauses

Evaluation Rebuttal. If the employee feels his/her formal written evaluation is incomplete, inaccurate or unjust, the employee may put his/her objections in writing within thirty (30) days after receipt of said evaluation. Both the employee and evaluator shall date and sign all copies of the written objection. The signature of the evaluator shall not indicate agreement with the written objection, but rather shall indicate that the evaluator is in receipt of a copy of the written objection. A copy of the written objection shall be attached to the written evaluation.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (20)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Evaluation Rebuttal. 20 After an employee has had an opportunity to review and sign their evaluation, the employee 21 shall receive a written copy of their evaluation. If the employee disagrees with their evaluation, 22 they will have thirty (30) calendar days to write and submit a rebuttal to the District Human
Sample 1Sample 2See All (4)
Evaluation Rebuttal. An employee may submit a rebuttal to an evaluation which has a potentially adverse effect on his/her employment status. Within fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt of an evaluation, the employee either directly or with the assistance of the Union, will commit such rebuttal to writing, sign it, and present it to the supervisor. The written statement should include the nature of the rebuttal. The District and the Union may mutually agree in writing to extend the limits at any one of the steps described herein.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
Evaluation Rebuttal. If the unit member is in disagreement with a portion of the evaluation, a written explanation may be attached to the evaluation form by the unit member. This written explanation shall be attached to each of the copies of the evaluation following a discussion between the unit member and the immediate supervisor. In addition, any unit member taking exception to the evaluation shall have the right to appeal through the complaint procedure to the Board of Trustees (also referred to as Board of Education).
Sample 1Sample 2
Evaluation Rebuttal. If the Educator feels his/her written summative evaluation is incomplete, inaccurate or unjust, the Educator may put his/her objections in writing. Both the Educator and evaluator shall date and sign all copies of the written objection. The signature of the evaluator shall not necessarily indicate agreement with the written objection, but rather shall indicate that the evaluator is in receipt of a copy of the written objection. A copy of the written objection shall be attached to the written summative evaluation.
Sample 1
Evaluation Rebuttal. If the Support Staff member feels the written evaluation is incomplete, inaccurate, or unjust, they may put their objections in writing within ten (10) school days of the receipt of the final written evaluation. Both the Support Staff member and the evaluator shall date and sign all copies of the written objection. The signature of the evaluator shall not necessarily indicate agreement with the written objection, but rather shall indicate that the evaluator is in receipt of a copy of the written objection. A copy of the written objection shall be attached to the written evaluation. SECTION SIX: SUPPORT STAFF COMPENSATION AND RETIREMENT BENEFITS SECTION SIX: SUPPORT STAFF COMPENSATION AND RETIREMENT BENEFITS
Sample 1
Evaluation Rebuttal. An employee who disagrees with any written performance evaluation may, within thirty
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Evaluation Rebuttal. An employee who disagrees with any written performance evaluation may, within thirty (30) calendar days of discussing the evaluation with the raters and prior to the finalization of that evaluation, make a written rebuttal. The responses can reflect a “no comment” or a detailed account of the matter as viewed by the member. Such responses shall, in all cases, be considered a permanent part of the evaluation.
Sample 1

Related to Evaluation Rebuttal

  • Evaluation Report The state must provide a narrative summary of the evaluation design, status (including evaluation activities and findings to date), and plans for evaluation activities during the extension period. The narrative is to include, but not be limited to, describing the hypotheses being tested and any results available.

  • 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.

  • 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 Reports Where a formal evaluation of an employee's performance is carried out, the employee shall be provided with a copy to read and review. Provision shall be made on the evaluation form for an employee to sign it. The form shall provide for the employee's signature in two (2) places, one indicating that the employee has read and accepts the evaluation, and the other indicating that the employee disagrees with the evaluation. The employee shall sign in one of the places provided within seven (7) calendar days. No employee may initiate a grievance regarding the contents of an evaluation report unless the signature indicates disagreement with the evaluation. The employee shall receive a copy of the evaluation report at the time of signing. An evaluation report shall not be changed after an employee has signed it, without the knowledge of the employee, and any such changes shall be subject to the grievance procedure.

  • BID EVALUATION The Commissioner reserves the right to accept or reject any and all Bids, or separable portions of Bids, and waive technicalities, irregularities, and omissions if the Commissioner determines the best interests of the State will be served. The Commissioner, in his/her sole discretion, may accept or reject illegible, incomplete or vague Bids and his/her decision shall be final. A conditional or revocable Bid which clearly communicates the terms or limitations of acceptance may be considered, and Contract award may be made in compliance with the Bidder’s conditional or revocable terms in the Bid.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Evaluation Conference The final evaluation conference shall occur not later than the end of the fall term. The purpose of the final evaluation conference is to discuss with the probationary employee the results of the evaluation and announce the team’s recommendation. The evaluation team shall determine what additional evaluation activity shall occur during the spring term. If the team recommends that the District not employ the professor for the following year, no evaluation activities in the spring are necessary.

  • 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.

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