Faculty Review Board Sample Clauses

Faculty Review Board. Faculty disputes will be mediated by the Faculty Review Board (FRB). The faculty disputes that the FRB will mediate include: disputed workloads, disputed FAPs, denials of extension of probationary period, denials of tenure, and denials of promotion. Service on the FRB will constitute University service for the members’ FAPs, workloads, and workplans.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Faculty Review Board. If, after reconsideration, the Chief Academic Officer’s recommendation remains negative, the faculty member may file an appeal of the Chief Academic Officer’s negative recommendation with the Faculty Review Board (“FRB”). The function of the FRB shall be to determine whether the appropriate faculty body gave adequate consideration to the faculty member’s candidacy in reaching its decision and, if the FRB determines otherwise, to request reconsideration by that body or administrator. The FRB shall not substitute its judgment on the merits for that of the previous decision makers. Some examples of an “adequate consideration” review include the following procedural questions: • Was the decision conscientiously arrived at? • Was all evidence bearing on the relevant performance of the candidate considered? • Was there adequate deliberation by the department over the import of the evidence in the light of the relevant standards? • Were irrelevant and improper standards excluded from consideration? • Was the decision a good faith exercise of professional academic judgment?

Related to Faculty Review Board

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • Training Committee The parties to this Agreement may form a Training Committee. The Training Committee will be constituted by equal numbers of Employer nominees and ETU employee representatives and have a charter which clearly states its role and responsibilities. It shall monitor the clauses of this Agreement which relate to training and ensure all employees have equal access to training.

  • Review Committee A Committee of six members, three each from the Guild and shall be named. Any disputes arising under this Agreement shall be put before this Committee for resolution. When the Committee is unable to resolve an issue it is agreed that a third party will be named by mutual agreement of the parties to provide Arbitration for binding resolution. Failing such an appointment by the Committee either party may refer it to arbitration under Article of the Collective Agreement.

  • Compensation Review The compensation of the Executive will be reviewed not less frequently than annually by the board of directors of the Company.

  • 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.

  • Nurse Representatives & Grievance Committee (a) The Hospital agrees to recognize Association representatives to be elected or appointed from amongst nurses in the bargaining unit for the purpose of dealing with Association business as provided in this Collective Agreement. The number of representatives and the areas which they represent are set out in the Appendix of Local Provisions. (b) The Hospital will recognize a Grievance Committee, one of whom shall be chair. This committee shall operate and conduct itself in accordance with the provisions of the Collective Agreement and the number of nurses on the Grievance Committee is set out in the Appendix of Local Provisions. (c) It is agreed that Union representatives and members of the Grievance Committee have their regular duties and responsibilities to perform for the Hospital and shall not leave their regular duties without first obtaining permission from their immediate supervisor. Such permission shall not be unreasonably withheld. If, in the performance of their duties, a union representative or member of the Grievance Committee is required to enter a unit within the hospital in which they are not ordinarily employed they shall, immediately upon entering such unit, report their presence to the supervisor or nurse in charge, as the case may be. When resuming their regular duties and responsibilities, such representatives shall again report to their immediate supervisor. The Hospital agrees to pay for all time spent during their regular hours by such representatives hereunder.

  • Program Review The State ECEAP Office will conduct a review of each contractor’s compliance with the ECEAP Contract and ECEAP Performance Standards every four years. The review will involve ECEAP staff and parents. After the Program Review, the State ECEAP Office will provide the contractor with a Program Review report. The contractor must submit an ECEAP Corrective Action Plan for non-compliance with ECEAP Performance Standards. The Plan must be approved by the State ECEAP Office.

  • Joint Safety Committee (a) The Union and the Company shall cooperate in selecting one or more Safety Committees, which will meet at least once a month to consider all safety and occupational health problems. (b) The local Joint Safety Committee shall consist of equal representation from Company and Union. This Committee shall meet at least once a month to consider all safety and occupational health problems.

  • Technical Advisory Committee (TAC The goal of this subtask is to create an advisory committee for this Agreement. The TAC should be composed of diverse professionals. The composition will vary depending on interest, availability, and need. TAC members will serve at the CAM’s discretion. The purpose of the TAC is to: • Provide guidance in project direction. The guidance may include scope and methodologies, timing, and coordination with other projects. The guidance may be based on: o Technical area expertise; o Knowledge of market applications; or o Linkages between the agreement work and other past, present, or future projects (both public and private sectors) that TAC members are aware of in a particular area. • Review products and provide recommendations for needed product adjustments, refinements, or enhancements. • Evaluate the tangible benefits of the project to the state of California, and provide recommendations as needed to enhance the benefits. • Provide recommendations regarding information dissemination, market pathways, or commercialization strategies relevant to the project products. The TAC may be composed of qualified professionals spanning the following types of disciplines: • Researchers knowledgeable about the project subject matter; • Members of trades that will apply the results of the project (e.g., designers, engineers, architects, contractors, and trade representatives); • Public interest market transformation implementers; • Product developers relevant to the project; • U.S. Department of Energy research managers, or experts from other federal or state agencies relevant to the project; • Public interest environmental groups; • Utility representatives; • Air district staff; and • Members of relevant technical society committees. • Prepare a List of Potential TAC Members that includes the names, companies, physical and electronic addresses, and phone numbers of potential members. The list will be discussed at the Kick-off meeting, and a schedule for recruiting members and holding the first TAC meeting will be developed. • Recruit TAC members. Ensure that each individual understands member obligations and the TAC meeting schedule developed in subtask 1.11. • Prepare a List of TAC Members once all TAC members have committed to serving on the TAC. • Submit Documentation of TAC Member Commitment (such as Letters of Acceptance) from each TAC member. • List of Potential TAC Members • List of TAC Members • Documentation of TAC Member Commitment

  • Exclusion Review Notwithstanding any provision of Title 42 of the United States Code or Title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the only issues in a proceeding for exclusion based on a material breach of this CIA shall be whether Good Shepherd was in material breach of this CIA and, if so, whether: a. Good Shepherd cured such breach within 30 days of its receipt of the Notice of Material Breach; or b. the alleged material breach could not have been cured within the 30-day period, but that, during the 30-day period following Good Shepherd’s receipt of the Notice of Material Breach: (i) Good Shepherd had begun to take action to cure the material breach; (ii) Good Shepherd pursued such action with due diligence; and (iii) Good Shepherd provided to OIG a reasonable timetable for curing the material breach. For purposes of the exclusion herein, exclusion shall take effect only after an ALJ decision favorable to OIG, or, if the ALJ rules for Good Shepherd, only after a DAB decision in favor of OIG. Good Shepherd’s election of its contractual right to appeal to the DAB shall not abrogate OIG’s authority to exclude Good Shepherd upon the issuance of an ALJ’s decision in favor of OIG. If the ALJ sustains the determination of OIG and determines that exclusion is authorized, such exclusion shall take effect 20 days after the ALJ issues such a decision, notwithstanding that Good Shepherd may request review of the ALJ decision by the DAB. If the DAB finds in favor of OIG after an ALJ decision adverse to OIG, the exclusion shall take effect 20 days after the DAB decision. Good Shepherd shall waive its right to any notice of such an exclusion if a decision upholding the exclusion is rendered by the ALJ or DAB. If the DAB finds in favor of Good Shepherd, Good Shepherd shall be reinstated effective on the date of the original exclusion.

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