Financial Readiness Review Sample Clauses

Financial Readiness Review. In order to complete a Financial Readiness Review, HHSC will require that HMOs update information submitted in their proposals. Note: STAR+PLUS and/or CHIP Perinatal HMOs who have already submitted proposal updates for HHSC’s review for STAR and/or CHIP, must either verify that the information has not changed and that it applies to STAR+PLUS and/or the CHIP Perinatal Program or provide updated information for STAR+PLUS by July 10, 2006 and for the CHIP Perinatal Program by September 1, 2006. This information will include the following:
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (12)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Financial Readiness Review. To complete a financial review, the MCO must submit a Financial Update Report no later than 60 days prior to the Operational Start Date. At a minimum, the report must include the following: 1. Material change in financial condition. For both the MCO and its ultimate parent, the report must identify whether either entity has experienced any material financial deterioration following proposal submission. The report must identify and briefly describe any changes to the financial statements, including changes to net worth; cash flow; loss of contracts; credit, audit, regulatory, and/or legal issues; major contingencies, etc. The report must also describe any known potential issues, and any issues with respect to change of ownership or control. 2. Updated financial statements. The report must include the most recently updated financial statements, which should be more current than those provided in the proposal. The updated financial statements should include the most recent quarterly (or monthly) internal financial statements, the most-recently completed annual statements, and the most-recent audited statements. The statements should generally include the notes, management discussion, and where appropriate, the audit letter. Internal most-recent-month statements are not expected to include these items. The report must include any of the following new or updated reports (as referenced under Sections 4.2.3.3 and 4.2.3.4) that have become available since proposal submission: TDI financial examination report (or similar report from another state); Form B Registration statement filing; IRS Form 990; and bond or debt rating analysis. It is not necessary to submit updated SEC 10-K or 10-Q filings with the report. In addition to the Financial Update Report, the MCO must submit documentation demonstrating it has secured all required bonds in accordance with TDI requirements, Section 8, “Operations Phase Requirements,” and Attachment A, “Uniform Managed Care Terms and Conditions,” Article 17. Such documentation is due no later than ten (10) business days after the Contract Effective Date.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (8)
Financial Readiness Review. To complete a financial review, the MCO must submit a Financial Update Report no later than 60 days prior to the Operational Start Date. At a minimum, the report must include the following:
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
Financial Readiness Review. In order to complete a Financial Readiness Review, HHSC will require that HMOs update information submitted in their proposals. This information will include the following: 1. The Contractor’s legal name, trade name, or any other name under which the Contractor does business, if any. 2. The address and telephone number of the Contractor’s headquarters office. 3. A copy of its current Texas Department of Insurance Certificate of Authority to provide HMO or ANHC services in the applicable Service Area(s). The Certificate of Authority must include all counties in the Service Area(s) for which the Contractor is proposing to serve HMO Members. 4. Indicate with a “Yes-HMO”, “Yes-ANHC” or “No” in the applicable cell(s) of the Column B of the following chart whether the Contractor is currently certified by TDI as an HMO or ANHC in all counties in each of the CSAs in which the Contractor proposes to participate in one or more of the HHSC HMO Programs. If the Contractor is not proposing to serve a CSA for a particular HMO Program, the Contractor should leave the applicable cells in the table empty. Responsible Office: HHSC Office of General Counsel (OGC) Subject: Attachment B-1 – HHSC Joint Medicaid/CHIP HMO RFP, Section 7 Version 1.0 Bexar Dallas El Paso Xxxxxx Lubbock Nueces Tarrant Xxxxxx Xxxx If the Contractor is not currently certified by TDI as an HMO or ANHC in any one or more counties in a proposed CSA, the Contractor must identify such entire counties in Column C for each CSA. For each county listed in Column C, the Contractor must document that it applied to TDI for such certification of authority prior to the submission of a Proposal for this RFP. The Contractor shall indicate the date that it applied for such certification and the status of its application to get TDI certification in the relevant counties in this section of its submission to HHSC. 5. For Contractors proposing to serve any CHIP OSAs, indicate with a “Yes-HMO”, “Yes-ANHC” or “No” in the applicable cell(s) of the Column C of the following chart whether the Contractor is currently certified by TDI as an HMO or ANHC in the entire county in the OSA. If the Contractor is not proposing to serve an OSA, the Contractor should leave the applicable cells in the table empty. Bexar El Paso Xxxxxx Lubbock Nueces Xxxxxx For each county listed in Column C, the Contractor must document that it applied to TDI for such certification of authority prior to the submission of a Proposal for this RFP. The Contra...
Sample 1
Financial Readiness Review. In order to complete a Financial Readiness Review, HHSC will require that HMOs update information submitted in their proposals. Note: STAR+PLUS and/or CHIP Perinatal HMOs who have already submitted proposal updates for HHSC’s review for STAR and/or CHIP, must either verify that the information has not changed and that it applies to STAR+PLUS and/or the CHIP Perinatal Program or provide updated information for STAR+PLUS by July 10, 2006 and for the CHIP Perinatal Program by September 1, 2006. This information will include the following: 1 The Contractor’s legal name, trade name, or any other name under which the Contractor does business, if any.
Sample 1
Financial Readiness Review. In order to complete a Financial Readiness Review, HHSC will require that HMOs update information submitted in their proposals. Note: STAR+PLUS and/or CHIP Perinatal HMOs who have already submitted proposal updates for HHSC’s review for STAR and/or CHIP, must either verify that the information has not changed and that it applies to STAR+PLUS and/or the CHIP Responsible Office: HHSC Office of General Counsel (OGC) Subject: Attachment B-1 – HHSC Joint Medicaid/CHIP HMO RFP, Section 7 Version 1.7 Perinatal Program or provide updated information for STAR+PLUS by July 10, 2006 and for the CHIP Perinatal Program by September 1, 2006. This information will include the following:
Sample 1

Related to Financial Readiness Review

  • BUSINESS REVIEWS Supplier must perform a minimum of one business review with Sourcewell per contract year. The business review will cover sales to Participating Entities, pricing and contract terms, administrative fees, sales data reports, performance issues, supply issues, customer issues, and any other necessary information.

  • Business Review Meetings In order to maintain the relationship between the Department and the Contractor, each quarter the Department may request a business review meeting. The business review meeting may include, but is not limited to, the following: • Successful completion of deliverables • Review of the Contractor’s performance • Review of minimum required reports • Addressing of any elevated Customer issues • Review of continuous improvement ideas that may help lower total costs and improve business efficiencies.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances 1. If FEMA determines that the entire scope of an Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances in Appendix B of this Agreement, with determinations for Tier II Allowances being made by SOI-qualified staff, FEMA shall complete the Section 106 review process by documenting this determination in the project file, without SHPO review or notification. 2. If the Undertaking involves a National Historic Landmark (NHL), FEMA shall notify the SHPO, participating Tribe(s), and the NPS NHL Program Manager of the NPS Midwest Regional Office that the Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances. FEMA shall provide information about the proposed scope of work for the Undertaking and the allowance(s) enabling FEMA’s determination. 3. If FEMA determines any portion of an Undertaking’s scope of work does not conform to one or more allowances listed in Appendix B, FEMA shall conduct expedited or standard Section 106 review, as appropriate, for the entire Undertaking in accordance with Stipulation II.B, Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings, or Stipulation II.C, Standard Project Review. 4. Allowances may be revised and new allowances may be added to this Agreement in accordance with Stipulation IV.A.3, Amendments. B. Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings

  • Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.

  • TRUNK FORECASTING 57.1. CLEC shall provide forecasts for traffic utilization over trunk groups. Orders for trunks that exceed forecasted quantities for forecasted locations will be accommodated as facilities and/or equipment are available. Sprint shall make all reasonable efforts and cooperate in good faith to develop alternative solutions to accommodate orders when facilities are not available. Company forecast information must be provided by CLEC to Sprint twice a year. The initial trunk forecast meeting should take place soon after the first implementation meeting. A forecast should be provided at or prior to the first implementation meeting. The semi-annual forecasts shall project trunk gain/loss on a monthly basis for the forecast period, and shall include: 57.1.1. Semi-annual forecasted trunk quantities (which include baseline data that reflect actual Tandem and end office Local Interconnection and meet point trunks and Tandem-subtending Local Interconnection end office equivalent trunk requirements) for no more than two years (current plus one year); 57.1.2. The use of Common Language Location Identifier (CLLI-MSG), which are described in Telcordia documents BR 000-000-000 and BR 000-000-000; 57.1.3. Description of major network projects that affect the other Party will be provided in the semi-annual forecasts. Major network projects include but are not limited to trunking or network rearrangements, shifts in anticipated traffic patterns, or other activities by CLEC that are reflected by a significant increase or decrease in trunking demand for the following forecasting period. 57.1.4. Parties shall meet to review and reconcile the forecasts if forecasts vary significantly.

  • Forecasting Manager and Sprint PCS will work cooperatively to generate mutually acceptable forecasts of important business metrics including traffic volumes, handset sales, subscribers and Collected Revenues for the Sprint PCS Products and Services. The forecasts are for planning purposes only and do not constitute Manager's obligation to meet the quantities forecast.

  • Forecast Customer shall provide Flextronics, on a monthly basis, a rolling [***] forecast indicating Customer’s monthly Product requirements. The first [***] of the forecast will constitute Customer’s written purchase order for all Work to be completed within the first [***] period. Such purchase orders will be issued in accordance with Section 3.2 below.

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration. Not later than thirty (30) calendar days after issuance of the final audit report, CONSULTANT may request a review by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by ALAMEDA CTC will excuse CONSULTANT from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT and subconsultants’ contracts, including cost proposals and ICRs, may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an AGREEMENT Audit, an Incurred Cost Audit, an ICR Audit, or a certified public accountant (“CPA”) ICR Audit Workpaper Review. If selected for audit or review, the AGREEMENT, cost proposal and ICR and related workpapers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR Audit Workpaper Review it is CONSULTANT’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s workpapers including making copies as necessary. The AGREEMENT, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by CONSULTANT and approved by ALAMEDA CTC to conform to the audit or review recommendations. CONSULTANT agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by ALAMEDA CTC at its sole discretion. Refusal by CONSULTANT to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state, or local governments have access to CPA workpapers, will be considered a breach of contract terms and cause for termination of the AGREEMENT and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.

  • Contract Review Agent shall have reviewed all material contracts of Borrowers including, without limitation, leases, union contracts, labor contracts, vendor supply contracts, license agreements and distributorship agreements and such contracts and agreements shall be satisfactory in all respects to Agent;

  • Loop Testing/Trouble Reporting 2.1.6.1 Telepak Networks will be responsible for testing and isolating troubles on the Loops. Telepak Networks must test and isolate trouble to the BellSouth portion of a designed/non-designed unbundled Loop (e.g., UVL-SL2, UCL-D, UVL-SL1, UCL-ND, etc.) before reporting repair to the UNE Customer Wholesale Interconnection Network Services (CWINS) Center. Upon request from BellSouth at the time of the trouble report, Telepak Networks will be required to provide the results of the Telepak Networks test which indicate a problem on the BellSouth provided Loop. 2.1.6.2 Once Telepak Networks has isolated a trouble to the BellSouth provided Loop, and had issued a trouble report to BellSouth on the Loop, BellSouth will take the actions necessary to repair the Loop if a trouble actually exists. BellSouth will repair these Loops in the same time frames that BellSouth repairs similarly situated Loops to its End Users. 2.1.6.3 If Telepak Networks reports a trouble on a non-designed or designed Loop and no trouble actually exists, BellSouth will charge Telepak Networks for any dispatching and testing (both inside and outside the CO) required by BellSouth in order to confirm the Loop’s working status. 2.1.6.4 In the event BellSouth must dispatch to the end-user’s location more than once due to incorrect or incomplete information provided by Telepak Networks (e.g., incomplete address, incorrect contact name/number, etc.), BellSouth will xxxx Xxxxxxx Networks for each additional dispatch required to repair the circuit due to the incorrect/incomplete information provided. BellSouth will assess the applicable Trouble Determination rates from BellSouth’s FCC or state tariffs.

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