Funder Evaluation of the Pre-proposal Sample Clauses

Funder Evaluation of the Pre-proposal. Use of the pre-proposal process is not formal Notice of a proposed integration under the Enabling Legislation. Funder consent to develop the project concept outlined in a pre-proposal does not constitute approval to proceed with the project. Nor does the Funder consent to develop a project concept presume the issuance of a favourable decision, should such a decision be required by the Enabling Legislation. Following the Funder’s review and evaluation, the HSP may be invited to submit a detailed proposal and a business plan for further analysis. Guidelines for the development of a detailed proposal and business case will be provided by the Funder.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Funder Evaluation of the Pre-proposal

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Independent Evaluation Buyer is experienced and knowledgeable in the oil and gas business. Buyer has been advised by and has relied solely on its own expertise and legal, tax, accounting, marketing, land, engineering, environmental and other professional counsel concerning this transaction, the Subject Property and value thereof.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and xxxx them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • Rate Redetermination for Market Change In the event of delay or interruption, exceeding 90 days, under B8.33, Contracting Officer shall make an appraisal to determine for each species the difference between the appraised unit value of Included Timber immediately prior to the delay or interruption and the appraised unit value of Included Timber immediately after the delay or interruption. The appraisal shall be done after any rate redetermination done pursuant to B3.31, using remaining volumes.

  • 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.

  • FINANCIAL EVALUATION (a) The financial bid shall be opened of only those bidders who have been found to be technically eligible. The financial bids shall be opened in presence of representatives of technically eligible bidders, who may like to be present. The institute shall inform the date, place and time for opening of financial bid. (b) Arithmetical errors shall be rectified on the following basis. If there is a discrepancy between the unit price and total price that is, the unit price shall prevail and the total price shall be corrected by the Institute. If there is a discrepancy between words and figures, the lesser amount shall be considered as valid. If the Supplier does not accept the correction of the errors, his bid shall be rejected. (c) The AIIMS Jodhpur does not bind himself to accept the lowest bid or any bid and reserves the right of accepting the whole or any part of the bid or portion of the job offered; and the bidder shall provide the same at the rates quoted. The AIIMS Jodhpur reserves the right to reject any or all offers received in response to tender or cancel or withdraw the tender notice without assigning any reason, whatsoever.

  • Evidence Used In Evaluation The following categories of evidence shall be used in evaluating each Educator: A. Multiple measures of student learning, growth, and achievement, which shall include: i. Measures of student progress on classroom assessments that are aligned with the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks or other relevant frameworks and are comparable within grades or subjects in a school; ii. Common assessments of student learning, growth, and achievement related to the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks or the Massachusetts Vocational Technical Education Frameworks or other relevant frameworks that are comparable across grades and/or subjects district-wide. These measures may include: portfolios, approved commercial assessments and district-developed pre and post unit and course assessments, and capstone projects. iii. Measures of student progress and/or achievement toward student learning goals set between the Educator and Evaluator for the school year or some other period of time as established in the Educator Plan. iv. For Educators whose primary role is not as a classroom teacher, the appropriate measures of the Educator's contribution to student learning, growth, and achievement set by the District. The measures set by the District should be based on the Educator's role and responsibility. See rubrics in Appendix A. B. Judgments based on observations and artifacts of practice including: i. Unannounced observations which are typically at least 10 minutes. ii. Announced observation(s) for non-PTS Educators in their first year of practice in a school, PTS Educators, Educators on Improvement Plans, and as determined by the evaluator. iii. Examination of Educator work products. iv. Examination of student work samples. C. Evidence relevant to one or more Performance Standards, including but not limited to: i. Evidence compiled and presented by the Educator, including: • Evidence of fulfillment of Standard IV: Professional Culture, including, but not limited to, professional responsibilities and growth such as self-assessments, peer collaboration, professional development linked to goals in the Educator plans, contributions to the school community and professional culture; and/or other items as described under Standard IV: Professional Culture. • Evidence of fulfillment of Standard III: Family and Community Engagement, including, but not limited to active outreach to and engagement with families, for example, phone logs, newsletters, conferences, district approved applications and platforms such as websites and email correspondence and /or other items as described in Standard III: Family and Community Engagement. ii. Evidence of progress towards professional practice goal(s); iii. Evidence of progress toward student learning outcomes goal(s). iv. Student Feedback (subject to negotiations) v. Any other relevant evidence from any source that the Evaluator shares with the Educator. Other relevant evidence could include information provided by other evaluators/administrators such as the superintendent. Relevant information from other sources will be assessed by the Evaluator and information will be shared with the Educator. vi. An Educators submission of evidence to support meeting the indicators of performance for Standard I: Curriculum, Planning and Assessment and Standard II: Teaching All Students, is optional as this evidence is typically gathered by the Evaluator during a classroom observation. Submission of evidence supporting either Standards I or II can provide additional data for inclusion in the Formative or Summative Reports. If an Educator chooses to submit evidence for these categories, it is suggested that the evidence be included by the time the Summative Report will be written.

  • Construction Change Directives 1.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.11, 3.12.8, 4.2.8, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.1.3, 7.3, 9.3.1.1 Construction Schedules, Contractor’s 3.10, 3.11, 3.12.1, 3.12.2, 6.1.3, 15.1.6.2

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