Grounds for an Appeal. An appeal can be made in relation to the decision about the timing of withdrawal of funding on one or both of the following grounds: • On the merits of the panel’s decision, e.g. the panel did not act reasonably or failed to take into account relevant information presented • That the Council did not follow its published procedure in conducting the Withdrawal of Funding Panel process. Appeals must be submitted within 10 working days of notification of the Council’s decision to withdraw funding to the Director of Commissioning. They can be contacted in writing to: Director of Commissioning Surrey County Council County Hall Penrhyn Road Kingston upon Thames KT1 2DW The appeal must state the grounds for the appeal and give as much information as possible to assist the panel in their decision whether or not to uphold the appeal. Once the notification of the appeal is received by the Director of Commissioning the following process applies: • An appeals panel composed of the Director of Commissioning (Chair) and two senior managers will consider all appeals. These managers must not have been involved in the original Withdrawal of Funding Panel. • One manager from the original withdrawal of funding panel will be invited to attend the appeal panel meeting to provide information regarding the original decision and answer questions regarding the process followed by the panel. This manager will not participate in deciding the outcome of the appeal. • The appeal panel members will consider information provided by the panel member, the formal correspondence sent to the provider and the minutes of the original panel and review the decision process and grounds for appeal. • The appeal panel members will then record whether the appeal is upheld or not upheld. • The appeals panel will inform the provider of its decision and findings in writing within five working days following the appeal meeting. • If the decision about the timing of withdrawal of funding is upheld Surrey County Council will write to the parents of the children claiming their funded early education hours at the setting to advise them that funding is being withdrawn and the related timescales. These letters will be sent out within 10 working days of the appeal panel. • If a provider receives an Ofsted inspection before the funding is withdrawn and the inspection outcome is no longer inadequate then the funding will continue with the provider. • If the decision on timing of withdrawal of funding is not uphel...
Grounds for an Appeal. A faculty member who has received notice of the President's intention to make a negative recommendation regarding tenure may appeal that recommendation on the following grounds only:
Grounds for an Appeal. An appeal may be filed challenging the APPR based upon one or more of the following grounds:
Grounds for an Appeal. Those students who have valid reasons to believe that all or part of their absences are the result of extraordinary circumstances may request a review of their case following the attendance appeal process below. Extraordinary circumstances may include, but are not limited to, verified illness or medical treatment, death in the family or death of close friends, and medical or dental professional appointments.
Grounds for an Appeal. A faculty member who has received notice of the President's intention to make a negative recommendation regarding tenure may appeal that recommendation on the following grounds only:
19.D.7.5.1 procedural defects which affected the intended recommendation to the Board of Governors. Procedural defects include but are not limited to bias or the denial of natural justice, or
19.D.7.5.2 incorrect consideration of substantive material in the tenure recommendation process.
Grounds for an Appeal. An appeal may be filed based upon one or more of the following grounds:
a. The substance of the Principal’s annual professional performance review.
b. The District’s failure to adhere to the standards and methodologies required for:
i. the annual professional performance review under Education Law §3012c, ii. applicable rules and regulations of the Commissioner of Education, or iii. the procedures negotiated with the Unit for the annual professional performance review.
c. The District’s issuance or implementation of a Principal Improvement Plan (PIP) issued pursuant Education Law §3012c.
d. Score of Developing of Ineffective on an APPR component where agreement between the unit member and Superintendent cannot be reached.
Grounds for an Appeal. An appeal may be filed challenging the APPR based on one or more of the following grounds:
a. The substance of the Annual Professional Performance Review;
1. Where a teacher is rated ineffective on the student performance category but rated highly effective on the observation category based on an anomaly determined locally.
b. The district's failure to adhere to the standards and methodologies required for the Annual Professional Performance Review, pursuant to Education Law §3012- c and applicable rules and regulations;
c. The district's failure to comply with either the applicable regulations of the Commissioner of Education or the procedures put in place in this Article
d. The district's failure to issue/or implement the terms of the Teacher Improvement Plan, where applicable, as required under Education Law §3012-d.
Grounds for an Appeal. An appeal may be filed challenging the APPR based on one or more of the following grounds:
a. The substance of the Annual Professional Performance Review;
b. The district’s failure to adhere to the standards and methodologies required for the Annual Professional Performance Review, pursuant to Education Law §3012-‐ c and applicable rules and regulations;
c. The district’s failure to comply with either the applicable regulations of the Commissioner of Education or the procedures put in place in this Article
d. The district’s failure to issue/or implement the terms of the Teacher Improvement Plan, where applicable, as required under Education Law §3012-‐c.
