Common use of GUIDELINES TO ASSIST IN EVALUATION OF APPLICATIONS Clause in Contracts

GUIDELINES TO ASSIST IN EVALUATION OF APPLICATIONS. Assessing substantial equivalence is a complex matter. The experience of the existing Authorized Members is that an evaluation based on documentation is only a first step – necessary but not sufficient. Confidence can only be achieved through a detailed evaluation, including close interaction and planned visits to observe processes and systems. In particular, it is difficult to define on paper the standard of competence for independent practice. The same words can embrace a wide range of standards. Documentation can describe criteria and procedures; but standards can only be reliably judged by experienced people through live interaction. Therefore applicants must give the opportunity for the nominators, and some other Authorized Members to be present at key decision points where the quality of evidence from potential registrants is evaluated against the relevant standard.

GUIDELINES TO ASSIST IN EVALUATION OF APPLICATIONS. ‌ Assessing substantial equivalence is a complex matter. The experience of the existing Authorized Members is that an evaluation based on documentation is only a first step – necessary but not sufficient. Confidence can only be achieved through a detailed evaluation, including close interaction and planned visits to observe processes and systems. In particular, it is difficult to define on paper the standard of competence for independent practice. The same words can embrace a wide range of standards. Documentation can describe criteria and procedures; but standards can only be reliably judged by experienced people through live interaction. Therefore applicants must give the opportunity for the nominators, and some other Authorized Members to be present at key decision points where the quality of evidence from potential registrants is evaluated against the relevant standard.

GUIDELINES TO ASSIST IN EVALUATION OF APPLICATIONS. Assessing substantial equivalence is a complex matter. The experience of the existing Authorized Authorised Members is that an evaluation based on documentation is only a first step – necessary but not sufficient. Confidence can only be achieved through a detailed evaluation, including close interaction and planned visits to observe processes and systems. In particular, it is difficult to define on paper the standard of competence for independent practice. The same words can embrace a wide range of standards. Documentation can describe criteria and procedures; but standards can only be reliably judged by experienced people through live interaction. Therefore applicants must give the opportunity for the nominators, and some other Authorized Authorised Members to be present at key decision points where the quality of evidence from potential registrants is evaluated against the relevant standard.