INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS Sample Clauses

INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS. Independent Private Sector Inspector General Reviews Pursuant to Miami-Dade County Administrative Order 3-20, the County has the right to retain the services of an Independent Private Sector Inspector General (hereinafter "IPSIG"), whenever the County deems it appropriate to do so. Upon written notice from the County, the Contractor shall make available to the IPSIG retained by the County, all requested records and documentation pertaining to this Agreement for inspection and reproduction. The County shall be responsible for the payment of these IPSIG services, and under no circumstance shall the Contractor's prices and any changes thereto approved by the County, be inclusive of any charges relating to these IPSIG services. The terms of this provision apply to the Contractor, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors and assignees. Nothing contained in this provision shall impair any independent right of the County to conduct an audit or investigate the operations, activities and performance of the Contractor in connection with this Agreement. The terms of this Article shall not impose any liability on the County by the Contractor or any third party.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (7)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS. Any Inspector General of a federal department or executive agency shall review, as appropriate, any concerns raised by the public about specific investments using federal funds. Any findings of such reviews not related to an ongoing criminal proceeding shall be relayed immediately to the New Mexico Department of Transportation or the agency concerned.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (5)
INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS. Any inspector general of a federal department or executive agency shall review, as appropriate, any concerns raised by the public about specific investments using funds made available in the Recovery Act. Any findings of such reviews not related to an ongoing criminal proceeding shall be relayed immediately to the head of the department or agency concerned. In addition, the findings of such reviews, along with any audits conducted by any inspector general of funds made available in the Recovery Act, shall be posted on the inspector general’s website and linked to the website established by Recovery Act Section 1526, except that portions of reports may be redacted to the extent the portions would disclose information that is protected from public disclosure under sections 552 and 552a of title 5, United States Code.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)
INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS. In addition to the access to records provisions of 2 CFR 215.53 or 40 CFR 31.42, and in accordance with the provisions of section 1515 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), recipient agrees to allow any appropriate representative of the Office of Inspector General to (1) examine any records of the recipient, any of its procurement contractors and subcontractors or subgrantees, or any State or local agency administering such contract, that pertain to, and involve transactions relating to, the procurement contract, subcontract, grant or subgrant; and (2) interview any officer or employee of the recipient, subcontractor, grantee, subgrantee, or agency regarding such transactions. The Grantee is advised that providing false, fictitious or misleading information with respect to the receipt and disbursement of EPA grant funds may result in criminal, civil or administrative fines and/or penalties. Recipient should be aware that the findings of any review, along with any audits, conducted by an inspector general of a Federal department or executive Agency and concerning funds awarded under ARRA shall be posted on the inspector general’s website and linked to xxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx, except that information that is protected from disclosure under sections 552 and 552a of title 5, United States Code may be redacted from the posted version.
Sample 1Sample 2
INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS. The Local Government shall allow any appropriate representative of the Office of US Inspector General to (1) examine its records relating to the Project and this ARRA Assistance Agreement and (2) interview any officer or employee of the Local Government.
Sample 1
INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS 
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS

  • Inspector General The Grantee understands its duty, pursuant to Section 20.055(5), F.S., to cooperate with the inspector general in any investigation, audit, inspection, review, or hearing. The Grantee will comply with this duty and ensure that its sub-grantees and/or subcontractors issued under this Agreement, if any, impose this requirement, in writing, on its sub-grantees and/or subcontractors, respectively.

  • 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.

  • Cooperation with Inspector General Grantee understands its duty, pursuant to Section 20.055(5), Fla. Stat., to cooperate with Florida Housing’s Inspector General in any investigation, audit, inspection, review, or hearing. Grantee will comply with this duty and ensure that any contracts issued under this Agreement impose this requirement, in writing, on its subcontractors.

  • Annual Reviews Within thirty (30) days after each annual anniversary of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Company shall review Employee’s performance of his duties pursuant to this Agreement and advise Employee of the results of that review; provided, however, that Company may elect to conduct a partial-year performance review in order to synchronize Employee’s annual review date with that of the Company’s other executives. In connection with each such review, the Company shall evaluate whether any increase in Employee’s compensation under Section 2, below, is appropriate.

  • Classification Review (A) Reclassification Request (a) An employee who has good reason to believe that they are improperly classified may apply, in writing by electronic mail, to their immediate out-of-scope Manager to have their classification reviewed. This may occur when there has been a substantive change in the job functions, when there has been a change in organizational structure that significantly impacts roles, or when a classification specification has been amended in a manner that alters the basis on which classification levels are differentiated. The employee making the request will indicate the reason(s) why they believe their position is inappropriately classified, including the changes that have occurred to the position, organization or classification specifications. In some circumstances, a classification review may be initiated in response to a long standing perceived inequity in how a position is classified. However, where a review has been previously conducted, employees should not request a subsequent classification review unless there has been a substantive change as described above. Submissions must include an approved job description, in the event that a current job description is not available an employee can initiate their written request so as to establish a potential effective date as per article 40.04(a). The manager shall send a copy of the employee’s request to Human Resources without delay, and shall confirm in writing to the employee and the Union that the employee’s request has been received. The manager shall advise the employee of the results of the classification review within ninety (90) calendar days of receiving the request. The notification shall be in writing and include rationale for the decision, specifically addressing the reasons for the review provided by the employee. (b) When reviewing a request for reclassification, the Employer shall follow the guidelines included in the Classification Specification User Manual. Requests are reviewed by the Employer. The evaluation of the role may include an audit of the role, including interviews with the Employee and the Employee’s Manager as needed. (c) Should the employee feel that they have not received proper consideration in regard to a classification review, they may request that the matter be referred to the Internal Appeal Process.

  • 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.

  • LABOR/MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES A. Statewide

  • Annual Review The Board of Directors during the Contract Period shall review annually, or at more frequent intervals which the Board of Directors determines is appropriate, the Executive’s compensation and shall award the Executive additional compensation to reflect the Executive’s performance, the performance of the Company and competitive compensation levels, all as determined in the discretion of the Board of Directors.

  • INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSONS Xx. Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx Registered Nurses Association of Ontario 000 Xxxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxx 0000 Xxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Telephone: (000) 000-0000, ext. 216 Fax: (000) 000-0000 E-mail: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xx Ms. Xxxxxxx Plain 0000 Xxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Telephone: (000) 000-0000 Email: xxxxxxx.xxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xx BETWEEN: AND:

  • 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.

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