Instruction of Reviewers Sample Clauses

Instruction of Reviewers. No later than April 30th of the Spring prior to the semester in which a candidate is reviewed for tenure or promotion, letters will be sent by the Academic Supervisor, Unit Manager or designee to each potential reviewer outlining a request for review of scholarship material. Guidelines for the submission shall be developed by each Unit, including criteria developed in the Unit. Each reviewer will be asked to submit a statement outlining his relationship with the candidate. The Unit Managers, in consultation with faculty will develop a profile of the University, describing teaching load, resources for the support of faculty scholarship, and any exceptional circumstances that may impact faculty productivity, positively or negatively. A paragraph will be developed specific for each Unit and will be included in the narrative. This profile will be available in the Appendix of this agreement. Also included in the correspondence is the entire scholarship section of the candidate’s file, including the candidate’s self-assessment of the scholarship. Reviewers will be asked to address: (i) quality of the scholarship/professional activities presented; (ii) relevance to the field; (iii) importance of the scholarship/professional activities to or impact of the scholarship/professional activities in the field. Letters should equate/compare the scholarship/professional activities to that of others in that field or subfield, within the context of the submitted University criteria. Reviewers will be asked to return the reviews to the Academic Supervisor by June 30th. Should a response not be received, the Academic Supervisor or designee is required to send a follow up letter of request to the reviewer, with a request for the review no later than July
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Instruction of Reviewers. No later than April 30th of the Spring prior to the semester in which a candidate is reviewed for tenure or promotion, letters will be sent by the Academic Supervisor, Unit Manager or designee to each potential reviewer outlining a request for review of scholarship material. Guidelines for the submission shall be developed by each Unit, including criteria developed in the Unit. Each reviewer will be asked to submit a statement outlining his relationship with the candidate. The Unit Managers, in consultation with faculty will develop a profile of the University, describing teaching load, resources for the support of faculty scholarship, and any exceptional circumstances that may impact faculty productivity, positively or negatively. A paragraph will be developed specific for each Unit and will be included in the narrative. Also included in the correspondence is the entire scholarship section of the candidate’s file, including the candidate’s self-assessment of the scholarship. Reviewers will be asked to address: (i) quality of the scholarship/professional activities presented; (ii) relevance to the field; (iii) importance of the scholarship/professional activities to or impact of the scholarship/professional activities in the field. Letters should equate/compare the scholarship/professional activities to that of others in that field or sub field, within the context of the submitted University criteria. Reviewers will be asked to return the reviews to the Academic Supervisor by June 30th. Should a response not be received, the Academic Supervisor or designee is required to send a follow up letter of request to the reviewer, with a request for the review no later than July 30th. Additional reviewers will be sought utilizing the method of choosing reviewers described above, should there be an issue with receiving reviews. Should the process result in fewer than two external reviews, this will not reflect negatively on the tenure or promotion application review for the candidate. The internal review process will continue while further external reviews are sought. This information will be included in the file. External reviews will be part of the tenure and promotion portfolios and used as input in order to review the candidate’s scholarly, creative or artistic achievements and professional activities. A statement regarding the content of the external review should be included in the narrative of the review by the academic supervisor, unit manager, RPT and UPT. ...

Related to Instruction of Reviewers

  • Termination of Review If a Review is in process and the Notes will be paid in full on the next Payment Date, the Servicer will notify the Asset Representations Reviewer and the Indenture Trustee no less than ten days before that Payment Date. On receipt of notice, the Asset Representations Reviewer will terminate the Review immediately and will not be obligated to deliver a Review Report.

  • Notification of Recall Notification of recall from layoff shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, deliverable to addressee only, to the employee's last known address. The notice shall give the employee a minimum of ten (10) calendar days within which to respond after the notice of recall has been mailed. Employees who decline recall or who, in the absence of extenuating circumstances, fail to respond within the time set for return to work, shall be presumed to have resigned and their name shall be removed from the seniority and preferred eligibility list.

  • Asset Representations Reviewer Representative The Asset Representations Reviewer will designate one or more representatives who will be available to the Issuer and the Servicer during the performance of an Asset Review.

  • Request for Review Within sixty (60) days after receiving notice from the Plan Administrator that a claim has been denied (in part or all of the claim), then claimant (or their duly authorized representative) may file with the Plan Administrator, a written request for a review of the denial of the claim. The claimant (or his duly authorized representative) shall then have the opportunity to submit written comments, documents, records and other information relating to the claim. The Plan Administrator shall also provide the claimant, upon request and free of charge, reasonable access to, and copies of, all documents, records and other information relevant (as defined in applicable ERISA regulations) to the claimant’s claim for benefits.

  • Asset Representations Review Representative The Asset Representations Reviewer will designate one or more representatives who will be available to the Issuer and the Servicer during the performance of an Asset Representations Review.

  • Review Procedures a. In consultation with the Illinois SHPO, NRCS shall identify those undertakings with little to no potential to affect historic properties and list those undertakings in Appendix A. Upon the determination by the CRS that a proposed undertaking is included in Appendix A, the NRCS is not required to consult further with the SHPO for that undertaking. A list of undertakings with the potential to affect historic properties comprises Appendix B. b. The lists of undertakings provided in Appendices A and B may be modified through consultation and written agreement between the NRCS State Conservationist and the SHPO without requiring an amendment to this Illinois Prototype Agreement. The NRCS State Office will maintain the master list and will provide an updated list to all consulting parties with an explanation of the rationale for classifying the practices accordingly. c. Undertakings identified in Appendix B shall require further review as outlined in Stipulation V. a. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO to define the undertaking’s APE, identify and evaluate historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking, assess potential effects, and identify strategies for resolving adverse effects prior to implementing the undertaking. 1) NRCS may provide its proposed APE, identification of historic properties and/or scope of identification efforts, and assessment of effects in a single transmittal to the SHPO, provided this documentation meets the substantive standards in 36 CFR Part 800.4-5 and 800.11. 2) The NRCS shall attempt to avoid adverse effects to historic properties whenever possible; where historic properties are located in the APE, NRCS shall describe how it proposes to modify, buffer, or move the undertaking to avoid adverse effects to historic properties. 3) Where the NRCS proposes a finding of "no historic properties affected" or "no adverse effect" to historic properties, the SHPO shall have 30 calendar days from receipt of this documented description and information to review it and provide comments. The NRCS shall take into account all timely comments. i. If the SHPO, or another consulting party, disagrees with NRCS' findings and/or determination, it shall notify the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar daytime period. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO or other consulting party to attempt to resolve the disagreement. If the disagreement cannot be resolved through this consultation, NRCS shall follow the dispute resolution process in Stipulation VIII below. ii. If the SHPO does not respond to the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar day period and/or the NRCS receives no objections from other consulting parties, or if the SHPO concurs with the NRCS' determination and proposed actions to avoid adverse effects, the NRCS shall document the concurrence/lack of response within the review time noted above and may move forward with the undertaking. 4) Where a proposed undertaking may adversely affect historic properties, NRCS shall describe proposed measures to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects, and follow the process in 36 CFR Part 800.6, including consultation with other consulting patties and notification to the ACHP, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement to resolve the adverse effects. Should the proposed undertaking have the potential to adversely affect a known NHL, the NRCS shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions that may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL in accordance with 54 U.S.C. § 306107 of the NHPA and 36 CFR Part 800.6 and 800.10, including consultation with the ACHP and respective National Park Service, Regional National Historic Landmark Program Coordinator, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement. d. NRCS will conduct archaeological surveys and will submit reports and other documentation to SHPO for review and comment. When no archaeological sites have been located by the archaeological survey, NRCS may proceed with the proposed undertaking. Reports for negative surveys must be submitted to SHPO on a quarterly basis. All positive and negative reports submitted to SHPO will be sent digitally for submission to the Inventory of Illinois Archaeological Sites (IAS) data file maintained by staff at the Illinois State Museum (ISM) housed under the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). The NRCS further agrees that access to specific site location data will be restricted to the CRS, the NRCS field personnel installing conservation practices adjacent to the cultural resource, and the landowner. Specific site location information for individual projects will be maintained in a secure cultural resources file kept in the field offices and will not be available to the public. e. Curation: NRCS personnel will not collect artifactual material during routine field inspections. However, if a professional survey, evaluation testing, or mitigation is required, NRCS shall ensure that all materials and records resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities on federal or state property are curated by the Illinois State Museum. The NRCS shall ensure that all records resulting from cultural resource surveys or data recovery activities on private property are curated by the Illinois State Museum or an equivalent curation facility in accordance with 36 CFR Part 79. Subject to the landowner's permission, all objects resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities are maintained by the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution until their analysis is complete and they are returned to their owner(s). Although landowners will be encouraged to donate artifactual material, it is understood that objects collected on private land remain the property of the landowner(s) unless the landowner(s) donates the material to the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution. This excludes burial goods, as stipulated by XXXXXX.

  • Asset Representations Review Process Section 3.01 Asset Representations Review Notices and Identification of Review Receivables. On receipt of an Asset Representations Review Notice from the Seller according to Section 5.7 of the Receivables Purchase Agreement, the Asset Representations Reviewer will start an Asset Representations Review. The Servicer will provide the list of Review Receivables to the Asset Representations Reviewer promptly upon receipt of the Asset Representations Review Notice. The Asset Representations Reviewer will not be obligated to start, and will not start, an Asset Representations Review until an Asset Representations Review Notice and the related list of Review Receivables is received. The Asset Representations Reviewer is not obligated to verify (i) whether the conditions to the initiation of the Asset Representations Review and the issuance of an Asset Representations Review Notice described in Section 7.6 of the Indenture were satisfied or (ii) the accuracy or completeness of the list of Review Receivables provided by the Servicer.

  • Completion of Review for Certain Review Receivables Following the delivery of the list of the Review Receivables and before the delivery of the Review Report by the Asset Representations Reviewer, the Servicer may notify the Asset Representations Reviewer if a Review Receivable is paid in full by the Obligor or purchased from the Issuer in accordance with the terms of the Basic Documents. On receipt of such notice, the Asset Representations Reviewer will immediately terminate all Tests of the related Review Receivable, and the Review of such Review Receivables will be considered complete (a “Test Complete”). In this case, the related Review Report will indicate a Test Complete for such Review Receivable and the related reason.

  • 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.

  • Termination of Representative The services of a Representative may be terminated at any time by the affirmative vote of Holders holding a majority of the Notes, measured by the outstanding principal amount with respect to each such Note, but only if they simultaneously appoint a replacement Representative.

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