PROGRESS EVALUATION Engineer shall, from time to time during the progress of the Engineering Services, confer with County at County’s election. Engineer shall prepare and present such information as may be pertinent and necessary, or as may be reasonably requested by County, in order for County to evaluate features of the Engineering Services. At the request of County or Engineer, conferences shall be provided at Engineer's office, the offices of County, or at other locations designated by County. When requested by County, such conferences shall also include evaluation of the Engineering Services. County may, from time to time, require Engineer to appear and provide information to the Williamson County Commissioners Court. Should County determine that the progress in Engineering Services does not satisfy an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, then County shall review same with Engineer to determine corrective action required. Engineer shall promptly advise County in writing of events which have or may have a significant impact upon the progress of the Engineering Services, including but not limited to the following:
A. Problems, delays, adverse conditions which may materially affect the ability to meet the objectives of an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, or preclude the attainment of Project Engineering Services units by established time periods; and such disclosure shall be accompanied by statement of actions taken or contemplated, and County assistance needed to resolve the situation, if any; and
B. Favorable developments or events which enable meeting goals sooner than anticipated in relation to an applicable Work Authorization’s or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto.
Self-Evaluation Each regular faculty member shall provide a self-evaluation. It shall address, among other items, the faculty member's fulfillment of professional responsibilities as referenced in Section 18.2.3 and an assessment of his or her own performance. The faculty member will share the self-evaluation with the Faculty Evaluation Committee and the first-level manager or designee. The self-evaluation will become part of the evaluation report.
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?
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.
EMPLOYEE EVALUATION A. Formal evaluation of employees shall be in writing and shall be for the purpose of establishing a record of the employee’s work performance. The evaluation may include but is not limited to: establishing performance standards and outcome measures, recognition of an employee’s efforts, as well as planning for improvement. Issues of attendance and punctuality may be addressed if they have previously been discussed with the employee. The employee’s job description shall be a basis for the evaluation.
B. The evaluator shall review the written evaluation with the employee and provide the employee with a copy. The employee shall sign the evaluation acknowledging receipt. If the employee has objections to the evaluation, s/he, may within twenty (20) working days following receipt of the evaluation put such objections in writing and have them attached to the evaluation report and placed in his/her personnel file.
C. The frequency of evaluations shall be determined by the District and generally occur every other year by April 1st for bargaining unit employees. If the District chooses to do so, it may conduct formal evaluations on an annual basis. An employee may request to receive one (1) annual evaluation. Such request shall be in writing to the employee’s supervisor with a copy to the Human Resources Department.
D. The Human Resources Department will consult with the Federation in developing an outline of best practices to be used in conducting employee evaluations.
E. When the District determines that an employee’s work performance is unsatisfactory, it shall inform the employee in writing of any deficiency and the improvement expected and provide the employee with the opportunity to correct the unsatisfactory performance within a reasonable time period established by the District.
F. The judgment of an employee’s work performance by an evaluating supervisor shall not be the subject of a grievance. A grievance concerning an evaluation shall be limited to an allegation that the evaluation was done in bad faith or clearly untrue. The burden of proof shall rest with the grievant. Such grievance shall be filed at the next administrative level above that of the evaluator and that administrator shall provide a written decision within ten (10) working days of any hearing. If the grievance is not resolved, it may be appealed by submitting a written statement to the Human Resources Department within ten (10) working days following receipt of the administrative written decision. The written statement must clearly set forth why the previous decision is in error regarding the allegation of bad faith or being clearly untrue. The Director of Labor Relations, or designee, may review the record of the grievance and/or conduct a hearing and shall issue a written decision within ten (10) working days following such review or hearing. Such decision shall be final.
G. Effective July 1, 2013, Sign Language Interpreters will be evaluated using the Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA) pursuant to OAR 581-015-2035 and/or the District’s evaluation form.
Performance Evaluations The Contractor is subject to an annual performance evaluation to be conducted by NYCDOT pursuant to the PPB Rules.
EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS 6.1 Administrators will meet with new employees to discuss their job description within one (1) month of hire. The Administrator and new employee will sign off on the job description and it will be forwarded to the Human Resources Department for inclusion in the employee‘s personnel file. The Human Resources Department will compile and distribute a list showing each employee‘s evaluator prior to November 1st of each year. Bargaining unit job descriptions will be made available via the District‘s web site.
6.2 Evaluations will transpire as follows for employees that are receiving satisfactory ratings:
a. New hires—regular part-time (school year employees) will be evaluated at three (3) and six (6) working months.
b. New hires—full time (12 month employees) will be evaluated at three (3), six (6) and twelve (12) months.
c. After the initial year of employment, each employee shall be evaluated at least once annually by March 31st.
6.3 Criteria for evaluating bargaining unit members will be based on the performance categories outlined on the evaluation form as related to the job description of their specific position assignment.
6.4 Evaluation reports shall include feedback regarding strengths and weaknesses (if any) demonstrated by the employee. Prior to an employee receiving a rating less than “Meets Expectations,” the employee shall be advised of the performance concern and provided with a clear statement of any deficiency and a statement defining acceptable performance. This shall occur within a reasonable time prior to the final evaluation to allow the employee a chance to demonstrate improvement.
6.5 In the event an employee is evaluated overall as “Does Not Meet Expectations,” the district, in consultation with the employee and the Association, will provide the employee a written plan of improvement (See Employee Plan of Improvement form in Appendix). The plan shall clearly define all areas of deficiency, provide clear and attainable performance goals, and outline supports (if any) to be given, including any necessary training at the District’s expense. The employee will be given a reasonable amount of time, not to exceed sixty (60) working days, to meet job performance expectations. During the improvement period, feedback will be provided through a minimum of three scheduled meetings. Following the completion of the plan, the supervisor shall notify the employee in writing of the outcome. Failure to demonstrate satisfactory improvement may constitute grounds for termination.
6.6 The bargaining unit member shall be given a copy of their evaluation, and any data collection sheets (with the submitters name excluded) used in the evaluation.
6.7 Under the law there is no right to Association Representation at evaluation conferences.
6.8 Any information shared with the evaluating administrator for the evaluation process shall be recorded on Data Collection Sheet(s), with the exception of those unit members that have supervising teachers. Supervising teachers will work directly with the evaluating administrator to share performance information for inclusion in the unit member‘s evaluation.
6.9 Employees shall have the right to respond to evaluations in writing. Such written response shall be attached to the evaluation if received within 5 days.
6.10 No bargaining unit member shall be required to sign a blank or incomplete evaluation form.
