INTERMEDIATE TENURE REVIEW Sample Clauses

INTERMEDIATE TENURE REVIEW. A. For pre-tenure faculty members with a five-year or four-year probationary period there will be an intermediate tenure review by June 15 of the third probationary year. This is a substantive review of the pre-tenure faculty member’s overall performance throughout all the years of their probationary appointment for the principal purpose of providing constructive feedback to the applicant in terms of their progress toward satisfying the criteria for tenure.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (11)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
INTERMEDIATE TENURE REVIEW. For probationary faculty members with a five-year or four- year probationary period, there will be an intermediate tenure review prior to the completion of the third probationary year. The DAC will perform a substantive review of the probationary faculty member’s overall performance. The Chair/Director and the probationary faculty member will submit to the DAC the material listed in C. above, and the results of student evaluations for the first term of the third year, conducted according to the procedures outlined in Appendix F (Faculty/Course Evaluation) of this agreement. Where the absence of student evaluations for a given semester is beyond the faculty member's control such absence may not be used as grounds for extension of the probationary period, or for denial of tenure. A member may also submit supporting documentation. A probationary member undergoing this review shall have the right to address the DAC concerning her/his record of employment. On the basis of the criteria listed in 1. above, the DAC will:
Sample 1
INTERMEDIATE TENURE REVIEW. For probationary faculty members with a five-year or four-year probationary period, there will be an intermediate tenure review by June 15 of the third probationary year. As per 4.4.C. at the end of the third probationary year the DAC will conduct a year end assessment by reviewing and commenting on the probationary faculty member’s activities in the immediately preceding academic year and will also carry out the intermediate tenure review by performing a substantive review of the probationary faculty member’s overall performance toward satisfying the criteria for tenure. The Chair/Director and the probationary faculty member will submit to the DAC the material listed in C. above, and the results of student evaluations for the first term of the third year, conducted according to the procedures outlined in Appendix F (Faculty/Course Survey) of this agreement. Where the absence of student evaluations for a given semester is beyond the faculty member's control such absence may not be used as grounds for extension of the probationary period, or for denial of tenure. A probationary member undergoing this review shall have the right to address the DAC concerning her/his record of employment prior to the DAC conducting its intermediate tenure review. On the basis of the criteria listed in 1. above, the DAC will:
Sample 1
INTERMEDIATE TENURE REVIEW 
Sample 1

Related to INTERMEDIATE TENURE REVIEW

  • Post-Tenure Review For the purpose of maintaining and improving effectiveness, tenured faculty members shall be evaluated and shall submit reports as described in this Article. The Xxxx/designee and/or Athletic Director/designee shall submit written comments in response to written reports submitted by faculty members in accordance with this Article.

  • Engagement of Independent Review Organization Within 60 days after the Effective Date, Xx. Xxxxxx shall engage an individual or entity, such as an accounting, auditing, or consulting firm (hereinafter “Independent Review Organization” or “IRO”), to perform the reviews listed in this Section III.C. The applicable requirements relating to the IRO are outlined in Appendix A to this IA, which is incorporated by reference.‌

  • Compliance Reviews The Department may conduct a compliance review of the Contractor’s security procedures before and during the Contract term to protect Confidential Information.

  • Compliance Review During the Term, Developer agrees to permit the GLO, HUD, and/or a designated representative of the GLO or HUD to access the Property for the purpose of performing Compliance-Monitoring Procedures. In accordance with GLO Compliance-Monitoring Procedures, the GLO or HUD will periodically monitor and audit Developer’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, the CDBG-DR Regulations, the CDBG Multifamily Rental Housing Guidelines, and any and all other Governmental Requirements during the Term. In conducting any compliance reviews, the GLO or HUD will rely primarily on information obtained from Developer’s records and reports, on-site monitoring, and audit reports. The GLO or HUD may also consider other relevant information gained from other sources, including litigation and citizen complaints. Attachment G GLO Contract No. 19-097-041-B662 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION

  • Quality Assurance The parties endorse the underlying principles of the Company’s Quality Management System, which seeks to ensure that its services are provided in a manner which best conforms to the requirements of the contract with its customer. This requires the Company to establish and maintain, implement, train and continuously improve its procedures and processes, and the employees to follow the procedures, document their compliance and participate in the improvement process. In particular, this will require employees to regularly and reliably fill out documentation and checklists to signify that work has been carried out in accordance with the customer’s specific requirements. Where necessary, training will be provided in these activities.

  • 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.

  • Appropriate Technical and Organizational Measures SAP has implemented and will apply the technical and organizational measures set forth in Appendix 2. Customer has reviewed such measures and agrees that as to the Cloud Service selected by Customer in the Order Form the measures are appropriate taking into account the state of the art, the costs of implementation, nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing of Personal Data.

  • Contractual and Operational Compliance Audits (a) ICANN may from time to time (not to exceed twice per calendar year) conduct, or engage a third party to conduct, contractual compliance audits to assess compliance by Registry Operator with its representations and warranties contained in Article 1 of this Agreement and its covenants contained in Article 2 of this Agreement. Such audits shall be tailored to achieve the purpose of assessing compliance, and ICANN will (a) give reasonable advance notice of any such audit, which notice shall specify in reasonable detail the categories of documents, data and other information requested by ICANN, and

  • Project Team Cooperation Partnering 1.1.3 Constitutional Principles Applicable to State Public Works Projects.

  • Business Review Meetings In order to maintain the relationship between the Department and the Contractor, each quarter the Department may request a business review meeting. The business review meeting may include, but is not limited to, the following: • Successful completion of deliverables • Review of the Contractor’s performance • Review of minimum required reports • Addressing of any elevated Customer issues • Review of continuous improvement ideas that may help lower total costs and improve business efficiencies.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.