National Evaluation Process and Framework Sample Clauses

National Evaluation Process and Framework. The Battelle team developed a National Evaluation Framework (NEF) to provide a foundation for evaluation of the UPA/CRD sites. The NEF is based on the 4Ts congestion reduction strategies and the questions that the U.S. DOT seeks to answer through the evaluation. The NEF is essential because it defines the questions, analyses, measures of effectiveness, and associated data collection for the entire UPA/CRD evaluation. As illustrated in Figure 3-2, the framework is a key driver of the site-specific evaluation plans and test plans and will serve as a touchstone throughout the project to ensure that national evaluation objectives are being supported through the site-specific activities. Site-Specific Evaluation Plans and Test Plans Review Evaluation Plans National Evaluation Framework Miami Monitor and Support Minnesota San Francisco Data Collection Data Collection And Analysis And Analysis Los Angeles Data Collection And Analysis Seattle Data Collection And Analysis Miami Evaluation Report Los Angeles Evaluation Report Seattle Evaluation Report San Francisco Evaluation Report Minnesota Evaluation Report National Evaluation Findings Report Figure 3-2. The National Evaluation Framework in Relation to Other Evaluation Activities The evaluation of each UPA/CRD site will involve several steps. With the exception of Miami, where the national evaluation team is serving in a limited role of review and support to the local partners, the national evaluation team will work closely with the local partners to perform the following activities and provide the following products:  a site-specific strategy guided by the NEF;  a site-specific evaluation plan that describes the strategy and provides a high-level view of all the test plans needed, the roles and responsibilities, and the schedule;  multiple site-specific test plans that provide complete details on how the data collection and analysis activity will be implemented;  collection of one year of pre-deployment and one year of post-deployment data;  analysis of the collected data; and  site-specific evaluation reports and a National Evaluation Findings Report. The NEF provides guidance to the local sites in designing and deploying their projects, such as by identifying the need to build in data collection mechanisms if such infrastructure does not already exist. To measure the impact of the congestion strategies, it is essential to collect both the “before” and “after” data for many of the measures of effectivenes...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to National Evaluation Process and Framework

  • Required Procurement Procedures for Obtaining Goods and Services The Grantee shall provide maximum open competition when procuring goods and services related to the grant-assisted project in accordance with Section 287.057, Florida Statutes.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order.

  • Program Monitoring and Evaluation (c) The Recipient shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, and furnish to the Association not later than six months after the Closing Date, a report of such scope and in such detail as the Association shall reasonably request, on the execution of the Program, the performance by the Recipient and the Association of their respective obligations under the Legal Agreements and the accomplishment of the purposes of the Financing.”

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • Project Monitoring Reporting and Evaluation The Recipient shall furnish to the Association each Project Report not later than forty-five (45) days after the end of each calendar semester, covering the calendar semester.

  • Procurement of Goods and Services (a) If the HSP is subject to the procurement provisions of the BPSAA, the HSP will abide by all directives and guidelines issued by the Management Board of Cabinet that are applicable to the HSP pursuant to the BPSAA.

  • Evaluation Process A. The immediate supervisor will meet with an employee at the start of the employee’s probationary, trial services, transition, and annual review period to discuss performance expectations. The employee will receive copies of their performance expectations as well as notification of any modifications made during the review period. Employee work performance will be evaluated during probationary, trial service and transition review periods and at least annually thereafter. Notification will be given to a probationary or trial service employee whose work performance is determined to be unsatisfactory.

  • Evaluation Procedure The procedural requirements set forth in this agreement to provide specificity to the statutory obligations established under sections 3319.111 and 3319.112 of the Ohio Revised Code and to conform to the framework for the evaluation of teachers developed under section 3319.112 of the Ohio Revised Code.

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.

  • Using Student feedback in Educator Evaluation ESE will provide model contract language, direction and guidance on using student feedback in Educator Evaluation by June 30, 2013. Upon receiving this model contract language, direction and guidance, the parties agree to bargain with respect to this matter.

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