Outcomes for Terminology Sample Clauses

Outcomes for Terminology. ‌ As terminology was clearly an issue at the expert meeting, there are plans in place to meet this need. Specifically, there will be an added session at the ADED conference on July 30, 2012. This session will be a one and a half hour session with an initial presentation from Xxxx Xxxxxxxxx and Xxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxx highlighting the issues with terminology. Discussion will be taped and offer insights by experienced specialists and their understanding of terminology and its issues. There will be a second hour and half with the leadership of ADED as well as members of the expert panel available to meet to make plans of how this issue might be addressed. Appendices‌ Visual Acuity 000 000 000 90 23 10 ROM – Upper Extremity 213 95 200 91 13 6 ROM – Head, Neck, trunk 212 94 203 90 9 4 Muscle Strength 210 93 196 87 14 6 ROM – Lower Extremity 207 91 197 87 10 4 Ocular Range of Motion 195 86 138 61 57 25 Muscle Tone 184 86 164 73 29 13 Trails B 189 84 139 62 50 22 Saccades 186 83 121 54 65 29 Endurance 179 79 167 74 12 5 Trails A 171 76 124 55 47 21 Depth Perception 170 75 163 72 7 3 Sensation 162 72 128 57 34 15 MVPT 150 66 91 40 59 26 Balance 147 65 127 56 20 9 Clock Drawing Test 132 59 49 22 83 37 Letter/Number Cancelation 132 48 47 21 85 32 Fine Motor Coordination 121 55 103 46 18 8 Convergence/Divergence 000 00 00 00 00 00 Arm Reach 000 00 0 00 00 00 Coordination; Foot Tap 115 51 92 41 23 10 Color Perception 115 73 153 68 11 5 Contrast Sensitivity 110 48 96 42 14 6 Brake Reaction 110 49 99 44 11 5 Judgment/Rules of the Road 109 48 93 41 16 7 Phorias 105 67 88 56 17 11 Road Signs (Optec) 102 45 95 42 7 3 Short Blessed 100 45 56 25 44 20 Mini Mental Status Exam 93 41 41 18 52 23 MMSE or SBT 193 86 97 43 Clock Drawing Test 83 83 72 59 2 21 1 9 Letter Cancelation 65 38 64 22 1 16 5 MVPT 59 33 56 37 1 32 2 18 Convergence/Divergence 59 28 58 19 3 25 2 11 Ocular Range of Motion 57 27 56 18 5 27 2 10 Mini Mental Exam 52 25 34 45 2 7 4 2 Trails B 50 22 48 45 3 25 4 12 Trails A 47 27 45 40 3 22 3 9 Saccades 46 29 36 19 Short Blessed 44 27 29 39 0 10 1 5 UFOV 28 19 27 21 14 1 9 Draw a person 28 19 25 12 7 3 All clients taken BTW 105 or 45% 170 or 75% Only select clients on BTW 12 or 5% 13 or 6% Length of the BTW 5 minutes – 4 hours 5 minutes – 6 hours Mean 44 minutes (SD=39.8) 70 Minutes (SD = 40.0) Median 30 60 Respondents were asked to list their top 5 assessments used to make a fitness to drive decision. Also could give “all other assessments.” Behind the Wheel 155 57.6 + ...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Outcomes for Terminology

  • Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)

  • Standards for Determining Commercial Reasonableness Borrower and Silicon agree that a sale or other disposition (collectively, "sale") of any Collateral which complies with the following standards will conclusively be deemed to be commercially reasonable: (i) Notice of the sale is given to Borrower at least seven days prior to the sale, and, in the case of a public sale, notice of the sale is published at least seven days before the sale in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the sale is to be conducted; (ii) Notice of the sale describes the collateral in general, non-specific terms; (iii) The sale is conducted at a place designated by Silicon, with or without the Collateral being present; (iv) The sale commences at any time between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m; (v) Payment of the purchase price in cash or by cashier's check or wire transfer is required; (vi) With respect to any sale of any of the Collateral, Silicon may (but is not obligated to) direct any prospective purchaser to ascertain directly from Borrower any and all information concerning the same. Silicon shall be free to employ other methods of noticing and selling the Collateral, in its discretion, if they are commercially reasonable.

  • Determination of Responsiveness 28.1 The Procuring Entity's determination of a Tender's responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the Tender itself, as defined in ITT28.2.

  • Technical Feasibility of String While ICANN has encouraged and will continue to encourage universal acceptance of all top-­‐level domain strings across the Internet, certain top-­‐level domain strings may encounter difficulty in acceptance by ISPs and webhosters and/or validation by web applications. Registry Operator shall be responsible for ensuring to its satisfaction the technical feasibility of the TLD string prior to entering into this Agreement.

  • Technical Objections to Grievances It is the intent of both Parties of this Agreement that no grievance shall be defeated merely because of a technical error, other than time limitations in processing the grievance through the grievance procedure. To this end, an arbitration board shall have the power to allow all necessary amendments to the grievance and the power to waive formal procedural irregularities in the processing of a grievance, in order to determine the real matter in dispute and to render a decision according to equitable principles and the justice of the case.

  • Presentation of Potential Target Businesses The Company shall cause each of the Initial Shareholders to agree that, in order to minimize potential conflicts of interest which may arise from multiple affiliations, the Initial Shareholders will present to the Company for its consideration, prior to presentation to any other person or company, any suitable opportunity to acquire an operating business, until the earlier of the consummation by the Company of a Business Combination or the liquidation of the Company, subject to any pre-existing fiduciary obligations the Initial Shareholders might have.

  • Benchmarks for Measuring Accessibility For the purposes of this Agreement, the accessibility of online content and functionality will be measured according to the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA and the Web Accessibility Initiative Accessible Rich Internet Applications Suite (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 for web content, which are incorporated by reference.

  • Claims Review Methodology ‌‌ a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject‌‌ to the Quarterly Claims Review.

  • 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.

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion # 4 READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not i ncrease your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for years two and thr ee and potentially year four, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIP S, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentati on, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from th e “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, wit h any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they ma y apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@t xxx-xxx.xxx

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