PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS Sample Clauses

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS. More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings: More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. Scope/Complexity/Magnitude Description of Work Scope Instructor Services Technical experience providing Firefighting and Damage Control instructor services and support for similar courses of instruction to those listed in the PNW PWS with similar qualifications/certifications requirements and complexity. Complexity Variety of courses Experience providing instructor services for courses of similar variety and complexity. Magnitude Personnel Similar number of labor hours and categories. Dollar amount Similar contract value.

Related to PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

  • Performance Rating Describes the Educator’s performance on each performance standard and overall. There shall be four performance ratings:  Exemplary: the Educator’s performance consistently and significantly exceeds the requirements of a standard or overall. The rating of exemplary on a standard indicates that practice significantly exceeds proficient and could serve as a model of practice on that standard district-wide.  Proficient: the Educator’s performance fully and consistently meets the requirements of a standard or overall. Proficient practice is understood to be fully satisfactory.

  • Past Performance The Government will evaluate the contractor's performance on the NETCENTS-2 Orders provided in Exhibit B, CDRL B001. The PCO will determine the quality of the work performed based on an integrated assessment of data obtained in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting Systems (CPARS) and information obtained from Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels, interviews with customers, program managers and/or contracting officers for NETCENTS-2 task orders. Based on the contractor performance records above, the PCO will determine if there is an expectation that the contractor will successfully perform the required efforts under the unrestricted Application Services contract.

  • Performance Measurement Satisfactory performance of this Contract will be measured by:

  • Ongoing Performance Measures The Department intends to use performance-reporting tools in order to measure the performance of Contractor(s). These tools will include the Contractor Performance Survey (Exhibit H), to be completed by Customers on a quarterly basis. Such measures will allow the Department to better track Vendor performance through the term of the Contract(s) and ensure that Contractor(s) consistently provide quality services to the State and its Customers. The Department reserves the right to modify the Contractor Performance Survey document and introduce additional performance-reporting tools as they are developed, including online tools (e.g. tools within MFMP or on the Department's website).

  • PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS Upon a particular Commission’s issuance of an Order pertaining to Performance Measurements in a proceeding expressly applicable to all CLECs generally, BellSouth shall implement in that state such Performance Measurements as of the date specified by the Commission. Performance Measurements that have been Ordered in a particular state can currently be accessed via the internet at xxxx://xxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx. The following Service Quality Measurements (SQM) plan as it presently exists and as it may be modified in the future, is being included as the performance measurements currently in place for the state of Tennessee. At such time that the TRA issues a subsequent Order pertaining to Performance Measurements, such Performance Measurements shall supersede the SQM contained in the Agreement. BellSouth Service Quality Measurement Plan‌ (SQM) Tennessee Performance Metrics Measurement Descriptions Version 2.00 Issue Date: July 1, 2003 Introduction

  • Performance Levels (a) The Performance Levels which apply to the performance by the respective Parties of their obligations under this Agreement are set out in Part 1 of Schedule 5. A failure by either Party to achieve the relevant Performance Level will not constitute a breach of this Agreement and the only consequences of such failure as between the Parties shall be the consequences set out in this Clause 5.6.

  • Staffing Levels To the extent legislative appropriations and PIN authorizations allow, safe staffing levels will be maintained in all institutions where employees have patient, client, inmate or student care responsibilities. In July of each year, the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of each agency will, upon request, meet with the Union, to hear the employees’ views regarding staffing levels. In August of each year, the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of Budget and Management will, upon request, meet with the Union to hear the employees’ views regarding the Governor’s budget request.

  • Annual Performance Evaluation On either a fiscal year or calendar year basis, (consistently applied from year to year), the Bank shall conduct an annual evaluation of Executive’s performance. The annual performance evaluation proceedings shall be included in the minutes of the Board meeting that next follows such annual performance review.

  • Level IV a. If the grievant is not satisfied with the disposition of his/her grievance at Level III, he/she may file the grievance within five (5) days of the Level III response for transmittal to the Board.

  • Level III In the event the grievance is not resolved in Level II, the decision rendered may be appealed to the School Board, provided such an appeal is made in writing within ten (10) days after receipt of the decision in Level II. If a grievance is properly appealed to the School Board, the School District shall hear the grievance within twenty (20) days after the receipt of the appeal. Within twenty (20) days after the meeting the School Board shall issue its decision in writing to the parties involved. At the option of the School Board, a committee or representative(s) of the School District may be designated by the School Board to hear the appeal at this level, and report its findings and recommendations to the School District. The School District shall then render its decision.

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