PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 6.1 The Performance Plan (Annexure A) to this Agreement sets out –
6.1.1 The standards and procedures for evaluating the Employee’s performance; and
6.1.2 The intervals for the evaluation of the Employee’s performance.
6.2 Despite the establishment of agreed intervals for evaluation, the Employer may in addition review the Employee’s performance at any stage while the contract of employment remains in force;
6.3 Personal growth and development needs identified during any performance review discussion must be documented in a Personal Development Plan as well as the actions agreed to and implementation must take place within set time frames;
6.4 The Employee’s performance will be measured in terms of contributions to the goals and strategies set out in the Employer’s Integrated Development Plan (IDP) as described in 6.6 – 6.12 below;
6.5 The Employee will submit quarterly performance reports (SDBIP) and a comprehensive annual performance report at least one week prior to the performance assessment meetings to the Evaluation Panel Chairperson for distribution to the panel members for preparation purposes;
6.6 Assessment of the achievement of results as outlined in the performance plan:
6.6.1 Each KPI or group of KPIs shall be assessed according to the extent to which the specified standards or performance targets have been met and with due regard to ad-hoc tasks that had to be performed under the KPI, and the score of the employer will be given to and explained to the Employee during the assessment interview.
6.6.2 A rating on the five-point scale shall be provided for each KPI or group of KPIs which will then be multiplied by the weighting to calculate the final score;
6.6.3 The Employee will submit his self-evaluation to the Employer prior to the formal assessment;
6.6.4 In the instance where the employee could not perform due to reasons outside the control of the employer and employee, the KPI will not be considered during the evaluation. The employee should provide sufficient evidence in such instances; and
6.6.5 An overall score will be calculated based on the total of the individual scores calculated above.
Performance Management 17.1 The Contractor will appoint a suitable Account Manager to liaise with the Authority’s Strategic Contract Manager. Any/all changes to the terms and conditions of the Agreement will be agreed in writing between the Authority’s Strategic Contract Manager and the Contractor’s appointed representative.
17.2 The Contractor will ensure that there will be dedicated resources to enable the smooth running of the Framework Agreement and a clear plan of contacts at various levels within the Contractor's organisation. Framework Public Bodies may look to migrate to this Framework Agreement as and when their current contractual arrangements expire. The Contractor will where necessary assign additional personnel to this Framework Agreement to ensure agreed service levels are maintained and to ensure a consistent level of service is delivered to all Framework Public Bodies.
17.3 In addition to annual meetings with the Authority's Strategic Contract Manager, the Contractor is expected to develop relationships with nominated individuals within each of the Framework Public Bodies to ensure that the level of service provided on a local basis is satisfactory. Where specific problems are identified locally, the Contractor will attempt to resolve such problems with the nominated individual within that organisation. The Authority's Strategic Contract Manager will liaise (or meet as appropriate) regularly with the Framework Public Bodies' Contract Manager, and where common problems are identified, it will be the responsibility of the Contractor to liaise with the Authority's Strategic Contract Manager to agree a satisfactory course of action. Where the Contractor becomes aware of a trend that would have a negative effect on one or more of the Framework Public Bodies, they should immediately notify the Authority's Strategic Contract Manager to discuss corrective action.
17.4 Regular meetings, frequency to be advised by Framework Public Body, will be held between the Framework Public Bodies' Contract Manager and the Contractor's representative to review the performance of their Call-Off Contract(s) under this Framework Agreement against the agreed service levels as measured through Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Reports will be provided by the Contractor to the Framework Public Bodies' Contract Manager at least 14 days prior to the these meetings.
17.5 Performance review meetings will also be held annually, between the Authority's Strategic Contract Manager and the Contractor's representative to review the performance of the Framework Agreement against the agreed service levels as measured through Key Performance Indicators. A summary of the quarterly reports will be provided by the Contractor at least 14 days prior to these meetings.
17.6 The Authority will gather the outputs from contract management to review under the areas detailed in the table below. Provision of management reports 90% to be submitted within 10 working days of the month end Report any incident affecting the delivery of the Service(s) to the Framework Public Body 100% to be reported in writing to FPB within 24 hours of the incident being reported by telephone/email Prompt payment of sub-contractors and/or consortia members (if applicable). Maximum of 30 from receipt of payment from Framework Public Bodies, 10 days target 100% within 30 days
Performance Monitoring
A. Performance Monitoring of Subrecipient by County, State of California and/or HUD shall consist of requested and/or required written reporting, as well as onsite monitoring by County, State of California or HUD representatives.
B. County shall periodically evaluate Subrecipient’s progress in complying with the terms of this Contract. Subrecipient shall cooperate fully during such monitoring. County shall report the findings of each monitoring to Subrecipient.
C. County shall monitor the performance of Subrecipient against the goals, outcomes, milestones and performance standards required herein. Substandard performance, as determined by County, will constitute non-compliance with this Contract for which County may immediately terminate the Contract. If action to correct such substandard performance is not taken by Subrecipient within the time period specified by County, payment(s) will be denied in accordance with the provisions contained in this Paragraph 47 of this Contract.
D. HUD in accordance with 24 CFR Part 570 Subpart O, 570.902, will annually review the performance of County to determine whether County has carried out its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) assisted activities in a timely manner and has significantly disbursed CDBG funds and met the mandated “1.5 ratio” threshold. Subrecipient is responsible to ensure timely drawdown of funds.
Performance Evaluation The Department may conduct a performance evaluation of Contractor’s Services, including Contractor’s Subcontractors. Results of any evaluation may be made available to Contractor upon request.
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.
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.
Performance Evaluations The Contractor is subject to an annual performance evaluation to be conducted by NYCDOT pursuant to the PPB Rules.
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.
(b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation.
(c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled.
(d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.
The Performance Improvement Process (a) The Performance Improvement Process will focus on the risks of non- performance and problem-solving. It may include one or more of the following actions:
(1) a requirement that the HSP develop and implement an improvement plan that is acceptable to the LHIN;
(2) the conduct of a Review;
(3) a revision and amendment of the HSP’s obligations; and
(4) an in-year, or year end, adjustment to the Funding, among other possible means of responding to the Performance Factor or improving performance.
(b) Any performance improvement process begun under a prior service accountability agreement that was not completed under the prior agreement will continue under this Agreement. Any performance improvement required by a LHIN under a prior service accountability agreement will be deemed to be a requirement of this Agreement until fulfilled or waived by the LHIN.
Program Management 1.1.01 Implement and operate an Immunization Program as a Responsible Entity
1.1.02 Identify at least one individual to act as the program contact in the following areas:
1. Immunization Program Manager;
