Performance Outcome Sample Clauses

Performance Outcome. If an Extensions Lecturer’s evaluations show a significant 20 decrease in performance in their two-year rolling average, the Senior Director may undertake a 21 documented performance review to help the Extension Lecturer improve that performance. The 22 review will be for a specified time, not to be more than one (1) year, and will include clear 23 measurable goals and recommended training where applicable. Unsatisfactory completion of a 24 performance review can result in removal from the annual contract Hiring List as indicated in 25 Article 9.3.4 or the Extension Lecturer may become subject to the provisions of Article 14. 26 4.1. The contents of performance evaluations are not subject to grievance and arbitration.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Performance Outcome. Based upon the items listed above in Article 19.2.1, Extension 18 Lecturers shall be evaluated in three categories: (1) Instructor and Course Evaluations; (2)
Sample 1
Performance Outcome. 10. The Parties agree that the outcome to be achieved by the Australian Taxation Office in GST administration is to collect GST revenue effectively, including through optimising voluntary compliance by effectively and efficiently managing the administrative and compliance risks to the GST system. 11. The Australian Taxation Office is accountable to the Council for achieving the above stated performance outcome, the achievement of which will be measured by the agreed measures outlined in Schedule A (Performance Outcome Measures).
Sample 1
Performance Outcome. ‌ Upon completion, OCIO, Bureaus and Offices will use institutionalized governance and architecture processes to prioritize and synchronize IT investments to meet mission requirements more effectively, save money, and better serve the public. 2 Refers to policy promulgated by DOI Memorandum on Changes in Information Technology Governance, Performance Management, and Acquisition issued June 12, 2019.
Sample 1
Performance Outcome. ‌ In the end, IRM financial management policies and practices improve visibility of the enterprise portfolio with data-driven decision-making and oversight of IRM resources so they align with the highest priority mission needs. 5 The Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA), 2014, OMB Circular A-11, 2019 and OMB Circular A-130, Managing Information as a Strategic Resource, 2016, and the Xxxxxxx-Xxxxx Act, 1996, informs this Goal. DOI data drives the evidence required to answer mission questions and support evidence-based policy. DOI must xxxxxxx data, which is a critical asset for research, commercial and government decisions. DOI’s data assets are essential for increasing transparency in our decisions and maintaining the public’s trust. A more data literate workforce will have the knowledge and skills necessary to best use data to improve mission outcomes, increase automation and reap the rewards of artificial intelligence‌
Sample 1
Performance Outcome. ‌ Cybersecurity operations will deliver standardized and improved protection to mission services and investments across the enterprise.
Sample 1
Performance Outcome. ‌ User-centric analyses and business partnerships enable service improvements, from service strategy through continuous improvement, so enhancements and future investment decisions align with priority business needs.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Performance Outcome. ‌ IRM financial management policies and practices use cross-functional enterprise data to manage portfolio resources efficiently and effectively to fulfill strategic priorities and mission needs. OBJECTIVE OUTCOME KPI Objective 4.1: A Mature IT Portfolio that Informs Decision Making Portfolio structure and processes enable lifecycle monitoring of business services/ projects per established objectives % of IT investments associated with a portfolio service (Business or IT) Objective 4.2: Capital Planning, Budget, and Procurement Transparency IRM leadership has data and input from multiple management functions (e.g., HR, budget) necessary to support good IT investment decisions Evaluation of IRM resources and assets to determine priority and feasibility of current/future IT solutions involves a data-driven decision support model Number of management functions represented per IT portfolio review and investment decision % of Bureau and Office IT acquisitions that exhibit adherence to DOI technology standards/governance decision model Objective 4.3: Alignment of All IT Expenditures with Business Needs Portfolio view of services driven IT investments based on business needs and effective communications with Bureau and Office programs IT expenditures directly aligned to business objectives % of Bureau and Office IT internal budget reviews focused on IT services and projects GOAL 5: Data as a Strategic Asset for Public and Organizational Use‌ Performance Outcome:‌ DOI manages data as valued assets used to support evidence-based policy decisions and are open by default to the American people. OBJECTIVE OUTCOME KPI Objective 5.1: Data Governance Enables a Robust Data Ecosystem Data Governance Board sets appropriate policies and procedures that align with mission objectives. Data management policies support a high level of transparency and accountability of DOI data assets. % of DOI Strategic Plan KPIs linked to the data assets supporting them. Objective 5.2: Data Is Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable Users can find relevant datasets necessary to support DOI’s learning agenda and evaluation needs through the DOI Data Inventory. 100% of DOI’s data assets associated within the DOI application inventory registered in the DOI Data Inventory. Data Assets in the DOI Data Inventory are FAIR, as necessary. Objective 5.3: Data Literate DOI Workforce Efficiently Leverages Data to Support Evidence-based Decisions DOI’s workforce has the data skills needed to effe...
Sample 1
Performance Outcome. Based upon the items listed above in Article 19.2.1, Extension Lecturers shall be evaluated in three categories: (1) Instructor and Course Evaluations; (2) Professional Development; (3) Department Contributions. Areas Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Needs Improvement L-form Instructor and Course Evaluations (two-year rolling average) 3.6 or below Professional Development Examples include but are not limited to: relevant regional, national, international conferences, webinars, workshops, seminars, symposia, self-study and classroom or online courses; relevant certifications Attends in-service sessions and conduct two peer observations. Does not meet minimum expectations, including attending in-service requirements Department Contributions Examples include but are not limited to: committee work, in- service presentations or organization; teacher training support for MATESOL students; course mentor; course development; curriculum development Meets expectations of Core Job Responsibilities in Article 16. Does not meet expectations of Core Job responsibilities in Article 16, excluding attending in-service requirements If an Extension Lecturer is not performing to standard, a performance improvement plan can be developed. The purpose of an improvement plan is to be corrective, not punitive, and is to help the Extension Lecturer improve their performance. When needed, a performance improvement plan will be developed by the Supervising Director with input from the Employee by the end of Spring Quarter. The plan will be for a specified time, not to be more than one (1) year, and will include clear measurable goals and recommended training where applicable. Unsatisfactory completion of a performance review may result in disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. The contents of performance appraisals are not subject to grievance and arbitration.
Sample 1

Related to Performance Outcome

  • Performance Targets Threshold, target and maximum performance levels for each performance measure of the performance period are contained in Appendix B.

  • Performance Measure Grantee will adhere to the performance measures requirements documented in

  • PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES 4.1 The Performance Plan (Annexure A) sets out- 4.1.1 the performance objectives and targets that must be met by the Employee; and 4.1.2 the time frames within which those performance objectives and targets must be met. 4.2 The performance objectives and targets reflected in Annexure A are set by the Employer in consultation with the Employee and based on the Integrated Development Plan, Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan (SDBIP) and the Budget of the Employer, and shall include key objectives; key performance indicators; target dates and weightings. 4.2.1 The key objectives describe the main tasks that need to be done. 4.2.2 The key performance indicators provide the details of the evidence that must be provided to show that a key objective has been achieved. 4.2.3 The target dates describe the timeframe in which the work must be achieved. 4.2.4 The weightings show the relative importance of the key objectives to each other. 4.3 The Employee’s performance will, in addition, be measured in terms of contributions to the goals and strategies set out in the Employer’s Integrated Development Plan.

  • 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 Goal (a) Subject to the following sentence, the Performance Goal is set out in Appendix A hereto, which Appendix A is incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provisions of Section 13 or any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, the Committee reserves the right to unilaterally change or otherwise modify the Performance Goal in any manner whatsoever (including substituting a new Performance Goal). If the Committee exercises such discretionary authority to any extent, the Committee shall provide the Grantee with a new Appendix A in substitution for the Appendix A attached hereto, and such new Appendix A and the Performance Goal set out therein (rather than the Appendix A attached hereto and the Performance Goal set out therein) shall in all events apply for all purposes of this Agreement. (b) Depending upon the extent, if any, to which the Performance Goal has been achieved, and subject to compliance with the requirements of Section 4, each PSU shall entitle the Grantee to receive, at such time as is determined in accordance with the provisions of Section 5, between 0 and 2.0 Shares for each PSU. The Committee shall, as soon as practicable following the last day of the Performance Period, certify (i) the extent, if any, to which, in accordance with Appendix A, the Performance Goal has been achieved with respect to the Performance Period and (ii) the number of whole and/or partial Shares, if any, which, subject to compliance with the vesting requirements of Section 4, the Grantee shall be entitled to receive with respect to each PSU (with such number of whole and/or partial Shares being hereafter referred to as the “Share Delivery Factor”). Such certification shall be final, conclusive and binding on the Grantee, and on all other persons, to the maximum extent permitted by law.

  • 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. (b) If the Operator does not comply with the Operator Performance Level then the Access Holder must pay to QR Network the amount determined in accordance with Schedule 5 as part of the invoice issued by QR Network for Access Charges and other charges for the Billing Period immediately following QR Network becoming entitled to that amount. Where there is no next Billing Period, the Operator must pay such amount to QR Network within fourteen (14) days after receipt of a Tax Invoice from QR Network. (c) If QR Network does not comply with the QR Network Performance Level then QR Network will credit to the Access Holder the amount determined in accordance with Schedule 5 by way of a deduction from the invoice issued by QR Network for Access Charges and other charges for the Billing Period immediately following the Access Holder becoming entitled to that amount. Where there is no next Billing Period, QR Network must pay such amount to the Access Holder within fourteen (14) days after receipt of a Tax Invoice from the Access Holder. (d) The Parties must, if requested by either Party, meet to review the Performance Levels subject to such review not occurring within six (6) Months after the Commitment Date or any previous review of the Performance Levels. If either Party notifies the other that it considers that the Performance Levels are no longer appropriate, the Parties may agree on varied Performance Levels and any associated variations to the Agreement including the Base Access Charges and the Train Service Description. If the Parties are unable to agree to such variations, then the existing Performance Levels shall continue to apply unless varied by QR Network in accordance with the provisions of Clause 5.6(e). (e) In the event that the Access Holder and/or the Operator (i) does not comply in any material respect with the Train Service Description; and (ii) the Access Holder fails to demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of QR Network when requested to do so, that the Access Holder will consistently comply with the Train Service Description for the remainder of the Term then, following consultation with the Access Holder, QR Network will be entitled to: (iii) vary the Train Service Description to a level it reasonably expects to be achievable by the Access Holder for the remainder of the Term having regard to the extent of previous compliance with the Train Service Description (ignoring, for the purpose of assessing previous compliance, any non-compliance to the extent that the non-compliance was attributable to a Railway Operator (other than the Access Holder) or to QR Network); and (iv) vary the Agreement (including, without limitation, the Operator Performance Level and the Base Access Charges) to reflect the impact of the change in the Train Service Description. (f) The Access Holder shall be entitled to dispute any variation proposed by QR Network pursuant to Clause 5.6(e) and such dispute will be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 17.3.

  • Performance Goals A. The Trust and State Street have developed mutually acceptable performance goals dated March 1, 2011 , and as may be amended from time to time, regarding the manner in which they expect to deliver and receive the services under this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as “Service Level Agreement”). The parties agree that such Service Level Agreement reflects performance goals and any failure to perform in accordance with the provisions thereof shall not be considered a breach of contract that gives rise to contractual or other remedies. It is the intention of the parties that the sole remedy for failure to perform in accordance with the provisions of the Service Level Agreement, or any dispute relating to performance goals set forth in the Service Level Agreement, will be a meeting of the parties to resolve the failure pursuant to the consultation procedure described in Sections V. B. and V.C. below. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties hereby acknowledge that any party’s failure (or lack thereof) to meet the provisions of the Service Level Agreement, while not in and of itself a breach of contract giving rise to contractual or other remedies, may factor into the Trust’s reasonably determined belief regarding the standard of care exercised by State Street hereunder.

  • Performance Metrics The “Performance Metrics” for the Performance Period are: (i) the JD Power Residential National Large Segment Survey for investor-owned utilities; (ii) the System Average Interruption Frequency Index (Major Events Excluded) (“XXXXX”); (iii) Arizona Public Service Company’s customer to employee improvement ratio; (iv) the OSHA rate (All Incident Injury Rate); (v) nuclear capacity factor; and (vi) coal capacity factor. (1) With respect to the Performance Metric described in clause (i) of this Subsection 6(a), the JD Power Residential National Large Segment Survey will provide data on an annual basis reflecting the Company’s percentile ranking, relative to other participating companies. (2) With respect to the Performance Metric described in clause (ii) of this Subsection 6(a), the Edison Electric Institute (“EEI”) will provide data on an annual basis regarding the XXXXX result of the participating companies; the Company will calculate its XXXXX result for the year in question and determine its percentile ranking based on the information provided by EEI. (3) With respect to the Performance Metric described in clause (iii) of this Subsection 6(a), SNL, an independent third party data system, will provide data on an annual basis regarding the customer and employee counts; the Company will use its customer and employee counts for the year in question and determine its percentile ranking based on the information provided by SNL. Only those companies whose customers and employees were included in the data provided by SNL in each of the years of the Performance Period will be considered. (4) With respect to the Performance Metric described in clause (iv) of this Subsection 6(a), EEI will provide data on an annual basis regarding the OSHA rate of the participating companies; the Company will calculate its OSHA rate for the year in question and determine its percentile ranking based on the information provided by EEI. (5) With respect to the Performance Metric described in clause (v) of this Subsection 6(a), SNL will provide data on an annual basis regarding the nuclear capacity factors of the participating nuclear plants; the Company will calculate its nuclear capacity factor for the year in question and determine its percentile ranking based on the information provided by SNL. Only those plants that were included in the data provided by SNL in each of the years of the Performance Period will be considered. (6) With respect to the Performance Metric described in clause (vi) of this Subsection 6(a), SNL will provide data on an annual basis regarding the coal capacity factors of the participating coal plants; the Company will calculate its coal capacity factor for the year in question and determine its percentile ranking based on the information provided by SNL. Only those plants that were included in the data provided by SNL in each of the years of the Performance Period will be considered. (7) The Company’s percentile ranking during the Performance Period for each Performance Metric will be the average of the Company’s percentile ranking for each Performance Metric during each of the three years of the Performance Period (each, an “Average Performance Metric”); provided, however, that if the third year of a Performance Metric is not calculable by December 15 of the following year, the Performance Metric shall consist of the three most recent years for which such Performance Metric is calculable. The Company’s “Average Performance,” for purposes of determining any Base Grant adjustments pursuant to Subsection 5(b) above will be the average of the Average Performance Metrics. If only quartile, rather than percentile, rankings are available for a particular Performance Metric, the Average Performance Metric for any such Performance Metric shall be expressed as a percentile. For example, if the Performance Metric was in the top quartile for two Performance Periods and in the lowest quartile in the other Performance Period, the average of these quartiles would be 3 (the average of 4, 4, and 1) and the Average Performance Metric would be the 75th percentile (3 /4). The calculations in this Subsection 6(a)(7) will be verified by the Company’s internal auditors. (8) If either EEI or SNL discontinues providing the data specified above, the Committee shall select a data source that, in the Committee’s judgment, will provide data most comparable to the data provided by EEI or SNL, as the case may be. If the JD Power Residential National Large Segment Survey for investor-owned utilities (or a successor JD Power survey) is not available during each of the years of the Performance Period, the Performance Metric associated with the JD Power Residential Survey (Subsection 6(a)(1)) will be disregarded and not included in the Company’s Average Performance for purposes of determining any Base Grant adjustments pursuant to Subsection 5(b).

  • 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 Measurement The Uniform Guidance requires completion of OMB-approved standard information collection forms (the PPR). The form focuses on outcomes, as related to the Federal Award Performance Goals that awarding Federal agencies are required to detail in the Awards.

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