Review and Approval Documents specified above must be submitted for review and approval by CITY Purchasing and Contracts prior to the commencement of work by CONTRACTOR. Neither approval by CITY nor failure to disapprove the insurance furnished by CONTRACTOR shall relieve CONTRACTOR of CONTRACTOR’S full responsibility to provide the insurance required by this Contract. Compliance with the insurance requirements of this Contract shall not limit the liability of CONTRACTOR or its sub-contractors, employees or agents to CITY or others, and shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to CITY under this Contract or otherwise. CITY reserves the right to request and review a copy of any required insurance policy or endorsement to assure compliance with these requirements.
Ongoing Review and Revisions As set forth in Section 35.7, the Parties have agreed to the coordination and exchange of data and information under this Agreement to enhance system reliability and efficient market operations as systems exist and are contemplated as of the Effective Date. The Parties expect that these systems and the technology applicable to these systems and to the collection and exchange of data will change from time to time throughout the term of this Agreement. The Parties agree that the objectives of this Agreement can be fulfilled efficiently and economically only if the Parties, from time to time, review and, as appropriate, revise the requirements stated herein in response to such changes, including deleting, adding, or revising requirements and protocols. Each Party will negotiate in good faith in response to such revisions the other Party may propose from time to time. Nothing in this Agreement, however, shall require any Party to reach agreement with respect to any such changes, or to purchase, install, or otherwise implement new equipment, software, or devices, or functions, except as required to perform this Agreement.
Review and Appeal (a) Each Party shall establish or maintain judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative tribunals or procedures for the purpose of the prompt review and, where warranted, correction of final administrative actions regarding matters covered by this Treaty. Such tribunals shall be impartial and independent of the office or authority entrusted with administrative enforcement and shall not have any substantial interest in the outcome of the matter.
Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances
Personnel File Review a. A unit member has the right upon his/her own request to review the contents of his/her personnel file. The review will be conducted in the presence of the administrator, or his/her designee, responsible for the safekeeping of such file. The employee may have a committee person assist in said review. Such review shall be conducted at a mutually agreeable time. A copy of requested material will be provided.
Validation Review In the event OIG has reason to believe that: (a) Good Shepherd’s Claims Review fails to conform to the requirements of this CIA; or (b) the IRO’s findings or Claims Review results are inaccurate, OIG may, at its sole discretion, conduct its own review to determine whether the Claims Review complied with the requirements of the CIA and/or the findings or Claims Review results are inaccurate (Validation Review). Good Shepherd shall pay for the reasonable cost of any such review performed by OIG or any of its designated agents. Any Validation Review of Reports submitted as part of Good Shepherd’s final Annual Report shall be initiated no later than one year after Good Shepherd’s final submission (as described in Section II) is received by OIG. Prior to initiating a Validation Review, OIG shall notify Good Shepherd of its intent to do so and provide a written explanation of why OIG believes such a review is necessary. To resolve any concerns raised by OIG, Good Shepherd may request a meeting with OIG to: (a) discuss the results of any Claims Review submissions or findings; (b) present any additional information to clarify the results of the Claims Review or to correct the inaccuracy of the Claims Review; and/or (c) propose alternatives to the proposed Validation Review. Good Shepherd agrees to provide any additional information as may be requested by OIG under this Section III.D.3 in an expedited manner. OIG will attempt in good faith to resolve any Claims Review issues with Good Shepherd prior to conducting a Validation Review. However, the final determination as to whether or not to proceed with a Validation Review shall be made at the sole discretion of OIG.
County Review and Approval of Insurance Requirements The County reserves the right to review and adjust the Required Insurance provisions, conditioned upon County’s determination of changes in risk exposures.
FAA APPROVAL This Agreement may be subject to approval of the FAA. If the FAA disapproves this Agreement, it will become null and void, and both Parties will bear their own expenses relative to this Agreement, up to the date of disapproval.
How to File an Appeal of a Prescription Drug Denial For denials of a prescription drug claim based on our determination that the service was not medically necessary or appropriate, or that the service was experimental or investigational, you may request an appeal without first submitting a request for reconsideration. You or your physician may file a written or verbal prescription drug appeal with our pharmacy benefits manager (PBM). The prescription drug appeal must be submitted to us within one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the initial determination letter. You will receive written notification of our determination within thirty (30) calendar days from the receipt of your appeal. How to File an Expedited Appeal Your appeal may require immediate action if a delay in treatment could seriously jeopardize your health or your ability to regain maximum function, or would cause you severe pain. To request an expedited appeal of a denial related to services that have not yet been rendered (a preauthorization review) or for on-going services (a concurrent review), you or your healthcare provider should call: • our Grievance and Appeals Unit; or • our pharmacy benefits manager for a prescription drug appeal. Please see Section 9 for contact information. You will be notified of our decision no later than seventy-two (72) hours after our receipt of the request. You may not request an expedited review of covered healthcare services already received.
Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.
