Phase 1 Quantitative Investigation Methodology Sample Clauses

Phase 1 Quantitative Investigation Methodology. In January 2012, identical Baseline KPC Surveys were administered in 30 Phase 1 and 30 Phase 2 communities of the three project municipalities and yielded quantitative baseline data for all project indicators. The Survey included 299 mothers of children 0-23 months from the 30 Phase 1 communities and 300 mothers of children 0- 23 months from the 30 Phase 2 communities, with all mothers and clusters randomly selected using standard stratified cluster sampling. This survey included questions on the six empowerment indicators. Details of the implementation, training of interviewers, quality control measures, and analysis are detailed in the report of these findings. Data was entered into Epi Info 7.1 and frequencies, proportions, confidence intervals, and p-values calculated first with Excel, and then confirmed with Epi-Info 7.. In September 2013 and in February 2014, mini-KPC Surveys of mothers of children aged 0-23 months were conducted in Phase 1 communities of all three municipalities. [A mini-KPC is a KPC Survey that focuses on a very limited number of indicators, and so is relatively brief and quick to administer, usually only 3 to 7 questions, plus a few demographic/locator questions]. The questions asked in both surveys were identical to those of the Baseline KPC Survey, and were those that pertained to the empowerment indicators listed above in Table 1. In addition to investigating other indicators, the September 2013 survey looked at 1) women’s contact with Care Groups/Care Group Volunteers; and 2) women’s participation in community meetings. A copy of the questionnaire is found in Appendix A. The February 2014 survey focused on 1) women’s participation in health related decision-making concerning place of their last delivery, practice of family planning, and care seeking for a child with symptoms of pneumonia/ARI; and 2) women’s control of the money they needed to purchase food for their children. A copy of the questionnaire is found in Appendix B. Following its CBIO methodology, the project keeps vital events registers which record new pregnancies, births, and maternal and U-5 deaths. The birth registers identify and locate the mother was well as the child. These birth registers were utilized to achieve simple random sampling (SRS), which permitted a sample size of 100 randomly selected mothers of children 0-23 months of age; this yielded sufficient power to detect statistically significant differences between baseline results and the results of t...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Phase 1 Quantitative Investigation Methodology

  • Calculation methodology No adjustment in the Conversion Price need be made unless the adjustment would require an increase or decrease of at least 1% in the Conversion Price then in effect, provided that any adjustment that would otherwise be required to be made shall be carried forward and taken into account in any subsequent adjustment. Except as stated in this Article VI, the Conversion Rate will not be adjusted for the issuance of Common Stock or any securities convertible into or exchangeable for Common Stock or carrying the right to purchase any of the foregoing. Any adjustments that are made shall be carried forward and taken into account in any subsequent adjustment. All calculations under Article V and Section 6.06 hereof and this Section 6.07 shall be made to the nearest cent or to the nearest 1/10,000th of a share, as the case may be.

  • 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 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

  • 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 increase your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for the life of the contract, 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 TIPS, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentation, 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 Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from the “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, with 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 may 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@xxxx-xxx.xxx 8 Choice of Law clauses with TIPS Members If the vendor is awarded a contract with TIPS under this solicitation, the vendor agrees to make any Choice of Law clauses in any contract or agreement entered into between the awarded vendor and with a TIPS member entity to read as follows: "Choice of law shall be the laws of the state where the customer resides" or words to that effect. 9

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

  • STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is an NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram with the exception of the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”) to be completed by the LEA, and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by XXX xxxxxxxx to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. XXX shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by XXX.

  • Completion of Evaluation Cycle 1. The summative evaluation rating shall be based upon a preponderance of the evidence, assessed in a holistic manner, that is aligned to the Ohio Educator Standards. Only evidence gathered during the walkthroughs and formal observations that are conducted for the current school year may be used.

  • Focused Evaluation The Focused Evaluation is used when a teacher is not evaluated using the Comprehensive Evaluation process, and will include evaluation of one of the eight state criteria (student growth impact required). If a non-provisional teacher has scored at Proficient or higher the previous year, they may be moved to Focused Evaluation. The teacher may remain on the Focused Evaluation for five (5) years before returning to the Comprehensive Evaluation. The teacher or the evaluator can initiate a move from the Focused to the Comprehensive Evaluation. A decision to move a teacher from a Focused to a Comprehensive Evaluation must occur by December 15.

  • Using Student feedback in Educator Evaluation ESE will provide model contract language, direction and guidance on using student feedback in Educator Evaluation by June 30, 2013. Upon receiving this model contract language, direction and guidance, the parties agree to bargain with respect to this matter.

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

  • Treatment Program Testing The Employer may request or require an employee to undergo drug and alcohol testing if the employee has been referred by the employer for chemical dependency treatment or evaluation or is participating in a chemical dependency treatment program under an employee benefit plan, in which case the employee may be requested or required to undergo drug or alcohol testing without prior notice during the evaluation or treatment period and for a period of up to two years following completion of any prescribed chemical dependency treatment program.

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