Procedures for Preliminary Review Sample Clauses

Procedures for Preliminary Review. (a) All probationary appointees will undergo a preliminary review by the DPRC during the candidate’s second year of appointment whereby the DPRC will evaluate the candidate’s accomplishments against the University’s expectations as outlined in the letter of appointment and the criteria document. (b) For those candidates that start on January 1st, the next academic year will be considered to start the July 1st immediately following the January hire date OR the following July 1st, 18 months from the date of hire. The determination of this timeframe will be at the discretion of the candidate within six (6) months of their hire date and will be declared by letter to the VPAR copied to the Xxxx and the Division Chair. (c) The VPAR will advise the probationary faculty of the preliminary review requirements in writing by August 15th of the second year of hire. (d) The Academic Xxxx will provide the DPRC with an outline of the expectations within the letter of appointment at the time of hire. The candidate is responsible for providing the following information to the Xxxx’x office by October 15th for consideration by the DPRC: (i) A copy of the candidate’s current curriculum vitae using the stipulated format; (ii) the member’s Annual Report(s); (iii) the member’s teaching evaluations for the period under consideration; (iv) the member’s teaching dossier (including a statement of teaching philosophy, sample course outline(s), and a sample lesson plan); (v) a research plan and evidence of scholarly work including publications; (vi) other material the candidate wishes to submit. The materials will be available to the members of the candidate’s DPRC and will be located in the office of the Xxxx for review. (e) For cases regarding Professional Librarians, the Academic Xxxx will provide the DPRC with an outline of the expectations within the letter of appointment at the time of hire. The candidate is responsible for providing the following information to the Xxxx’x office by October 15th for consideration by the DPRC: a. A copy of the candidate’s current curriculum vitae using the stipulated format; b. the member’s Annual Report(s); c. a research plan and evidence of scholarly work including publications; d. other material the candidate wishes to submit. These materials will be available to the members of the candidate’s DPRC and will be located in the office of the Xxxx for review. (f) The DPRC shall meet by November 30th to review the candidate’s materials and provide...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Procedures for Preliminary Review. (a) All probationary appointees will undergo a preliminary review by the Peer Review Committee during the candidate’s second year of appointment whereby the Peer Review Committee will evaluate the candidate’s accomplishments against the University’s expectations as outlined in the letter of appointment. (b) The Academic Xxxx will advise the probationary faculty of the preliminary review requirements by July 1st or January 1st of the second year of hire, whichever date is closest to the 12-month xxxx of employment with the University. The review will take place within 12 weeks of this date. (c) The Academic Xxxx will provide the Peer Review Committee with an outline of the expectations within the letter of appointment at the time of hire. The Peer Review Committee will consider the member’s first Annual Report, the member’s teaching evaluations for the first twelve months of employment, and any other material the candidate wishes to submit. (d) As part of its deliberations, the Peer Review Committee will meet with the candidate to discuss any performance-related issues relevant to the review by October 1st or April 1st of each year. (e) The preliminary review will culminate with a letter of evaluation by the Peer Review Committee being placed in the probationary member’s file by October 15th or April 15th of each year. The evaluation letter will identify areas of concern, if any, that the candidate will need to address in preparation for the formal review following the second year of the appointment. The candidate has the opportunity to place a written letter of commentary to be attached to the Peer Review Committee’s letter in his/her file.

Related to Procedures for Preliminary Review

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration. Not later than thirty (30) calendar days after issuance of the final audit report, CONSULTANT may request a review by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by ALAMEDA CTC will excuse CONSULTANT from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT and subconsultants’ contracts, including cost proposals and ICRs, may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an AGREEMENT Audit, an Incurred Cost Audit, an ICR Audit, or a certified public accountant (“CPA”) ICR Audit Workpaper Review. If selected for audit or review, the AGREEMENT, cost proposal and ICR and related workpapers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR Audit Workpaper Review it is CONSULTANT’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s workpapers including making copies as necessary. The AGREEMENT, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by CONSULTANT and approved by ALAMEDA CTC to conform to the audit or review recommendations. CONSULTANT agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by ALAMEDA CTC at its sole discretion. Refusal by CONSULTANT to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state, or local governments have access to CPA workpapers, will be considered a breach of contract terms and cause for termination of the AGREEMENT and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.

  • Conformity Assessment Procedures 1. Each Party shall give positive consideration to accepting the results of conformity assessment procedures of other Parties, even where those procedures differ from its own, provided it is satisfied that those procedures offer an assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to its own procedures. 2. Each Party shall seek to enhance the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures conducted in the territories of other Parties with a view to increasing efficiency, avoiding duplication and ensuring cost effectiveness of the conformity assessments. In this regard, each Party may choose, depending on the situation of the Party and the specific sectors involved, a broad range of approaches. These may include but are not limited to: (a) recognition by a Party of the results of conformity assessments performed in the territory of another Party; (b) recognition of co-operative arrangements between accreditation bodies in the territories of the Parties; (c) mutual recognition of conformity assessment procedures conducted by bodies located in the territory of each Party; (d) accreditation of conformity assessment bodies in the territory of another Party; (e) use of existing regional and international multilateral recognition agreements and arrangements; (f) designating conformity assessment bodies located in the territory of another Party to perform conformity assessment; and (g) suppliers’ declaration of conformity. 3. Each Party shall exchange information with other Parties on its experience in the development and application of the approaches in Paragraph 2(a) to (g) and other appropriate approaches with a view to facilitating the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures. 4. A Party shall, upon request of another Party, explain its reasons for not accepting the results of any conformity assessment procedure performed in the territory of that other Party.

  • Request for Review Within sixty (60) days after receiving notice from the Plan Administrator that a claim has been denied (in part or all of the claim), then claimant (or their duly authorized representative) may file with the Plan Administrator, a written request for a review of the denial of the claim. The claimant (or his duly authorized representative) shall then have the opportunity to submit written comments, documents, records and other information relating to the claim. The Plan Administrator shall also provide the claimant, upon request and free of charge, reasonable access to, and copies of, all documents, records and other information relevant (as defined in applicable ERISA regulations) to the claimant’s claim for benefits.

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • PROFESSIONAL GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE A. Any claim by the Association or a teacher that there has been a violation, misinterpretation, or misapplication of the terms of the Agreement or violation of any established policy shall be a grievance and shall be resolved through the procedure set forth herein. B. In the event that a teacher, or the Association believes there is a basis for a grievance, the teacher or representative of the Association within thirty (30) working days of the time the teacher knew of the circumstances giving rise to the grievance, shall first discuss the alleged grievance with the building principal either personally or accompanied by the Association Representative. The grievance process may begin at the Superintendent’s level when the building principal is not involved with an alleged incident. C. If, as a result of the informal discussion with the building principal, a grievance still exists, the teacher or representative of the Association may, within ten (10) working days, invoke the formal grievance procedure through the Association on the grievance report form, signed by the grievant and a representative of the Association. Said form shall be available from the Association Representative in each building. A copy of the grievance form shall be delivered to the building principal, it may be filed with the Superintendent or a representative designated by him. D. Within five (5) working days of receipt of the grievance the principal shall meet with the Association in an effort to resolve the grievance. The principal shall indicate his/her disposition of the grievance in writing within five (5) working days of such meeting and shall furnish a copy thereof to the Association. If the Association desires to proceed to the next step, it shall do so within fifteen (15) calendar days of the principal’s disposition. E. If the Association is not satisfied with the disposition of the grievance, or if no disposition has been made within five (5) working days of such meeting (or ten [10] working days from the date of filing, whichever shall be later) the grievance shall be transmitted to the Superintendent. Within seven (7) working days the Superintendent or his/her designee, shall meet with the Association concerning the grievance and shall indicate his/her disposition of the grievance in writing within five (5) working days of such meeting, and shall furnish a copy thereof to the Association. F. If the Association is not satisfied with the disposition of the superintendent, or if no disposition has been received within five (5) working days of such meeting the Association may proceed to a Board Level Hearing. This grievance hearing shall be heard in closed session, so long as it does not violate the open meetings act. If the grievance is not settled at the preceding step, it may be submitted to binding arbitration. Within fifteen (15) working days of the receipt of the Superintendent’s answer, the party choosing to arbitrate must give written notice to the other party, setting forth specifically the nature of the dispute to be arbitrated. The charging party shall file a Demand for Arbitration with the American Arbitration Association within fifteen (15) days from the notification date that arbitration will be pursued. The arbitrator shall be selected by the American Arbitration Association in accordance with its rules, which shall likewise govern the arbitration proceedings. G. The arbitrator shall have no power to rule on any of the following: 1. The termination of services of or failure to re-employ any probationary teacher. 2. Any claim or complaint for which there is another remedial procedure or forum established by law or by regulation having the force of law, including any matter subject to the procedures specified in the Teacher’s Tenure Act (Act IV Public Acts, Extra Session of 1937 of Michigan, as amended). 3. Any matter involving the content of a teacher evaluation. H. The Board and the Association shall not be permitted to assert in such arbitration proceedings any ground or to rely on any evidence not previously disclosed to the other party. The arbitrator shall have no power to alter, add to, or subtract from the terms of this Agreement. Both parties agree to be bound by the decision of the arbitrator and agree that judgment thereon may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction. I. The fees and expense of the arbitrator shall be shared equally by both parties. J. The time limits provided in this Article shall be strictly observed but may be extended by written agreement of the parties. In the event a grievance is filed after May 15 of any year and strict adherence to the time limits may result in hardship to any party, the Board shall use its best efforts to process such grievance prior to the end of the school term or as soon thereafter as possible.

  • Review Procedures a. In consultation with the Illinois SHPO, NRCS shall identify those undertakings with little to no potential to affect historic properties and list those undertakings in Appendix A. Upon the determination by the CRS that a proposed undertaking is included in Appendix A, the NRCS is not required to consult further with the SHPO for that undertaking. A list of undertakings with the potential to affect historic properties comprises Appendix B. b. The lists of undertakings provided in Appendices A and B may be modified through consultation and written agreement between the NRCS State Conservationist and the SHPO without requiring an amendment to this Illinois Prototype Agreement. The NRCS State Office will maintain the master list and will provide an updated list to all consulting parties with an explanation of the rationale for classifying the practices accordingly. c. Undertakings identified in Appendix B shall require further review as outlined in Stipulation V. a. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO to define the undertaking’s APE, identify and evaluate historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking, assess potential effects, and identify strategies for resolving adverse effects prior to implementing the undertaking. 1) NRCS may provide its proposed APE, identification of historic properties and/or scope of identification efforts, and assessment of effects in a single transmittal to the SHPO, provided this documentation meets the substantive standards in 36 CFR Part 800.4-5 and 800.11. 2) The NRCS shall attempt to avoid adverse effects to historic properties whenever possible; where historic properties are located in the APE, NRCS shall describe how it proposes to modify, buffer, or move the undertaking to avoid adverse effects to historic properties. 3) Where the NRCS proposes a finding of "no historic properties affected" or "no adverse effect" to historic properties, the SHPO shall have 30 calendar days from receipt of this documented description and information to review it and provide comments. The NRCS shall take into account all timely comments. i. If the SHPO, or another consulting party, disagrees with NRCS' findings and/or determination, it shall notify the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar daytime period. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO or other consulting party to attempt to resolve the disagreement. If the disagreement cannot be resolved through this consultation, NRCS shall follow the dispute resolution process in Stipulation VIII below. ii. If the SHPO does not respond to the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar day period and/or the NRCS receives no objections from other consulting parties, or if the SHPO concurs with the NRCS' determination and proposed actions to avoid adverse effects, the NRCS shall document the concurrence/lack of response within the review time noted above and may move forward with the undertaking. 4) Where a proposed undertaking may adversely affect historic properties, NRCS shall describe proposed measures to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects, and follow the process in 36 CFR Part 800.6, including consultation with other consulting patties and notification to the ACHP, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement to resolve the adverse effects. Should the proposed undertaking have the potential to adversely affect a known NHL, the NRCS shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions that may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL in accordance with 54 U.S.C. § 306107 of the NHPA and 36 CFR Part 800.6 and 800.10, including consultation with the ACHP and respective National Park Service, Regional National Historic Landmark Program Coordinator, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement. d. NRCS will conduct archaeological surveys and will submit reports and other documentation to SHPO for review and comment. When no archaeological sites have been located by the archaeological survey, NRCS may proceed with the proposed undertaking. Reports for negative surveys must be submitted to SHPO on a quarterly basis. All positive and negative reports submitted to SHPO will be sent digitally for submission to the Inventory of Illinois Archaeological Sites (IAS) data file maintained by staff at the Illinois State Museum (ISM) housed under the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). The NRCS further agrees that access to specific site location data will be restricted to the CRS, the NRCS field personnel installing conservation practices adjacent to the cultural resource, and the landowner. Specific site location information for individual projects will be maintained in a secure cultural resources file kept in the field offices and will not be available to the public. e. Curation: NRCS personnel will not collect artifactual material during routine field inspections. However, if a professional survey, evaluation testing, or mitigation is required, NRCS shall ensure that all materials and records resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities on federal or state property are curated by the Illinois State Museum. The NRCS shall ensure that all records resulting from cultural resource surveys or data recovery activities on private property are curated by the Illinois State Museum or an equivalent curation facility in accordance with 36 CFR Part 79. Subject to the landowner's permission, all objects resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities are maintained by the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution until their analysis is complete and they are returned to their owner(s). Although landowners will be encouraged to donate artifactual material, it is understood that objects collected on private land remain the property of the landowner(s) unless the landowner(s) donates the material to the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution. This excludes burial goods, as stipulated by XXXXXX.

  • Review Procedure If the Plan Administrator denies part or all of the claim, the claimant shall have the opportunity for a full and fair review by the Plan Administrator of the denial, as follows:

  • Completion of Review for Certain Review Receivables Following the delivery of the list of the Review Receivables and before the delivery of the Review Report by the Asset Representations Reviewer, the Servicer may notify the Asset Representations Reviewer if a Review Receivable is paid in full by the Obligor or purchased from the Issuer in accordance with the terms of the Basic Documents. On receipt of such notice, the Asset Representations Reviewer will immediately terminate all Tests of the related Review Receivable, and the Review of such Review Receivables will be considered complete (a “Test Complete”). In this case, the related Review Report will indicate a Test Complete for such Review Receivable and the related reason.

  • Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.

  • Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.

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