Proposed Material Assessment Sample Clauses

Proposed Material Assessment. Upon receipt of the Depositor Authorized Representative’s written permission (which may be provided via email), ASU will notify the Depositor Scientist and/or Depositor Authorized Representative who submitted the Plasmid Deposit Form that he/she may submit the Proposed Material to the Repository to be assessed by ASU. Upon receipt of the Proposed Material, ASU will, in accordance with its policies, procedures, and standard laboratory practices:
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Proposed Material Assessment. Upon receipt of the Depositor Authorized Representative’s written permission (which may be provided via email), ASU will notify the Depositor Scientist and/or Depositor Authorized Representative who submitted the Plasmid Deposit Form that he/she may submit the Proposed Material to the Repository to be assessed by ASU. Upon receipt of the Proposed Material, ASU will, in accordance with its policies, procedures, and standard laboratory practices: Review the Proposed Material that it receives to confirm that the Proposed Material received matches the sample labels. ASU will notify the Depositor Scientist if (a) unexpected samples were received; or (b) if expected sample containers were not received. If unexpected samples were received, ASU will either return the samples at Depositor Institution’s expense or destroy them. If expected sample containers were not received, ASU will notify the Depositor Scientist, so that he or she can send a replacement; Perform a diagnostic analysis of each Plasmid to confirm a partial or complete nucleotide sequence identity of the Proposed Material submitted by Depositor Scientist; ASU will return or destroy any Proposed Material that does not pass the diagnostic analysis at Depositor Scientist’s request and expense; Following completion of steps in Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2, notify the Depositor Scientist and/or Depositor Authorized Representative that the Proposed Material was accepted and has become Depositor Material or rejected in whole or in part; and Replicate samples of the Depositor Material for subsequent distribution and archival storage. Special Proposed Material. From time to time, Depositor Institution may wish to provide Proposed Material to the Repository that is subject to (a) material transfer agreements with third parties, (b) license agreements with third parties, or (c) other limitations such as time limits for testing by Recipient Institution of the pursuant to which the Depositor Material can only be provided to Recipient Institutions subject to the Standard Plasmid Transfer Agreement attached as Exhibit B with appropriate addendum. In such cases, the Depositor Institution shall request the use of the Standard Plasmid Transfer Agreement with Addendum in the Plasmid Deposit Form, described in Section 3.1. ASU and the Depositor Institution shall work in good faith to reach an agreement regarding the specific terms of the Addendum, provided, however, that such terms are consistent with ASU’s obligations to N...
Proposed Material Assessment. Upon receipt of the Depositor Authorized Representative’s written permission (which may be provided via email), HIP will notify the Depositor Scientist and/or Depositor Authorized Representative who submitted the Plasmid Deposit Form that he/she may submit the Proposed Material to the Repository to be assessed by HIP. Upon receipt of the Proposed Material, HIP will, in accordance with its policies, procedures, and standard laboratory practices:

Related to Proposed Material Assessment

  • Environmental Assessment Buyer shall have the right for a period commencing upon execution of this Agreement by both parties and ending on November 28, 2012, to conduct an environmental assessment of the Assets, at Buyer’s sole risk, liability and expense. Seller shall make available to Buyer, during the environmental assessment period described above, Seller’s historical files regarding prior operations on the Assets, and provide Buyer and its representatives with reasonable access to the Assets to conduct the environmental assessment. Buyer shall provide Seller three (3) days prior written notice of a desired date(s) for such assessment and Seller shall have the right to be present during any assessment and, if any testing is conducted pursuant to Seller’s express prior written consent, Seller may require splitting of all samples. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, Buyer shall not have the right to drill any test, monitor or other xxxxx or to extract samples of any air, soil, water or other substance from the Assets without Seller’s express prior written consent. If Buyer proposes a reasonable request to drill a test well or extract a sample pursuant to a systematic and customary procedure for the assessment of the environmental condition of the Assets and Seller refuses to grant its consent to such a well or sampling, then Buyer shall have the right, for a period of seventy-two (72) hours following notification of Seller’s refusal to consent, to deliver written notice to Seller of Buyer’s election to exclude from this transaction the portion of the Assets affected by such proposed test well or sample, and the Purchase Price shall be adjusted accordingly by the Allocated Value of such portion of the Assets so excluded. Under no circumstances whatsoever shall Seller ever be obligated to grant its consent to any such test xxxxx or sampling proposed by Buyer, and Buyer’s sole and exclusive remedy for any refusal by Seller to grant its consent shall be the limited right contained in the preceding sentence to exclude the affected Assets from the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. If Buyer fails to exercise the right to exclude such Assets by written notice to Seller delivered prior to the expiration of the seventy-two hour period described above, then Buyer shall be conclusively deemed to have waived such right and shall be obligated to purchase the affected Assets without conducting such testing or sampling or any adjustment of the Purchase Price unless otherwise provided in this Agreement.

  • Proposed Corrective Action Plan Simultaneously with the submission of the Audit, the Recipient will submit to OCR for its review and approval a proposed Corrective Action Plan to address all inaccessible content and functionality identified during the Recipient’s Audit. The proposed Corrective Action Plan will set out a detailed schedule for: (1) addressing problems, taking into account identified priorities, with all corrective actions to be completed within 18 months of the date OCR approved the Corrective Action Plan; (2) setting up systems of accountability and verifying claims of accessibility by vendors or open sources; and setting up a system of testing and accountability to maintain the accessibility of all online content and functionality on an ongoing basis.

  • PROPOSED MOBILITY PROGRAMME The proposed mobility programme includes the indicative start and end months of the agreed study programme that the student will carry out abroad. The Learning Agreement must include all the educational components to be carried out by the student at the receiving institution (in table A) and it must contain as well the group of educational components that will be replaced in his/her degree by the sending institution (in table B) upon successful completion of the study programme abroad. Additional rows can be added as needed to tables A and B. Additional columns can also be added, for example, to specify the study cycle-level of the educational component. The presentation of this document may also be adapted by the institutions according to their specific needs. However, in every case, the two tables A and B must be kept separated, i.e. they cannot be merged. The objective is to make clear that there needs to be no one to one correspondence between the courses followed abroad and the ones replaced at the sending institutions. The aim is rather that a group of learning outcomes achieved abroad replaces a group of learning outcomes at the sending institution, without having a one to one correspondence between particular modules or courses. A normal academic year of full-time study is normally made up of educational components totalling 60 ECTS* credits. It is recommended that for mobility periods shorter than a full academic year, the educational components selected should equate to a roughly proportionate number of credits. In case the student follows additional educational components beyond those required for his/her degree programme, these additional credits must also be listed in the study programme outlined in table A. When mobility windows are embedded in the curriculum, it will be enough to fill in table B with a single line as described below: Component code (if any) Component title (as indicated in the course catalogue) at the sending institution Semester [autumn / spring] [or term] Number of ECTS* credits Mobility window … Total: 30 Otherwise, the group of components will be included in Table B as follows: Component code (if any) Component title (as indicated in the course catalogue) at the sending institution Semester [autumn / spring] [or term] Number of ECTS* credits Course x … 10 Module y … 10 Laboratory work … 10 Total: 30 The sending institution must fully recognise the number of ECTS* credits contained in table A if there are no changes to the study programme abroad and the student successfully completes it. Any exception to this rule should be clearly stated in an annex of the Learning Agreement and agreed by all parties. Example of justification for non-recognition: the student has already accumulated the number of credits required for his/her degree and does not need some of the credits gained abroad. Since the recognition will be granted to a group of components and it does not need to be based on a one to one correspondence between single educational components, the sending institution must foresee which provisions will apply if the student does not successfully complete some of the educational components from his study programme abroad. A web link towards these provisions should be provided in the Learning Agreement. The student will commit to reach a certain level of language competence in the main language of instruction by the start of the study period. The level of the student will be assessed after his/her selection with the Erasmus+ online assessment tool when available (the results will be sent to the sending institution) or else by any other mean to be decided by the sending institution. A recommended level has been agreed between the sending and receiving institutions in the inter-institutional agreement. In case the student would not already have this level when he/she signs the Learning Agreement, he/she commits to reach it with the support to be provided by the sending or receiving institution (either with courses that can be funded by the organisational support grant or with the Erasmus+ online tutored courses). All parties must sign the document; however, it is not compulsory to circulate papers with original signatures, scanned copies of signatures or digital signatures may be accepted, depending on the national legislation. * In countries where the "ECTS" system it is not in place, in particular for institutions located in partner countries not participating in the Bologna process, "ECTS" needs to be replaced in all tables by the name of the equivalent system that is used and a weblink to an explanation to the system should be added. CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL LEARNING AGREEMENT The section to be completed during the mobility is needed only if changes have to be introduced into the original Learning Agreement. In that case, the section to be completed before the mobility should be kept unchanged and changes should be described in this section. Changes to the mobility study programme should be exceptional, as the three parties have already agreed on a group of educational components that will be taken abroad, in the light of the course catalogue that the receiving institution has committed to publish well in advance of the mobility periods and to update regularly as ECHE holder. However, introducing changes might be unavoidable due to, for example, timetable conflicts. Other reasons for a change can be the request for an extension of the duration of the mobility programme abroad. Such a request can be made by the student at the latest one month before the foreseen end date. These changes to the mobility study programme should be agreed by all parties within four to seven weeks (after the start of each semester). Any party can request changes within the first two to five-week period after regular classes/educational components have started for a given semester. The exact deadline has to be decided by the institutions. The shorter the planned mobility period, the shorter should be the window for changes. All these changes have to be agreed by the three parties within a two-week period following the request. In case of changes due to an extension of the duration of the mobility period, changes should be made as timely as possible as well. Changes to the study programme abroad should be listed in table C and, once they are agreed by all parties, the sending institution commits to fully recognise the number of ECTS credits as presented in table C. Any exception to this rule should be documented in an annex of the Learning Agreement and agreed by all parties. Only if the changes described in table C affect the group of educational components in the student's degree (table B) that will be replaced at the sending institution upon successful completion of the study programme abroad, a revised version should be inserted and labelled as "Table D: Revised group of educational components in the student's degree that will be replaced at sending institution". Additional rows and columns can be added as needed to tables C and D. All parties must confirm that the proposed amendments to the Learning Agreement are approved. For this specific section, original or scanned signatures are not mandatory and an approval by email may be enough. The procedure has to be decided by the sending institution, depending on the national legislation.

  • Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.

  • Environmental Assessment and Mitigation Development of a transportation project must comply with applicable environmental laws. The party named in article 1, Responsible Parties, under AGREEMENT is responsible for the following:

  • Evaluation Cycle: Formative Assessment A) A specific purpose for evaluation is to promote student learning, growth and achievement by providing Educators with feedback for improvement. Evaluators are expected to make frequent unannounced visits to classrooms. Evaluators are expected to give targeted constructive feedback to Educators based on their observations of practice, examination of artifacts, and analysis of multiple measures of student learning, growth and achievement in relation to the Standards and Indicators of Effective Teaching Practice.

  • Diagnostic Assessment 6.3.1 Boards shall provide a list of pre-approved assessment tools consistent with their Board improvement plan for student achievement and which is compliant with Ministry of Education PPM (PPM 155: Diagnostic Assessment in Support of Student Learning, date of issue January 7, 2013).

  • Project Completion Report At the completion of construction and once a Project is placed in service, the Subrecipient must submit a Project Completion Report that includes the total number of units built and leased, affordable units built and leased, DR-MHP units built and leased, an accomplishment narrative, and the tenants names, demographics and income for each DR-MHP unit.

  • Initial Assessment A Board-designated Administrator shall determine whether the alleged conduct merits an investigation.

  • Risk Assessment An assessment of any risks inherent in the work requirements and actions to mitigate these risks.

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