Quality and doability Sample Clauses

Quality and doability. As discussed above, the impulses set building a market for climate ser- vices will most likely—like most other EU policies and business fashions—follow a sort of inno- vation hype cycle. The major challenge is to use enough time and precision as to arrive at suffi- cient results in creating climate services infrastructures, quality assuring regimes, and business models that work. Too little effort can lead to failure due to lack of quality and doability. However, when it takes too long until infrastructure is harmonised, potential users identified and fit of services co-shaped with them leading to suitable business models, the climate services hype might be gone.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Quality and doability

  • Equality and Diversity 36.2.1 The Supplier shall:

  • Quality- and Cost-Based Selection Except as ADB may otherwise agree, the Borrower shall apply quality- and cost-based selection for selecting and engaging consulting services.

  • Quality and Extent of Services The Board considered the terms of the Agreement, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreement. The Board noted that, under the Agreement, XXXX provides portfolio management services to the Fund and that, pursuant to a separate administrative services agreement, DIMA provides administrative services to the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to XXXX in sponsoring or managing the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to XXXX from such risks and XXXX’s approach to addressing such risks. The Board reviewed the Fund’s performance over short-term and long-term periods and compared those returns to various agreed-upon performance measures, including market index(es) and a peer universe compiled using information supplied by Morningstar Direct (“Morningstar”), an independent fund data service. The Board also noted that it has put into place a process of identifying “Funds in Review” (e.g., funds performing poorly relative to a peer universe), and receives additional reporting from XXXX regarding such funds and, where appropriate, XXXX’s plans to address underperformance. The Board believes this process is an effective manner of identifying and addressing underperforming funds. Based on the information provided, the Board noted that, for the one-, three- and five-year periods ended December 31, 2021, the Fund’s performance (Class A shares) was in the 1st quartile, 3rd quartile and 3rd quartile, respectively, of the applicable Morningstar universe (the 1st quartile being the best performers and the 4th quartile being the worst performers). The Board also observed that the Fund has outperformed its benchmark in the one-year period, has performed equal to its benchmark in the three-year period and has underperformed its benchmark in the five-year period ended December 31, 2021. Fees and Expenses. The Board considered the Fund’s investment management fee schedule, operating expenses and total expense ratios, and comparative information provided by Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. (“Broadridge”) and the Fee Consultant regarding investment management fee rates paid to other investment advisors by similar funds (1st quartile being the most favorable and 4th quartile being the least favorable). With respect to management fees paid to other investment advisors by similar funds, the Board noted that the contractual fee rates paid by the Fund, which include a 0.097% fee paid to DIMA under the Fund’s administrative services agreement, were lower than the median (1st quartile) of the applicable Broadridge peer group (based on Broadridge data provided as of December 31, 2021). The Board noted that the Fund’s Class A shares total (net) operating expenses (excluding 12b-1 fees) were expected to be lower than the median (2nd quartile) of the applicable Broadridge expense universe (based on Broadridge data provided as of December 31, 2021, and analyzing Broadridge expense universe Class A (net) expenses less any applicable 12b-1 fees) (“Broadridge Universe Expenses”). The Board also reviewed data comparing each other operational share class’s total (net) operating expenses to the applicable Broadridge Universe Expenses. The Board noted that the expense limitations agreed to by XXXX were expected to help the Fund’s total (net) operating expenses remain competitive. The Board considered the Fund’s management fee rate as compared to fees charged by XXXX to comparable DWS U.S. registered funds (“DWS Funds”), noting that XXXX indicated that it does not provide services to any other comparable DWS Funds. The information requested by the Board as part of its review of fees and expenses also included information about institutional accounts (including any sub-advised funds and accounts) and funds offered primarily to European investors (“DWS Europe Funds”) managed by DWS Group. The Board noted that XXXX indicated that DWS Group does not manage any institutional accounts or DWS Europe Funds comparable to the Fund. On the basis of the information provided, the Board concluded that management fees were reasonable and appropriate in light of the nature, quality and extent of services provided by DIMA.

  • Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Contractor understands that HHS does not tolerate any type of fraud, waste, or abuse. Violations of law, agency policies, or standards of ethical conduct will be investigated, and appropriate actions will be taken. Pursuant to Texas Government Code, Section 321.022, if the administrative head of a department or entity that is subject to audit by the state auditor has reasonable cause to believe that money received from the state by the department or entity or by a client or contractor of the department or entity may have been lost, misappropriated, or misused, or that other fraudulent or unlawful conduct has occurred in relation to the operation of the department or entity, the administrative head shall report the reason and basis for the belief to the Texas State Auditor’s Office (SAO). All employees or contractors who have reasonable cause to believe that fraud, waste, or abuse has occurred (including misconduct by any HHS employee, Grantee officer, agent, employee, or subcontractor that would constitute fraud, waste, or abuse) are required to immediately report the questioned activity to the Health and Human Services Commission's Office of Inspector General. Contractor agrees to comply with all applicable laws, rules, regulations, and System Agency policies regarding fraud, waste, and abuse including, but not limited to, HHS Circular C-027. A report to the SAO must be made through one of the following avenues: ● SAO Toll Free Hotline: 1-800-TX-AUDIT ● SAO website: xxxx://xxx.xxxxx.xxxxx.xx.xx/ All reports made to the OIG must be made through one of the following avenues: ● OIG Toll Free Hotline 0-000-000-0000 ● OIG Website: XxxxxxXxxxxXxxxx.xxx ● Internal Affairs Email: XxxxxxxxXxxxxxxXxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxxxx.xx.xx ● OIG Hotline Email: XXXXxxxxXxxxxxx@xxxx.xxxxx.xx.xx. ● OIG Mailing Address: Office of Inspector General Attn: Fraud Hotline MC 1300 P.O. Box 85200 Austin, Texas 78708-5200

  • Contractor Responsibility and Debarment 14.1 A responsible contractor is a contractor who has demonstrated the attribute of trustworthiness, as well as quality, fitness, capacity and experience to satisfactorily perform the contract. It is the COUNTY’s policy to conduct business only with responsible contractors.

  • Information Technology Accessibility Standards Any information technology related products or services purchased, used or maintained through this Grant must be compatible with the principles and goals contained in the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards adopted by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board under Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. §794d), as amended. The federal Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards can be found at: xxxx://xxx.xxxxxx-xxxxx.xxx/508.htm.

  • Review of legality and data minimisation (a) The data importer agrees to review the legality of the request for disclosure, in particular whether it remains within the powers granted to the requesting public authority, and to challenge the request if, after careful assessment, it concludes that there are reasonable grounds to consider that the request is unlawful under the laws of the country of destination, applicable obligations under international law and principles of international comity. The data importer shall, under the same conditions, pursue possibilities of appeal. When challenging a request, the data importer shall seek interim measures with a view to suspending the effects of the request until the competent judicial authority has decided on its merits. It shall not disclose the personal data requested until required to do so under the applicable procedural rules. These requirements are without prejudice to the obligations of the data importer under Clause 14(e).

  • Quality Standards Each Party agrees that the nature and quality of its products and services supplied in connection with the other Party's Marks will conform to quality standards set by the other Party. Each Party agrees to supply the other Party, upon request, with a reasonable number of samples of any Materials publicly disseminated by such Party which utilize the other Party's Marks. Each Party will comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and customs and obtain any required government approvals pertaining to use of the other Party's marks.

  • QUALITY OF GOODS 5.1 The Supplier warrants that on delivery, and for a period of 12 months from the date of delivery (warranty period), the Goods shall:

  • Quality Requirements Performance Indicator Heading Indicator (specific) Threshold Method of Measurement Frequency of monitoring Consequence of Breach QUALITY Patient Safety - Incidents I1 Number of incidents Adverse incidents include the following: clinical or non clinical adverse events that have potential to cause avoidable harm to a patient, including medical errors or adverse events related to medical devices or other equipment. Clinical or non- clinical accidents, accidental injuries to staff and members of the public, verbal, physical or psychological abuse or harassment, unusual or dangerous occurrences, damage to trust property, plant or equipment, fire or flood, security, theft or loss, near misses are identified as any event where under different circumstances significant injury or loss may have occurred Number of recorded incidents in the contract month Monthly Remedial Action Plan brought to Performance Meeting following breach; action under Module C Clause 32 if needed I2 Number of Sis Definition of SUI according to trust policy and national guidance Number of Serious Untoward Incidents reported in contract month Monthly Remedial Action Plan brought to Performance Meeting following breach; action under Module C Clause 32 if needed S1 Percentage of eligible staff received child safeguarding training at level 2 (as identified in LSCB training strategy) 95% Number received training/ Number of identified staff requiring training Monthly S2 Percentage of eligible staff received adult safeguarding awareness training at level 2 ( as identified in K&M Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults training strategy) 95% Number of staff trained/ Number of identified staff requiring training Monthly

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