Quality Assurance Review Process Sample Clauses

Quality Assurance Review Process. All Quality Assurance Reviews conducted by AAQEP will be guided by AAQEP’s policies and procedures as specified in the Guide to Accreditation, available at xxx.xxxxx.xxx. AAQEP’s process includes an optional proposal review stage two to three years prior to a scheduled site visit. All Quality Assurance Reviews include an off-site review two months prior to each site visit, conducted virtually, and an on-site visit, the scope of which is determined by program size and complexity. MDE staff are welcome to attend both off-site and on-site visits.
Sample 1See All (9)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Quality Assurance Review Process. All Quality Assurance Reviews conducted by AAQEP will be guided by AAQEP’s policies and procedures as specified in the Guide to Accreditation, available at xxxxx://xxxxx.xxx. AAQEP’s process includes an optional proposal review stage two to three years prior to a schedule site visit. All Quality Assurance Reviews include an off-site review two months prior to each site visit, conducted virtually, which NYSED staff are welcome to attend, and an on-site visit, the scope of which is determined by program size and complexity. NYSED will appoint a staff member from the Office of College and University Evaluation (OCUE) to serve as a liaison in the Site Review, who will typically be the OCUE liaison assigned to the EPP for program registration purposes. The OCUE liaison will provide to the lead AAQEP Review Team member state-specific requirements for XXXx and other relevant State information prior to the Site Review, including the Inventory of Registered Programs listing for the EPP.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (5)
Quality Assurance Review Process. All Quality Assurance Reviews will be guided by AAQEP’s policies and procedures as specified in the Guide to Accreditation, available at xxxxx://xxxxx.xxx, as well as TSPC policies and procedures, as specified in Oregon Administrative Rule. AAQEP’s process includes a proposal review stage prior to a scheduled site visit. Oregon providers will be approved to begin working with AAQEP contingent on writing a proposal that is reviewed as ‘complete’ by AAQEP staff. A successful proposal will include, but not be limited to, demonstration that appropriate data sources are available to address the standards and reliability and validity have been empirically investigated. After a provider’s initial review with AAQEP, the proposal step is optional unless the provider ceases then returns to work with AAQEP. AAQEP will ensure site visits are conducted in accordance with the timelines identified on the TSPC Site Visit Schedule. Timelines established for unit reviews and consideration of requests for extensions will be decided by AAQEP and TSPC on a case-by-case basis and in accordance with AAQEP and TSPC policies. All Quality Assurance Reviews include an off-site review two to three months prior to each site visit. Off-site reviews are conducted virtually and TSPC staff are welcome to attend as observers. A report of the off-site review will be distributed to the provider with a copy to TSPC at least two months prior to the Quality Assurance Review. Quality Assurance Reviews also include an on-site visit, the scope of which is determined by provider size and complexity.
Sample 1Sample 2
Quality Assurance Review Process. All quality assurance reviews conducted by AAQEP will be guided by AAQEP’s policies and procedures as specified in the Guide to AAQEP Accreditation, available at xxxxx://xxxxx.xxx. AAQEP’s process includes an optional proposal review process prior to a scheduled site visit. All quality assurance reviews include an off-site review prior to each site visit, conducted virtually, which HTSB staff are welcome to attend, and an on-site visit, the scope of which is determined by program size and complexity, which HTSB staff are also welcome to attend as observers. At or near the beginning of each quality assurance site visit, a representative of HTSB will make a presentation to the Quality Review Team regarding the Hawaiian context for educator preparation. This presentation will include sharing any information regarding the provider’s status with the HTSB.
Sample 1Sample 2
Quality Assurance Review Process. All quality assurance reviews conducted by AAQEP will be guided by AAQEP’s policies and procedures as specified in the Guide to AAQEP Accreditation, available at xxxxx://xxxxx.xxx. ● AAQEP’s process includes an optional proposal review stage two to three years prior to a scheduled site visit. ● All quality assurance reviews seeking ‘accreditation’ status (7 years) include an off-site review conducted virtually two months prior to each site visit which PELSB staff are welcome to attend, and an on-site visit, the scope of which is determined by program size and complexity. ● All quality assurance reviews seeking ‘initial accreditation’ status (5 years) include a preliminary virtual meeting with program staff and a virtual site visit which includes stakeholder meetings and review of data when appropriate; PELSB staff are welcome to attend these meetings.
Sample 1
Quality Assurance Review Process. Consultant shall incorporate one or more structured quality assurance reviews into their project work plan.
Sample 1
Quality Assurance Review Process. Quality Assurance reviewing will be conducted by the QA department and the Operation Supervisors or Operation Shift Lead. Each month the QA Analyst will have a target number of sessions to complete. The Analyst may conduct a review through the use of voice recorded sessions. During a review session, the eRep’s voice session is either *** or through *** session. Sessions are analyzed and scored by QA Analyst on the QA Score Sheet. After this process, the QA Analyst meets with the eRep to deliver targeted feedback on his/her performance and provides coaching, if necessary. QA Score Sheet results detailing individual and team performance are reported to the Supervisors in the weekly team reports. Trending analysis will be provided to Client on a weekly basis. Individual and detailed information will be provided at the Client’s request. In addition, Operation Supervisors review a sample of sessions on a weekly basis. This review process, is similar to the QA process and is documented on the same score sheet. The feedback is given to the eRep either immediately or during a later review session. The Supervisor provides positive feedback or any necessary coaching. If remedial action is required, the Production Supervisor may recommend coaching from a Subject Matter Expert, listening to other eReps during sessions, or providing additional focused training. This document contains unpublished, confidential and proprietary information of PeopleSupport, Inc. No disclosure, duplication or use of any portion of the contents of these materials, for any purpose, may be made without the prior express written consent of PeopleSupport, Inc.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Quality Assurance Review Process. All Quality Assurance Reviews conducted by AAQEP will be guided by AAQEP’s policies and procedures as specified in the Guide to Accreditation, available at xxx.xxxxx.xxx. AAQEP’s process includes an optional proposal review stage two to three years prior to a scheduled site visit. All Quality Assurance Reviews include an off-site review process two months prior to each site visit, conducted virtually, which Commission staff are welcome to attend, and an on-site visit the scope of which is determined by program size and complexity. The institution’s California accreditation activities as defined in the Commission’s accreditation schedule will continue to take place. These activities include annual data submission, submission of Preconditions, Program Review and Common Standards Submission as well as the accreditation site visit. Should the Commission change its required accreditation activities in any way, the institution must adhere to those as well. The AAQEP Quality Assurance site visit may be scheduled concurrent to the institution’s Commission accreditation site visit. If the visit is scheduled concurrently with the Commission’s accreditation site visit, the teams may share interviews and the review of data or other information. Both site visit teams (AAQEP’s and the Commission’s) will each prepare their own reports. Each report will continue through the agency’s standard process.
Sample 1
Quality Assurance Review Process. All Quality Assurance Reviews conducted by AAQEP will be guided by AAQEP’s policies and procedures as specified in the Guide to Accreditation, available at xxxxx://xxxxx.xxx. AAQEP’s process includes an optional proposal review stage two to three years prior to a scheduled site visit. All Quality Assurance Reviews include a virtual off-site review two months prior to each site visit and an on-site visit, both the Department staff will attend. The number of teams and team members are determined by the provider size and complexity of the programs. The provider will work in collaboration with the Department and AAQEP to schedule the off-site and on-site visits.
Sample 1

Related to Quality Assurance Review Process

  • Quality Assurance The parties endorse the underlying principles of the Company’s Quality Management System, which seeks to ensure that its services are provided in a manner which best conforms to the requirements of the contract with its customer. This requires the Company to establish and maintain, implement, train and continuously improve its procedures and processes, and the employees to follow the procedures, document their compliance and participate in the improvement process. In particular, this will require employees to regularly and reliably fill out documentation and checklists to signify that work has been carried out in accordance with the customer’s specific requirements. Where necessary, training will be provided in these activities.

  • Quality Assurance Program An employee shall be entitled to leave of absence without loss of earnings from her or his regularly scheduled working hours for the purpose of writing examinations required by the College of Nurses of Ontario arising out of the Quality Assurance Program.

  • Quality Assurance Requirements There are no special Quality Assurance requirements under this Agreement.

  • Quality Assurance/Quality Control Contractor shall establish and maintain a quality assurance/quality control program which shall include procedures for continuous control of all construction and comprehensive inspection and testing of all items of Work, including any Work performed by Subcontractors, so as to ensure complete conformance to the Contract with respect to materials, workmanship, construction, finish, functional performance, and identification. The program established by Contractor shall comply with any quality assurance/quality control requirements incorporated in the Contract.

  • Review Process A/E's Work Product will be reviewed by County under its applicable technical requirements and procedures, as follows:

  • COUNTY’S QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN The County or its agent will evaluate the Contractor’s performance under this Contract on not less than an annual basis. Such evaluation will include assessing the Contractor’s compliance with all Contract terms and conditions and performance standards. Contractor deficiencies which the County determines are severe or continuing and that may place performance of the Contract in jeopardy if not corrected will be reported to the Board of Supervisors. The report will include improvement/corrective action measures taken by the County and the Contractor. If improvement does not occur consistent with the corrective action measures, the County may terminate this Contract or impose other penalties as specified in this Contract.

  • Review Scope The parties confirm that the Asset Representations Review is not responsible for (a) reviewing the Receivables for compliance with the representations and warranties under the Transaction Documents, except as described in this Agreement or (b) determining whether noncompliance with the representations and warranties constitutes a breach of the Eligibility Representations. For the avoidance of doubt, the parties confirm that the review is not designed to determine why an Obligor is delinquent or the creditworthiness of the Obligor, either at the time of any Asset Review or at the time of origination of the related Receivable. Further, the Asset Review is not designed to establish cause, materiality or recourse for any Test Fail (as defined in Section 3.05).

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances 1. If FEMA determines that the entire scope of an Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances in Appendix B of this Agreement, with determinations for Tier II Allowances being made by SOI-qualified staff, FEMA shall complete the Section 106 review process by documenting this determination in the project file, without SHPO review or notification. 2. If the Undertaking involves a National Historic Landmark (NHL), FEMA shall notify the SHPO, participating Tribe(s), and the NPS NHL Program Manager of the NPS Midwest Regional Office that the Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances. FEMA shall provide information about the proposed scope of work for the Undertaking and the allowance(s) enabling FEMA’s determination. 3. If FEMA determines any portion of an Undertaking’s scope of work does not conform to one or more allowances listed in Appendix B, FEMA shall conduct expedited or standard Section 106 review, as appropriate, for the entire Undertaking in accordance with Stipulation II.B, Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings, or Stipulation II.C, Standard Project Review. 4. Allowances may be revised and new allowances may be added to this Agreement in accordance with Stipulation IV.A.3, Amendments. B. Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings

  • Quality Management Grantee will: 1. comply with quality management requirements as directed by the System Agency. 2. develop and implement a Quality Management Plan (QMP) that conforms with 25 TAC § 448.504 and make the QMP available to System Agency upon request. The QMP must be developed no later than the end of the first quarter of the Contract term. 3. update and revise the QMP each biennium or sooner, if necessary. Xxxxxxx’s governing body will review and approve the initial QMP, within the first quarter of the Contract term, and each updated and revised QMP thereafter. The QMP must describe Xxxxxxx’s methods to measure, assess, and improve - i. Implementation of evidence-based practices, programs and research-based approaches to service delivery; ii. Client/participant satisfaction with the services provided by Xxxxxxx; iii. Service capacity and access to services; iv. Client/participant continuum of care; and v. Accuracy of data reported to the state. 4. participate in continuous quality improvement (CQI) activities as defined and scheduled by the state including, but not limited to data verification, performing self-reviews; submitting self-review results and supporting documentation for the state’s desk reviews; and participating in the state’s onsite or desk reviews. 5. submit plan of improvement or corrective action plan and supporting documentation as requested by System Agency. 6. participate in and actively pursue CQI activities that support performance and outcomes improvement. 7. respond to consultation recommendations by System Agency, which may include, but are not limited to the following: i. Staff training; ii. Self-monitoring activities guided by System Agency, including use of quality management tools to self-identify compliance issues; and iii. Monitoring of performance reports in the System Agency electronic clinical management system.

  • Review Protocol A narrative description of how the Claims Review was conducted and what was evaluated.

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