Rating Scales Clause Samples

The Rating Scales clause defines the method and criteria by which performance, quality, or other relevant metrics are measured and evaluated within an agreement. Typically, this clause outlines the specific scale to be used—such as numerical ratings, descriptive categories, or percentage scores—and may detail how ratings are assigned, who is responsible for rating, and the frequency of evaluations. By standardizing the evaluation process, the clause ensures consistency and fairness in assessments, reducing ambiguity and potential disputes over subjective judgments.
Rating Scales. Two rating scales are used for the IPAS as indicated below. 1. Rating Scale for Assessment Criteria a. Satisfactory b. Needs Improvement: Use of this rating requires written documentation and the implementation of a Performance Development Plan (See Section m). c. Unsatisfactory: Use of this rating requires written documentation and implementation of a Performance Development Plan (See Section m). 2. Rating Scale for Overall Performance a. Satisfactory
View SourceView Similar (6)
Rating Scales. Outstanding - 5: Exceeds Expectations - 4: Competent - 3: Needs Improvement - 2: Unsatisfactory - 1: Provisional/New Employee - 0:
View SourceView Similar (3)
Rating Scales. Rating scales are among the main components of an assessment battery (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013) for assessing behavioral, social, and emotional concerns; specifically, they are commonly used for screening and as part of the diagnostic process for internalizing problems, such as anxiety and depression (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014). They are typically self-administered questionnaires completed by multiple informants that focus on current or recent symptoms and behavior, and they are a standardized and objectively scored method of measuring perceptions of behavior (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013). Rating scales are often viewed as an efficient or cost effective way to assess symptoms and, therefore, are often used as screening instruments when there are behavioral concerns. When scores are elevated, a more comprehensive evaluation is typically completed; however, if informants do not accurately report symptoms, false negatives or false positives can occur (▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2005). Perceived advantages of rating scales for assessment include: (a) cost effectiveness, (b) brevity (i.e., can learn a lot about the problem in a short amount of time), (c) can provide a summary of rater perceptions over time of the child or adolescent’s behavior in natural environments (e.g., home or school), and (d) allow one to obtain data from individuals (e.g., parents, teachers, caregivers, etc.) who are most familiar with the child or adolescent and her/his behavior (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013). There are, however, some disadvantages with rating scales as assessment tools, which are detailed in what follows below.
View Source
Rating Scales to obtain a sample of behavior which occurs outside the office setting.
View Source

Related to Rating Scales

  • Ratings No “nationally recognized statistical rating organization” as such term is defined for purposes of Rule 436(g)(2) (i) has imposed (or has informed the Company that it is considering imposing) any condition (financial or otherwise) on the Company’s retaining any rating assigned to the Company or any securities of the Company or (ii) has indicated to the Company that it is considering any of the actions described in Section 7(c)(ii) hereof.

  • Rating The Notes can be issued without the requirement that they have any rating from a nationally recognized statistical rating organization.

  • Insurance Carrier Rating Coverages provided by Contractor must be underwritten by an insurance company deemed acceptable to the State of Washington’s Office of Risk Management. Insurance coverage shall be provided by companies authorized to do business within the State of Washington and rated A- Class VII or better in the most recently published edition of Best’s Insurance Rating. Enterprise Services reserves the right to reject all or any insurance carrier(s) with an unacceptable financial rating.