Reappointment and/or Promotion Process, the Instructor Review Sample Clauses

Reappointment and/or Promotion Process, the Instructor Review. (1) The Instructor-DEP and Instructor-UEC follow the same process as they do for other faculty, except there is no outside letter requirement for Instructor promotion or Senior Instructor reappointment.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Reappointment and/or Promotion Process, the Instructor Review

  • 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.

  • Seniority Verification Process i. The new school district shall provide the employee with the necessary verification form at the time the employee achieves continuing contract status.

  • 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.

  • Procurement Related Complaints and Administrative Review 49.1 The procedures for making a Procurement-related Complaint are as specified in the TDS.

  • HHS Single Audit Unit will notify Grantee to complete the Single Audit Determination Form If Grantee fails to complete the form within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of notice, Grantee maybe subject to sanctions and remedies for non-compliance.

  • Required Procurement Procedures for Obtaining Goods and Services The Grantee shall provide maximum open competition when procuring goods and services related to the grant-assisted project in accordance with Section 287.057, Florida Statutes.

  • Search, Enquiry, Investigation, Examination And Verification a. The Property is sold on an “as is where is basis” subject to all the necessary inspection, search (including but not limited to the status of title), enquiry (including but not limited to the terms of consent to transfer and/or assignment and outstanding charges), investigation, examination and verification of which the Purchaser is already advised to conduct prior to the auction and which the Purchaser warrants to the Assignee has been conducted by the Purchaser’s independent legal advisors at the time of execution of the Memorandum.

  • Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.

  • INVESTIGATIONS OF MISHAPS AND CLOSE CALLS In the case of a close call, mishap or mission failure, the Parties agree to provide assistance to each other in the conduct of any investigation. For all NASA mishaps or close calls, Partner agrees to comply with XXX 0000.0, "NASA Procedural Requirements for Mishap and Close Call Reporting, Investigating, and Recordkeeping".

  • Contractor’s Federal Employment Verification Certification The Contractor is registered with, authorized to use, is using and will continue to use, the federal work authorization program throughout the term of the contract, and holds the following authorization: User Identification Number: Date of Authorization: Date WITNESSETH, that the Contractor and the Owner, for the consideration set forth herein, the adequacy and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by each party, agree as follows:

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