Relationship to other project outcomes Sample Clauses

Relationship to other project outcomes. The deliverable is part of WP3 which focuses on stakeholder engagement, from the identification of relevant stakeholders to the definition of a Policy Action Plan to the EU Member States to raise awareness on the needs, challenges and opportunities related to ICT sustainability and carbon footprint. In this regard, the deliverable is a first iteration of an ongoing work on the identification of the main barriers and levers to the implementation of ICT footprint methodologies by the sector. During the second half of the project, further feedback will be gathered from users of the various tools and materials available on the XXXXXXXXXXXX.xx platform among which: self-assessment tools (SAT-S and SAT- O), marketplace, webinars, and methodology factsheets. Based on that feedback, the content of the deliverable will be updated and the most relevant data will be disseminated through the XXXXXXXXXXXX.xx online platform. Although the present deliverable refers to ICT methodologies, no technical content is provided – references to deliverable D2.1 Description & characterisation of the methodologies selected within the scope of XXXXXXXXXXXX.xx are provided in that respect. The information gathered in the deliverable D3.2 will also support the definition of the Policy Action Plan and can therefore be considered as a preliminary version of deliverable D4.2 Policy Action Plan and XXXXXXXXXXXX.xx sustainability roadmap, due at the end of the project.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Relationship to other project outcomes. D5.1 has been produced in close synergy with WP2 (Task 2.2, Framework design and infrastructure) and in close cooperation with WP3 (WISER modelling) and WP4 (WISER Monitoring). WP2 provides the design guidelines of the overall WISER framework and the information about the inputs coming from the Configuration module. WP4 provides the inputs coming from the Monitoring and the Testing modules. WP3 provides meaningful information about how the model works, which is necessary to define the internal functioning of the Risk Assessment Engine. WP2, and in particular Task 2.2 activities input is also needed to define the kind of logics the Decision Support System has to provide to the Dashboard, with visualization purposes. The interactions among the different components of the WISER Framework are also important to define the kind of information stored in the Data Warehouse and, this way, derive the data model, detail the data interface and the communication API.
Sample 1
Relationship to other project outcomes. This deliverable is the first document of WP2, which provides the technical background and knowledge around ICT-specific carbon footprint methodologies. The initial list of methodologies currently identified in this document will be continuously updated based on a constant monitoring of the carbon footprint ecosystem. For the purpose of this deliverable, the consortium carried out an evolved analysis on the status of the methodologies from the start of the project and introduced any evolutions up until the date of October 2016 and recorded them in the present deliverable. Deliverables D2.2, D2.3, and D2.5 will report any relevant update, which will be available on the website, to provide timely and updated information to the project’s stakeholders. The analysis of the methodologies’ characteristic is essential for the implementation of the self- assessment tool that will be deployed as part of the online service offer of XXXXXXXXXXXX.xx, that will be documented in WP4 deliverables.
Sample 1
Relationship to other project outcomes. The present deliverable 7.4 is produced in the context of the project WP7 - Market Validation and Roll-Out to Other Verticals, Task 7.1 Market conditions, user panels, and validation plan and feeds into the Task 7.2: Validation, carried out over project M12, May 2016, to M30 November 2017. Deliverable 7.5 “Validation Report” to be delivered in M30, November 2017, will detail the validation activities, key outcomes and the lessons learnt. The validation approach builds on the WP2 efforts and particularly on the requirements assessment detailed in D2.1 “Requirements”, D2.2 “Framework design, initial version” that established the key business and technical requirements that have been tested via the Early Assessment Pilots in WP6 and have been consolidated through the iterative process and the WISER Full Scale Pilots instantiations of the CyberWiser-Plus Service. The final version of the Requirements was released as an Annex to D2.2 and was the main outcome of the Task 2.1 Requirements, carried out during project M1 to M6, June-November 2015. The present plan is closely tied to deliverables 6.3; 6.5; 6.7 – the first set of deliverables concerning the 3 WISER Full Scale Pilots, describing the different services under consideration to validate the WISER Framework and defining the roadmap for the implementation of the 3 FSP. A Continuous exchange is foreseen with the 3 FSP(Tasks 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4) and the validation activity (Task 7.2). Validation outcomes will impact in Task 7.3, roll-out to other verticals, the stakeholder engagement and community development (Task 8.2), and the exploitation activities (Tasks 8.3 and 8.4) 2 WISER approach to validation The IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology (IEEE std 610.12-1990, 1990) defines validation as “The process of evaluating a system or component during or at the end of the development process to determine whether it satisfies specified requirements”. Validation determines the correctness and completeness of the end product, and ensures that the system will satisfy the actual needs and requirements expressed by the stakeholders. Validation within WISER will be conducted at two different levels:  At full-scale pilot level (on the 3 FSPs defined for WISER – each FSP will be a customised instantiation of the CWP service)  here validation will be conducted by the specific User Panels by means of structured UATs, presented in the following sections of the document.  At service level (CWL, CWE, CWP)...
Sample 1

Related to Relationship to other project outcomes

  • Relationship to Other Agreements You agree that when you use Mobile Banking, you will remain subject to the terms and conditions of all your existing agreements with us or any service providers of yours; including service carrier or provider and that this Agreement does not amend or supersede any of those agreements. You understand that those agreements may provide for fees, limitations and restrictions which might impact your use of Mobile Banking (for example, your mobile service carrier or provider may impose data usage or text message charges for your use of or interaction with Mobile Banking, including while downloading the Software, receiving or sending Mobile Banking text messages, or other use of your Wireless device when using the Software or other products and services provided by Mobile Banking), and you agree to be solely responsible for all such fees, limitations and restrictions. You agree that only your mobile service carrier or provider is responsible for its products and services. Accordingly, you agree to resolve any problems with your carrier or provider directly with your carrier or provider without involving us. You also agree that if you have any problems with Mobile Banking, you will contact us directly.

  • Working Relationship 4.3.1 Where there is a problem in the working relationship between the principal and the Board (including individual Board members) that has not been informally resolved and is to the detriment of the school, the Board, in consultation with the principal, may consider appointing a suitably qualified independent person to mediate or facilitate between the parties and/or undertake an impartial and objective assessment of the concern(s).

  • Relationship to Other Disclosures The information in these Disclosures applies only to the Services described herein. Provisions in other disclosure documents, as may be revised from time to time, remain effective for all other aspects of the Account.

  • Project Overview The Statement of Work (SOW) documents the Project Scope, methodology, roles and responsibilities, implementation Stages, and deliverables for the implementation of Tyler products. The Project goals are to offer City of Xxxxx Creek, GA the opportunity to make the City more accessible and responsive to external and internal customer needs and more efficient in its operations through:  Streamlining, automating, and integrating business processes and practices  Providing tools to produce and access information in a real‐time environment  Enabling and empowering users to become more efficient, productive and responsive  Successfully overcoming current challenges and meeting future goals

  • Project Name Register ASIC

  • Parties’ Relationship The parties to the Agreement are independent parties. BNY Mellon, in furnishing the Services, is acting as an independent contractor. BNY Mellon has the sole right and obligation to supervise, manage, contract, direct, procure, perform or cause to be performed, all work to be performed by BNY Mellon and its employees, agents, independent contractors and other representatives under the Agreement. At no time shall any such individuals represent himself or herself as an employee of a Fund or be considered an employee of a Fund. BNY Mellon is not a joint venturer with, nor an employee, agent or partner of the Funds and has no authority to represent or bind the Funds as to any matters.

  • For Product Development Projects and Project Demonstrations  Published documents, including date, title, and periodical name.  Estimated or actual energy and cost savings, and estimated statewide energy savings once market potential has been realized. Identify all assumptions used in the estimates.  Greenhouse gas and criteria emissions reductions.  Other non-energy benefits such as reliability, public safety, lower operational cost, environmental improvement, indoor environmental quality, and societal benefits.  Data on potential job creation, market potential, economic development, and increased state revenue as a result of the project.  A discussion of project product downloads from websites, and publications in technical journals.  A comparison of project expectations and performance. Discuss whether the goals and objectives of the Agreement have been met and what improvements are needed, if any.

  • Independent Contractor; No Partnership; No Agency; No Utility Services 15.1 Company and Developer shall be independent contractors. This Agreement shall not be interpreted or construed to create an association, joint venture, agency relationship, or partnership between the Parties or to impose any partnership obligation or partnership liability upon any Party. No Party shall have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement or undertaking for, or act on behalf of, or to act as or be an agent or representative of, or to otherwise bind, the other Party. This Agreement is not an agreement to provide or take utility services of any kind, including, without limitation, interconnection or other electric transmission services.

  • Relationship with other agreements The implementation of this Treaty shall not prejudice obligations undertaken by States Parties with regard to existing international agreements, to which they are party, where those obligations are consistent with the Treaty.

  • Contractor Certification regarding Business with Certain Countries and Organizations Pursuant to Subchapter F, Chapter 2252, Texas Government Code], Contractor certifies Contractor is not engaged in business with Iran, Sudan, or a foreign terrorist organization. Contractor acknowledges this Agreement may be terminated and payment withheld if this certification is inaccurate.

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