Removal Requirement If Xxxxxx has actual notice that a Covered Person has become an Ineligible Person, Xxxxxx shall remove such Covered Person from responsibility for, or involvement with, Xxxxxx’x business operations related to the Federal health care program(s) from which such Covered Person has been excluded and shall remove such Covered Person from any position for which the Covered Person’s compensation or the items or services furnished, ordered, or prescribed by the Covered Person are paid in whole or part, directly or indirectly, by any Federal health care program(s) from which the Covered Person has been excluded at least until such time as the Covered Person is reinstated into participation in such Federal health care program(s).
Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.
Escrow Agent Not Responsible after Release The Escrow Agent will have no responsibility for escrow securities that it has released to a Securityholder or at a Securityholder’s direction according to this Agreement.
Solicitation Deviation/Compliance Does the vendor agree with the General Conditions Standard Terms and Conditions or Item Specifications listed in this proposal invitation? Yes
Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Lower Tier Covered Transactions (a) The prospective lower tier participant certifies, by submission of this proposal, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any federal department or agency.
Removal from Layoff Lists Employees shall be removed from all layoff lists for any of the following reasons:
General Requirement Any notice, election, demand, request, consent, approval, or other communication required or permitted to be given under this Contract shall be in writing signed by an officer or duly authorized representative of the party making same and shall be delivered personally or shall be sent by certified or statutory mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, shall be effective as of the date on which it is received or would have been received but for the refusal of the addressee to accept delivery, and shall be addressed as shown in the Contract. The persons and addresses to which notices should be given may be changed by notice given in accordance with this Article.
Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion First Tier Participants:
Reasonable Cause Testing Reasonable cause for testing is a belief that an employee is under the influence of a drug and/or alcohol based on specific facts and/or reasonable inferences derived from those facts. An observing supervisor shall describe and document the following: -Specific observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech or performance of the employee; and/or -Violation of safety rule or other unsafe work incident which, after investigation, leads the supervisor(s) to believe that drug and/or alcohol use may be a contributing factor; and/or -Other physical, circumstantial or immediate indicators of drug and/or alcohol use.
Commercial Operation Date Testing and Modifications Prior to the Commercial Operation Date, the Connecting Transmission Owner shall test the Connecting Transmission Owner’s Attachment Facilities and System Upgrade Facilities and System Deliverability Upgrades and Developer shall test the Large Generating Facility and the Developer Attachment Facilities to ensure their safe and reliable operation. Similar testing may be required after initial operation. Developer and Connecting Transmission Owner shall each make any modifications to its facilities that are found to be necessary as a result of such testing. Developer shall bear the cost of all such testing and modifications. Developer shall generate test energy at the Large Generating Facility only if it has arranged for the injection of such test energy in accordance with NYISO procedures.
