Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes Sample Clauses

Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes. The cognizant Mission Director (MD), Assistant Administrator (AA), or Head of an Independent Office that reports directly to the Administrator has the authority to make a determination to restrict eligibility based on programmatic purposes. The determination does not need to be a separate document but may be described and approved in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) (see ADS 201), equivalent activity approval document, Selection of Instrument memorandum, other assistance planning documentation, or an amendment to the document. The Planner/AOR is responsible for preparing the determination, which must provide the programmatic rationale for restricting eligibility consistent with this section, and support how the rationale outweighs USAID’s policy preference for, and the benefits of, an unrestricted competitive process. The authority for the determination is not delegable. The cognizant RLO or GC Bureau or Independent Office backstop attorney must clear the determination. For a determination to restrict eligibility for an award over $10 million ($20 million for Critical Priority Countries (CPCs)) to a single organization for programmatic purposes, the written determination must also describe the steps taken, including market research, outreach, and public notices, to identify alternatives including engaging with a broader cross-section of development partners as required by Agency policy. This determination must be described and approved in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) (see ADS 201), equivalent activity approval document, or other assistance planning documentation. (1) Some examples of programmatic rationales for restricting eligibility based on a written determination include: i. Increasing the Agency’s partner base by restricting eligibility to organizations that have not previously received a direct award from USAID; ii. Developing the capability of a local entity or locally established entity iii. Accessing specialized skills or experience through an award to an entity with exclusive or predominant capability based on proprietary resources, specialized facilities, or unique relationship with the national government or other institutions in the cooperating country or intended beneficiaries; iv. Responding to a disaster, violent conflict, political crisis, or other emergency situation that requires an award to be made more rapidly than unrestricted competition can accommodate; or v. Developing a promising science and technology concept; or a un...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes. ‌ (1) Some examples of programmatic rationales for restricting eligibility based on a written determination include:‌ i. Increasing the Agency’s partner base by restricting eligibility to organizations that have not previously received a direct award from USAID;‌ ii. Developing the capability of a local entity or locally established entity‌ by making a direct award to such entity that has previously only received subawards or grants under contract (for example, a transition award; see ADS 303mbb);‌ iii. Accessing specialized skills or experience through an award to an entity with exclusive or predominant capability based on proprietary resources, specialized facilities, or unique relationship with the national government or other institutions in the cooperating country or intended beneficiaries, where the entity developed that exclusive or predominant capability independent of an ongoing USAID award;‌ iv. Responding to a disaster, violent conflict, political crisis, or other emergency situation that requires an award to be made more rapidly than unrestricted competition can accommodate; or‌ v. Developing a promising science and technology concept; or a unique, innovative, or proprietary solution addressing a pressing development challenge.
Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes. ‌ (1) Some examples of programmatic rationales for restricting eligibility based on a written determination include:‌ i. Increasing the Agency’s partner base by restricting eligibility to organizations that have not previously received a direct award from USAID;‌ ii. Developing the capability of a local entity or locally established entity‌ by making a direct award to such entity that has previously only received subawards or grants under contract (for example, a transition award); iii. Accessing specialized skills or experience through an award to an entity with exclusive or predominant capability based on proprietary resources, specialized facilities, or unique relationship with the national government or other institutions in the cooperating country or intended beneficiaries;‌ iv. Responding to a disaster, violent conflict, political crisis, or other emergency situation that requires an award to be made more rapidly than unrestricted competition can accommodate; or‌ v. Developing a promising science and technology concept; or a unique, innovative, or proprietary solution addressing a pressing development challenge.‌
Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes. ‌ For a determination to restrict eligibility for an award over $10 million ($20 million for Critical Priority Countries (CPCs)) to a single organization for programmatic purposes, the written determination must also describe the steps taken, including market research, outreach, and public notices, to identify alternatives including‌ (1) Some examples of programmatic rationales for restricting eligibility based on a written determination include:‌ i. Increasing the Agency’s partner base by restricting eligibility to organizations that have not previously received a direct award from USAID;‌ ii. Developing the capability of a local entity or locally established entity‌ by making a direct award to such entity that has previously only received subawards or grants under contract (for example, a transition award; see ADS 303mbb);‌ iii. Accessing specialized skills or experience through an award to an entity with exclusive or predominant capability based on proprietary resources, specialized facilities, or unique relationship with the national government or other institutions in the cooperating country or intended beneficiaries, where the entity developed that exclusive or predominant capability independent of an ongoing USAID award;‌ iv. Responding to a disaster, violent conflict, political crisis, or other emergency situation that requires an award to be made more rapidly than unrestricted competition can accommodate; or‌ v. Developing a promising science and technology concept; or a unique, innovative, or proprietary solution addressing a pressing development challenge.‌

Related to Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes

  • Funding Eligibility Contractor understands, acknowledges, and agrees that, pursuant to Chapter 2272 (eff. Sept. 1, 2021, Ch. 2273) of the Texas Government Code, except as exempted under that Chapter, HHSC cannot contract with an abortion provider or an affiliate of an abortion provider. Contractor certifies that it is not ineligible to contract with HHSC under the terms of Chapter 2272 (eff. Sept. 1, 2021, Ch. 2273) of the Texas Government Code.

  • Benefit Eligibility For purposes of the Benefit Plan entitlement, common-law and same sex relationships will apply as defined.

  • TAX LIMITATION ELIGIBILITY In order to be eligible and entitled to receive the value limitation identified in Section 2.4 for the Qualified Property identified in Article III, the Applicant shall: A. have completed the Applicant’s Qualified Investment in the amount of $30,000,000 during the Qualifying Time Period; B. have created and maintained, subject to the provisions of Section 313.0276 of the TEXAS TAX CODE, New Qualifying Jobs as required by the Act; and C. pay an average weekly wage of at least $1,185.50 for all New Non-Qualifying Jobs created by the Applicant.

  • General Eligibility i. Except as provided in paragraph 2 (a)(ii) below, a teacher who received an evaluation rating of needs improvement or ineffective in the prior school year is not eligible for any salary increase and remains at their prior year salary. ii. A teacher who is in the first two full school years of instructing students who receives an evaluation rating of improvement necessary is eligible for salary increase.

  • Automatic Renewal Limitation for TIPS Sales No TIPS Sale may incorporate an automatic renewal clause that exceeds month to month terms with which the TIPS Member must comply. All renewal terms incorporated into a TIPS Sale Supplemental Agreement shall only be valid and enforceable when Vendor received written confirmation of acceptance of the renewal term from the TIPS Member for the specific renewal term. The purpose of this clause is to avoid a TIPS Member inadvertently renewing an Agreement during a period in which the governing body of the TIPS Member has not properly appropriated and budgeted the funds to satisfy the Agreement renewal. Any TIPS Sale Supplemental Agreement containing an “Automatic Renewal” clause that conflicts with these terms is rendered void and unenforceable.

  • Member Eligibility Verify Member eligibility contemporaneous with the rendering of services. BCBS will provide systems and/or methods for verification of eligibility and benefit coverage for Members. This is furnished as a service and not as a guarantee of payment;

  • Automatic Renewal Clauses Incorporated in Awarded Vendor Agreements with TIPS Members Resulting from the Solicitation and with the Vendor Named in this Agreement.

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