STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is a NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASPP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram, , the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”), and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by LEA pursuant to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. ▇▇▇ shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by ▇▇▇.
Performance Testing (a) All performance tests of the Project, including any Initial Performance Test required in Section 2 of Appendix VIII, will be performed in accordance with the test procedures set forth in Appendix VIII (“Performance Test”), including additional procedures and protocols related to Performance Testing as mutually agreed between Buyer and Seller (“Test Procedures”). Seller shall bear all costs and receive all revenues, if applicable, associated with all Performance Tests. (b) After the Initial Delivery Date and during the Delivery Term, Buyer will have the right to conduct a Performance Test (“Buyer Performance Test”) no more than once a calendar year to demonstrate whether the Project is capable of delivering the Distribution Services at the Contract Capacity. Within 30 calendar days following a Buyer Performance Test, Seller will have the right to retest the Project with a Performance Test (“Seller Retest”). For the avoidance of doubt, the results of any Seller Retest will supersede the results of the preceding Buyer Performance Test. (i) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is capable of delivering Distribution Services at or above ninety-nine percent (99%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, the Contract Capacity will remain the Initial Contract Capacity; (ii) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is capable of delivering Distribution Services at more than or equal to eighty-five (85%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, but less than ninety-nine percent (99%) of the Initial Contract Capacity (“Testing Band”), the Contract Capacity will be automatically adjusted (upwards or downwards) to the capacity commensurate with the amount of Distribution Services the Project delivered during the Performance Test within the Testing Band. (iii) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is not capable of delivering Distribution Services of at least eighty-five percent (85%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, an Event of Default shall occur in accordance with Section 7.1(a)(viii).
Power Factor Design Criteria Developer shall design the Large Generating Facility to maintain an effective power delivery at demonstrated maximum net capability at the Point of Interconnection at a power factor within the range established by the Connecting Transmission Owner on a comparable basis, until NYISO has established different requirements that apply to all generators in the New York Control Area on a comparable basis. The Developer shall design and maintain the plant auxiliary systems to operate safely throughout the entire real and reactive power design range. The Connecting Transmission Owner shall not unreasonably restrict or condition the reactive power production or absorption of the Large Generating Facility in accordance with Good Utility Practice.
Performance Improvement Plan timely and accurate completion of key actions due within the reporting period 100 percent The Supplier will design and develop an improvement plan and agree milestones and deliverables with the Authority 3.2 The Authority may from time to time make changes to the KPIs measured as set out in paragraph 3.1 above and shall issue a replacement version to the Supplier. The Authority shall give notice In Writing of any such change to the KPIs measured and shall specify the date from which the replacement KPIs must be used for future reports. Such date shall be at least thirty (30) calendar days following the date of the notice to the Supplier.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 5.1 The Employee agrees to participate in the performance management system that the Employer adopted for the employees of the Employer; 5.2 The Employee accepts that the purpose of the performance management system will be to provide a comprehensive system with specific performance standards to assist the employees and service providers to perform to the standards required; 5.3 The Employer must consult the Employee about the specific performance standards and targets that will be included in the performance management system applicable to the Employee; 5.4 The Employee undertakes to actively focus on the promotion and implementation of the key performance indicators (including special projects relevant to the employee’s responsibilities) within the local government framework; 5.5 The criteria upon which the performance of the Employee shall be assessed shall consist of two components, Operational Performance and Competencies both of which shall be contained in the Performance Agreement; 5.6 The Employee’s assessment will be based on his performance in terms of the outputs/outcomes (performance indicators) identified as per attached Performance Plan, which are linked to the KPAs, and will constitute 80% of the overall assessment result as per the weightings agreed to between the Employer and Employee; 5.7 The Competencies will make up the other 20% of the Employee’s assessment score. The Competencies are spilt into two groups, leading competencies (indicated in blue on the graph below) that drive strategic intent and direction and core competencies (indicated in green on the graph below), which drive the execution of the leading competencies. Strategic direc on and leadership People management Program and project management Financial management Change leadership Governance leadersip Moral competence Planning and organising Analysis and innova on Knowledge and informa on management Communica on Results and quality focus