Review Criteria. A sports official shall be subject to review when the results of a criminal background check show that:
Review Criteria. A sports official shall be subject to review when the results of a criminal back- ground check show that:
Review Criteria. In reviewing and making decisions regarding applications for comprehensive plan amendments, rezonings, and DRIs the County and the City will consider the following issues:
Review Criteria. Procedures for assessing the technical merit of applications have been instituted to provide for an objective review of applications and to assist the applicant in understanding the standards against which each application will be judged. Critical indicators have been developed for each review criterion to assist the applicant in presenting pertinent information related to that criterion and to provide the reviewer with a standard for evaluation. Review criteria are outlined below with specific detail and scoring points. These criteria are the basis upon which the reviewers will evaluate the application. The entire proposal will be considered during objective review. Review Criteria are used to review and rank applications. The Rural Health Research Dissemination Cooperative Agreement has seven (7) review criteria:
Review Criteria. Procedures for assessing the technical merit of applications have been instituted to provide for an objective review of applications and to assist you in understanding the standards against which your application will be judged. Critical indicators have been developed for each review criterion to assist you in presenting pertinent information related to that criterion and to provide the reviewer with a standard for evaluation. Review criteria are outlined below with specific detail and scoring points. These criteria are the basis upon which the reviewers will evaluate and score the merit of the application. The entire proposal will be considered during objective review. Review criteria are used to review and rank applications. The HWRC Cooperative Agreement Program has five review criteria:
Review Criteria. 6.1 During any scheduled review period referred to in clause 5 (Scheduled Reviews), the parties shall in good faith consider the ongoing Protections having regard to the following:
Review Criteria. To determine whether the proposal would be in the public interest, the plan commission and city council shall weigh and make findings regarding each of the following criteria:
Review Criteria. A. In its discretion to approve or deny an application for a Coordinated Development Special Permit, the Planning Board shall consider the following:
Review Criteria. Procedures for assessing the technical merit of applications have been instituted to provide for an objective review of applications and to assist the applicant in understanding the standards against which each application will be judged. Critical indicators have been developed for each review criterion to assist the applicant in presenting pertinent information related to that criterion and to provide the reviewer with a standard for evaluation. Review criteria are outlined below with specific detail and scoring points. These criteria are the basis upon which the reviewers will evaluate the application. The entire proposal will be considered during objective review. Review Criteria are used to review and rank applications. The Rural Health Research Center Cooperative Agreement: Telehealth Research Center program has 6 (six) review criteria: Criterion 1: NEED (25 points) – Corresponds to Section IV’s Introduction, Needs Assessment, and Methodology • Extent to which the application demonstrates a strong understanding of emerging health policy trends and the issues and challenges facing rural and underserved communities and health care providers with a specific emphasis on telehealth, the provision of related clinical services, and the impact of related policies. • Extent to which the application demonstrates an understanding of the current state of telehealth research including where the gaps are and the methodological challenges of some telehealth research. • Extent to which the application demonstrates an understanding of the unique nature of rural and underserved populations as compared to urban populations, including different levels of rurality, provider shortages/distances to nearest provider for beneficiaries, payment provisions for providers, and connectivity. • The extent to which the five research proposals are clinically-informed, policy-relevant, and focused on emerging issues in the field of telehealth. Criterion 2: RESPONSE (25 points) – Corresponds to Section IV’s Methodology, Work Plan, and Resolution of Challenges • Extent to which the application appropriately responds to the “Purpose” included in the program description • The strength and feasibility of the proposed methodology (appropriate research methods, data sources, realistic time frame for completing each research project, appropriate personnel for each task, etc.). • Extent to which the proposed research projects will inform rural health policy and contribute to the telehealth e...
Review Criteria. The HSFAC will consider the proposals using the guidelines shown in the following table. These guidelines are intended to help the committee members focus on the various criteria as they evaluate each proposal, so that they may fully understand each application and identify any outstanding questions they may have. Other relevant factors, such as availability of funds and compatibility with the community values of the City of Bainbridge Island, will also guide the committee’s work to develop a funding recommendation. This table generally follows the order of the sections of the application: Area Indicator Emphasis Completeness of Application Application is: • Complete • Includes all appropriate attachments • Answers all relevant questions 5 Statement of Purpose Statement of Purpose should substantiate the need in our community via most recent demographic and usage data: • Well-defined statement of purpose • Need is clear and compelling • Good reference data cited 25 Proposal Summary Proposal Summary should clearly demonstrate how proposed funding at the specified program level (for program support request) or organizational-level (for general operating request) will provide for and improve the delivery of programs and directservices. In this it should: • Balance aspects of prevention and maintenance and crisis intervention. • Teach skills for long-term benefit. • Addressspecific obstacles to health, self-sufficiency. • Demonstrate cooperation/collaboration with other agencies to ensure safety-net and avoid duplication. • Consider numbers to be served and numbers potentially impacted by the service. • Consider the vulnerability of those served. Program should be aligned with the goals of the Human Services Element: • Provide people with the tools to achieve economic, social and emotional stability to the best of their ability. • Offer activities and services that promote healthy development of the individual, prevent problems, and support positive outcomes. • Support quality of life programs that enhance the health and well-being of the individual and the community. • These services may be provided on an emergency, temporary, or ongoing basis, depending on the circumstances. Program should result in an improvement in the range and quality of health, housing, and/or human services 25
