Review Cycle and ASP Pricing Sample Clauses

Review Cycle and ASP Pricing. ‌ (a) The Reviews will generally be conducted in six monthly cycles (each a Review Cycle), unless otherwise determined by the Operating Committee.‌ (b) The Operating Committee will be responsible for negotiating the ASP Standing Offer (and any variations thereto from year to year) with the ASP in the expectation that the ASP will commit to offer the opportunity to every Opt-In Lender to engage the ASP to provide Reviews on the terms of the ASP Standing Offer.‌ (c) The Operating Committee will instruct the ASP to give each Lender for each Review Cycle, notice of the intended Reviews, the anticipated Review topics listed in Schedule 2 and any Additional Review Items that may be offered as specified in the AAP Lender Deed.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Review Cycle and ASP Pricing

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans. B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below. C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows: i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus. ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals. D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.

  • Quantitative Analysis Quantitative analysts develop and apply financial models designed to enable equity portfolio managers and fundamental analysts to screen potential and current investments, assess relative risk and enhance performance relative to benchmarks and peers. To the extent that such services are to be provided with respect to any Account which is a registered investment company, Categories 3, 4 and 5 above shall be treated as “investment advisory services” for purposes of Section 5(b) of the Agreement.”

  • Unbundled Channelization (Multiplexing) 5.7.1 To the extent NewPhone is purchasing DS1 or DS3 or STS-1 Dedicated Transport pursuant to this Agreement, Unbundled Channelization (UC) provides the optional multiplexing capability that will allow a DS1 (1.544 Mbps) or DS3 (44.736 Mbps) or STS-1 (51.84 Mbps) Network Elements to be multiplexed or channelized at a BellSouth central office. Channelization can be accomplished through the use of a multiplexer or a digital cross-connect system at the discretion of BellSouth. Once UC has been installed, NewPhone may request channel activation on a channelized facility and BellSouth shall connect the requested facilities via COCIs. The COCI must be compatible with the lower capacity facility and ordered with the lower capacity facility. This service is available as defined in NECA 4. 5.7.2 BellSouth shall make available the following channelization systems and interfaces: 5.7.2.1 DS1 Channelization System: channelizes a DS1 signal into a maximum of twenty- four (24)

  • TIPS Pricing Vendor agrees and understands that for each TIPS Contract that it holds, Vendor submitted, agreed to, and received TIPS’ approval for specific pricing, discounts, and other pricing terms and incentives which make up Vendor’s TIPS Pricing for that TIPS Contract (“TIPS Pricing”). Vendor confirms that Vendor will not add the TIPS Administration Fee as a charge or line-item in a TIPS Sale. Vendor hereby certifies that Vendor shall only offer goods and services through this TIPS Contract if those goods and services are included in or added to Vendor’s TIPS Pricing and approved by TIPS. TIPS reserves the right to review Vendor’s pricing update requests as specifically as line-item by line-item to determine compliance. However, Vendor contractually agrees that all submitted pricing updates shall be within the original terms of the Vendor’s TIPS Pricing (scope, proposed discounts, price increase limitations, and other pricing terms and incentives originally proposed by Vendor) such that TIPS may accept Vendors price increase requests as submitted without additional vetting at TIPS discretion. Any pricing quoted by Vendor to a TIPS Member or on a TIPS Quote shall never exceed Vendor’s TIPS Pricing for any good or service offered through TIPS. TIPS Pricing price increases and modifications, if permitted, will be honored according to the terms of the solicitation and Vendor’s proposal, incorporated herein by reference.

  • GSA Benchmarked Pricing Additionally, where the NYS Net Price is based upon an approved GSA Supply Schedule:

  • Review Scope The parties confirm that the Asset Representations Review is not responsible for (a) reviewing the Receivables for compliance with the representations and warranties under the Transaction Documents, except as described in this Agreement or (b) determining whether noncompliance with the representations and warranties constitutes a breach of the Eligibility Representations. For the avoidance of doubt, the parties confirm that the review is not designed to determine why an Obligor is delinquent or the creditworthiness of the Obligor, either at the time of any Asset Review or at the time of origination of the related Receivable. Further, the Asset Review is not designed to establish cause, materiality or recourse for any Test Fail (as defined in Section 3.05).

  • Technical Feasibility of String While ICANN has encouraged and will continue to encourage universal acceptance of all top-­‐level domain strings across the Internet, certain top-­‐level domain strings may encounter difficulty in acceptance by ISPs and webhosters and/or validation by web applications. Registry Operator shall be responsible for ensuring to its satisfaction the technical feasibility of the TLD string prior to entering into this Agreement.

  • Statistical Sampling Documentation a. A copy of the printout of the random numbers generated by the “Random Numbers” function of the statistical sampling software used by the IRO.‌ b. A description or identification of the statistical sampling software package used by the IRO.‌

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion 4. READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not increase your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for the life of the contract, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIPS, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from the “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, with any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they may apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@xxxx-xxx.xxx If the vendor is awarded a contract with TIPS under this solicitation, the vendor agrees to make any Choice of Law clauses in any contract or agreement entered into between the awarded vendor and with a TIPS member entity to read as follows: "Choice of law shall be the laws of the state where the customer resides" or words to that effect.

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