Review Mechanisms Sample Clauses

Review Mechanisms. The mid term review is scheduled for Q4 2023, this will provide an opportunity to review targets and national and local ambition.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Review Mechanisms. The mid term review is scheduled for X0 0000, this will provide an opportunity to review targets and national and local ambition.
Review Mechanisms. The mid term review is scheduled for Q4 2023, this will provide an opportunity to review targets and national and local ambition. Appendix 3System Infrastructure and Framework for Measuring Performance <.. image(Graphical user interface, application Description automatically generated) removed ..>
Review Mechanisms. In addition to the monitoring of the implementation of this agreement by Delegates and Management, a higher level review will be conducted, as required, by the pertinent organisers and a relevant head office representative.
Review Mechanisms. The mid term review is scheduled for X0 0000, this will provide an opportunity to review targets and national and local ambition. Appendix 3System Infrastructure and Framework for Measuring Performance <.. image(Graphical user interface, application Description automatically generated) removed ..> Appendix 4 –CDETB Strategic Ambition 2022-2024 At A Glance Develop Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Street as a flagship City of Dublin College which can build a stronger identity for FET in the city and drive consolidation and integration of provision. Continue to take a leadership role on FET-HE pathways in realizing the Government vision for a unified tertiary system, including piloting co-development and co-delivery of programmes with HEIs. Agree an immediate action plan with SOLAS to address the significant falls in FET progression, certification, lifelong learning and key skills provision in recent years. Invest in more extensive centralized employer engagement resources and ramp up Skills to Advance activity considerably to reflect the scale of the ETB and the enterprise base it potentially serves. Continue to evolve the skills delivery model with a variety of classroom, practical and work-based learning offerings across all college and centre settings and ramp up the contracted training model to ensure agile skills responses. Develop stronger pathways into FET by expanding the CAO-linked CDETB offering for school leavers, developing Transition Year taster modules for roll-out to schools and investing in school outreach activities. Create an action plan to drive changes suggested within QQI Inaugural Review of CDETB FET QA. Build a centralized and consistent approach to learner support across all FET provision, including common assessment approaches and the roll-out of the Fund for Students with Disabilities outside PLC. Complete a review of FET structures and staffing in order to align the approach with strategic priorities rather than the current model. Undertake robust analysis of costs and funding flows across all CDETB FET provision and analyze how this relates to the learner outcomes generated. NFQ National Framework of Qualifications NRRP National Recovery and Resilience Plan NTF National Training Fund PLD Professional Learning and Development PLSS Programme and Learner Support System PWD Persons with a Disability QQI Quality and Qualifications Ireland QSCS Quarries Skills Certification Scheme RPL Recognition of Prior Learning RPCL Recognition of Prior Certified Le...
Review Mechanisms. 6.1 Both parties, on an annual basis, will jointly review this Agreement until it lapses or is terminated. 6.2 Both parties will collaborate to provide an annual report of each organisation’s operational experience of assessments of public authorities against the Record Management Code undertaken in accordance with this Agreement. This report will be reviewed at the meetings to be held by the Commissioner and the Keeper in accordance with clause 1 of the Memorandum of Understanding. The review of the report will also consider the desirability of publishing the report.
Review Mechanisms. The mid term review is scheduled for X0 0000, this will provide an opportunity to review targets and national and local ambition. Appendix 3System Infrastructure and Framework for Measuring Performance <.. image(Graphical user interface, application Description automatically generated) removed ..>
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Review Mechanisms. The Annual Fee shall be reviewed in accordance with Part 4 of Schedule 6.
Review Mechanisms. The mid term review is scheduled for X0 0000, this will provide an opportunity to review targets and national and local ambition. Appendix 3System Infrastructure and Framework for Measuring Performance <.. image(Graphical user interface, application Description automatically generated) removed ..> Appendix 4 – LCETB Strategic Ambition 2022-2024 At A Glance Further develop the new NZEB Retrofit Centre of Excellence for the construction industry, to support delivery of the targets in the national Housing for All Strategy. Expand the LCETB apprenticeship footprint, including in craft provision, with particular specialisation in electrical, and ramping up its main new apprenticeships, particularly in hairdressing, beauty therapy and barbering. Grow the reach to priority cohort learners, ‘lost’ as a result of the pandemic, via strategic, targeted initiatives. Continue to expand FET as a resource for enterprise, expanding upskilling in key areas like management, LEAN, sustainability and digital skills with a significant ramp-up of Skills to Advance provision. Continue to develop the lead role of LCETB in school-FET pathways, including building on its TY initiatives, in participating in senior cycle review projects and in ensuring a strong offering of a wide range of Level 5/6 options via the CAO linked site. Improve and strengthen integration across the ETB, consolidating FET provision in single dedicated locations to better serve communities, building on the success of the new College of FET and associated multi campuses.

Related to Review Mechanisms

  • Claims Review Methodology ‌‌ a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject‌‌ to the Quarterly Claims Review.

  • Review Materials The Servicer will provide reasonable assistance to the Asset Representations Reviewer to facilitate the Asset Review. Within 60 days of receipt by the Servicer of the Review Notice, the Servicer will provide the Asset Representations Reviewer with the Review Materials for all Subject Receivables in one or more of the following ways, as elected by the Servicer: (i) by providing access to the Servicer’s receivables system, either remotely or at one or more of the properties of the Servicer; (ii) by electronic posting of Review Materials to a password-protected website to which the Asset Representations Reviewer has access; (iii) by providing originals or photocopies at one or more of the properties of the Servicer where the Receivable Files are located; (iv) by sending originals or photocopies of Review Materials to the Asset Representations Reviewer at the address specified in Section 9.02; or (v) in another manner agreed to by the Servicer and the Asset Representations Reviewer. The Servicer may redact or remove Personally Identifiable Information from the Review Materials so long as such redaction or removal does not result in a change in the meaning or usefulness of the Review Materials. The Asset Representations Reviewer shall not be liable for any failure of the Review Materials to be accurate and complete, including any failure that results in the Review Materials being misleading in any material respect.

  • Access to Review Materials The Servicer will give the Asset Representations Reviewer access to the Review Materials for all of the Subject Receivables within sixty (60) calendar days after receipt of the review notice in one or more of the following ways in the Servicer’s reasonable discretion: (i) by electronic posting of Review Materials to a password-protected website to which the Asset Representations Reviewer has access, (ii) by providing originals or photocopies of documents relating to the Subject Receivables at one of the properties of the Servicer or (iii) in another manner agreed by the Servicer and the Asset Representations Reviewer. The Servicer may redact or remove PII from the Review Materials so long as all information in the Review Materials necessary for the Asset Representations Reviewer to complete the Asset Review remains intact and unchanged.

  • Maintenance of Review Materials It will maintain copies of any Review Materials, Review Reports and other documents relating to a Review, including internal correspondence and work papers, for a period of at least two years after any termination of this Agreement.

  • Review Procedure If the Plan Administrator denies part or all of the claim, the claimant shall have the opportunity for a full and fair review by the Plan Administrator of the denial, as follows:

  • Review Protocol A narrative description of how the Claims Review was conducted and what was evaluated.

  • Review Process Limitations The Asset Representations Reviewer will have no obligation (i) to determine whether a Delinquency Trigger Event has occurred or whether the required percentage of Noteholders has voted to direct an Asset Representations Review under the Indenture, (ii) to determine which Receivables are subject to an Asset Representations Review, (iii) to obtain or confirm the validity of the Review Materials, (iv) to obtain missing or insufficient Review Materials except as specifically described herein, (v) to take any action or cause any other party to take any action under any of the Transaction Documents to enforce any remedies for breaches of representations or warranties about the Eligible Representations, (vi) to determine the reason for the delinquency of any Review Receivable, the creditworthiness of any Obligor, the overall quality of any Review Receivable or the compliance by the Servicer with its covenants with respect to the servicing of such Review Receivable, or (vii) to establish cause, materiality or recourse for any failed Test as described in Section 3.03.

  • Review Process A/E's Work Product will be reviewed by County under its applicable technical requirements and procedures, as follows:

  • Review and Procedure Limitations The Asset Representations Reviewer will have no obligation (i) to determine whether a Delinquency Trigger has occurred, (ii) to determine whether the required percentage of Noteholders has voted to direct a Review, (iii) to determine which Receivables are subject to a Review, (iv) to obtain or confirm the validity of the Review Materials, (v) to obtain missing or insufficient Review Materials (except to the extent set forth in Section 3.04), or (vi) to take any action or cause any other party to take any action under any of the Basic Documents to enforce any remedies for breaches of any Eligible Representations. The Asset Representations Reviewer will only be required to perform the Tests provided in Exhibit A and will have no obligation to perform additional testing procedures on any ARR Receivables or to consider any additional information provided by any party. The Asset Representations Reviewer will have no obligation to provide reporting or information in addition to that described in Section 3.07. However, the Asset Representations Reviewer may review and report on additional information that it determines in good faith to be material to its performance under this ARR Agreement and may re-perform a Review with respect to an ARR Receivable as contemplated by Section 3.09. The Issuing Entity expressly agrees that the Asset Representations Reviewer is not advising the Issuing Entity or any Noteholder or any investor or future investor concerning the suitability of the Notes or any investment strategy. The Issuing Entity expressly acknowledges and agrees that the Asset Representations Reviewer is not an expert in accounting, tax, regulatory, or legal matters, and that the Asset Representations Reviewer is not providing legal advice as to any matter.

  • Review Procedures a. In consultation with the Illinois SHPO, NRCS shall identify those undertakings with little to no potential to affect historic properties and list those undertakings in Appendix A. Upon the determination by the CRS that a proposed undertaking is included in Appendix A, the NRCS is not required to consult further with the SHPO for that undertaking. A list of undertakings with the potential to affect historic properties comprises Appendix B. b. The lists of undertakings provided in Appendices A and B may be modified through consultation and written agreement between the NRCS State Conservationist and the SHPO without requiring an amendment to this Illinois Prototype Agreement. The NRCS State Office will maintain the master list and will provide an updated list to all consulting parties with an explanation of the rationale for classifying the practices accordingly. c. Undertakings identified in Appendix B shall require further review as outlined in Stipulation V. a. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO to define the undertaking’s APE, identify and evaluate historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking, assess potential effects, and identify strategies for resolving adverse effects prior to implementing the undertaking. 1) NRCS may provide its proposed APE, identification of historic properties and/or scope of identification efforts, and assessment of effects in a single transmittal to the SHPO, provided this documentation meets the substantive standards in 36 CFR Part 800.4-5 and 800.11. 2) The NRCS shall attempt to avoid adverse effects to historic properties whenever possible; where historic properties are located in the APE, NRCS shall describe how it proposes to modify, buffer, or move the undertaking to avoid adverse effects to historic properties. 3) Where the NRCS proposes a finding of "no historic properties affected" or "no adverse effect" to historic properties, the SHPO shall have 30 calendar days from receipt of this documented description and information to review it and provide comments. The NRCS shall take into account all timely comments. i. If the SHPO, or another consulting party, disagrees with NRCS' findings and/or determination, it shall notify the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar daytime period. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO or other consulting party to attempt to resolve the disagreement. If the disagreement cannot be resolved through this consultation, NRCS shall follow the dispute resolution process in Stipulation VIII below. ii. If the SHPO does not respond to the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar day period and/or the NRCS receives no objections from other consulting parties, or if the SHPO concurs with the NRCS' determination and proposed actions to avoid adverse effects, the NRCS shall document the concurrence/lack of response within the review time noted above and may move forward with the undertaking. 4) Where a proposed undertaking may adversely affect historic properties, NRCS shall describe proposed measures to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects, and follow the process in 36 CFR Part 800.6, including consultation with other consulting patties and notification to the ACHP, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement to resolve the adverse effects. Should the proposed undertaking have the potential to adversely affect a known NHL, the NRCS shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions that may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL in accordance with 54 U.S.C. § 306107 of the NHPA and 36 CFR Part 800.6 and 800.10, including consultation with the ACHP and respective National Park Service, Regional National Historic Landmark Program Coordinator, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement. d. NRCS will conduct archaeological surveys and will submit reports and other documentation to SHPO for review and comment. When no archaeological sites have been located by the archaeological survey, NRCS may proceed with the proposed undertaking. Reports for negative surveys must be submitted to SHPO on a quarterly basis. All positive and negative reports submitted to SHPO will be sent digitally for submission to the Inventory of Illinois Archaeological Sites (IAS) data file maintained by staff at the Illinois State Museum (ISM) housed under the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). The NRCS further agrees that access to specific site location data will be restricted to the CRS, the NRCS field personnel installing conservation practices adjacent to the cultural resource, and the landowner. Specific site location information for individual projects will be maintained in a secure cultural resources file kept in the field offices and will not be available to the public. e. Curation: NRCS personnel will not collect artifactual material during routine field inspections. However, if a professional survey, evaluation testing, or mitigation is required, NRCS shall ensure that all materials and records resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities on federal or state property are curated by the Illinois State Museum. The NRCS shall ensure that all records resulting from cultural resource surveys or data recovery activities on private property are curated by the Illinois State Museum or an equivalent curation facility in accordance with 36 CFR Part 79. Subject to the landowner's permission, all objects resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities are maintained by the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution until their analysis is complete and they are returned to their owner(s). Although landowners will be encouraged to donate artifactual material, it is understood that objects collected on private land remain the property of the landowner(s) unless the landowner(s) donates the material to the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution. This excludes burial goods, as stipulated by XXXXXX.

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