Review of Requests Sample Clauses

Review of Requests. If the Participating Institution of the Overall PI (or of the requesting Site Investigator as provided above) determines that the Research may be appropriate for Ceded Review, that Participating Institution shall consult, as needed, with relevant Participating Institutions (or designee(s)) involved in the particular Research to determine whether each agrees that the requested Research is appropriate for Ceded Review. If any Participating Institution disagrees that the Research is appropriate for Ceded Review and declines to participate in the Ceded Review, the Research shall remain eligible for Ceded Review with respect to the other Participating Institutions that have agreed, if any. No Participating Institution shall be obligated to participate as a Reviewing IRB Institution or a Relying Institution with regard to any particular Research. Should a Participating Institution decide to participate as a Reviewing IRB Institution or a Relying Institution with regard to any particular Research, no additional individual authorization or reliance agreements need to be completed to effectuate the Ceded Review.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Review of Requests. After a Reviewing IRB has signed the DU-CHOP Determination form as described above, the investigator seeking review will provide to the other IRB (the “Relying Institution”) a copy of the protocol, applicable supporting documents (e.g., IRB approval letter(s), institution-specific consent form approved by the Reviewing IRB), and DU-CHOP Determination Form. The Relying IRB will then determine whether or not to rely on the other institution’s IRB for the applicable study and will document its decision on the DU-CHOP Determination Form. Any study described in an appropriately executed DU-CHOP Determination Form will be considered “Research” for purposes of this Agreement.
Sample 1
Review of Requests. A Participating Institution receiving a request to conduct a Ceded Review shall consult with the other relevant IRBs to determine whether each agrees that the requested Research qualifies for Ceded Review.
Sample 1
Review of Requests. After a Reviewing IRB has signed the Penn-CHOP Determination form as described above, the investigator seeking review will provide to the other IRB (the “Relying Institution”) a copy of the protocol, applicable supporting documents (e.g., IRB approval letter(s), institution-specific consent form approved by the Reviewing IRB), and Penn-CHOP Determination Form. The Relying IRB will then determine whether or not to rely on the other institution’s IRB for the applicable study and will document its decision on the Penn-CHOP Determination Form. Any study described in an appropriately executed Penn-CHOP Determination Form will be considered “Research” for purposes of this Agreement.
Sample 1
Review of Requests. If the Participating Institution of the Overall PI (or of the requesting Site Investigator as provided above) determines that the Research may be appropriate for Ceded Reviewa Reliance Request is appropriate, that Participating Institution shall consult, as needed, with other relevant Participating Institutions (or designee(s)) involved in the particular Research to determine whether each agrees that the requested Research is appropriate for Ceded ReviewReliance Request is appropriate. As part of the consultation, each involved Participating Institution that extends its Assurance to Research that is not federally funded must inform all the other involved Participating Institutions of the applicability of its Assurance to the Research. If any Participating Institution disagrees that the Research is appropriate for Ceded Review and declines to participate in the Ceded Review, the Research shall remain eligible for Ceded Review with respect to the other Participating Institutions that have agreed, if any. No Participating Institution shall be obligated to participate as a Reviewing IRB Institution or a Relying Institution with regard to any particular Research. Should a Participating Institution decide to participate as a Reviewing IRB Institution or a Relying Institution with regard to any particular Research, no additional individual authorization or reliance agreements need to be completed to effectuate the Ceded Review.
Sample 1

Related to Review of Requests

  • Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.

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

  • Rationale/Justification The Cisco Certified Network Associate Security (CCNA® Security) certification represents industry acknowledgement of technical skill attainment of competencies in the IT Security program.

  • ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 9. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan. SCHEDULE 5

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

  • Claims Review Findings a. Narrative Results.‌‌

  • Resubmission If terminated, resolved or withdrawn, a grievance cannot be resubmitted.

  • Review of Submittals A/E and ODR review is only for conformance with the design concept and the information provided in the Contract Documents. Responses to submittals will be in writing. The approval of a separate item does not indicate approval of an assembly in which the item functions. The approval of a submittal does not relieve the Contractor of responsibility for any deviation from the requirements of the Contract unless the Contractor informs the A/E and ODR of such deviation in a clear, conspicuous, and written manner on the submittal transmittal and at the time of submission, and obtains the A/E’s and Owner’s written specific approval of the particular deviation.

  • Review Stages The Project Architect shall submit documents to the Owner for review at completion of the Schematic Design Phase, Design Development Phase and at the following stages of completion of the Construction Documents Phase as follows: 50%, 75%, 100%

  • Claims Review Report The IRO shall prepare a Claims Review Report as described in this Appendix for each Claims Review performed. The following information shall be included in the Claims Review Report for each Discovery Sample and Full Sample (if applicable).

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.