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.
Claims Review Methodology a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject to the Quarterly Claims Review.
Monthly MWBE Contractor Compliance Report A. In accordance with 5 NYCRR § 142.10, Contractor is required to report Monthly MWBE Contractor Compliance to OGS during the term of the Contract for the preceding month’s activity, documenting progress made towards achievement of the Contract MWBE goals. OGS requests that all Contractors use the New York State Contract System (“NYSCS”) to report subcontractor and supplier payments made by Contractor to MWBEs performing work under the Contract. The NYSCS may be accessed at xxxxx://xx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx/. This is a New York State-based system that all State agencies and authorities will be implementing to ensure uniform contract compliance reporting throughout New York State.
For Product Development Projects and Project Demonstrations Published documents, including date, title, and periodical name. Estimated or actual energy and cost savings, and estimated statewide energy savings once market potential has been realized. Identify all assumptions used in the estimates. Greenhouse gas and criteria emissions reductions. Other non-energy benefits such as reliability, public safety, lower operational cost, environmental improvement, indoor environmental quality, and societal benefits. Data on potential job creation, market potential, economic development, and increased state revenue as a result of the project. A discussion of project product downloads from websites, and publications in technical journals. A comparison of project expectations and performance. Discuss whether the goals and objectives of the Agreement have been met and what improvements are needed, if any.
Project Implementation Manual The Recipient, through the PCU, shall: (i) take all action required to carry out Parts 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2, 3.1(b), 3.2, 3.3 and 4 (ii) of the Project in accordance with the provisions and requirements set forth or referred to in the Project Implementation Manual; (ii) submit recommendations to the Association for its consideration for changes and updates of the Project Implementation Manual as they may become necessary or advisable during Project implementation in order to achieve the objective of Parts 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2, 3.1(b), 3.2, 3.3 and 4(ii) of the Project; and (iii) not assign, amend, abrogate or waive the Project Implementation Manual or any of its provisions without the Association’s prior agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any of the provisions of the Project Implementation Manual is inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail and govern.
Scoring The number of routes each company operates (Route # 0001-2999, 8000-8199) will be multiplied by 2 to determine the daily number of trips. (Only accidents, breakdowns and service reports related to routes falling in this range will be used for the evaluation). The daily number of trips will be multiplied by 175 to arrive at the annual number of trips. The number of accidents, breakdowns and service complaints will be divided by the total number of trips to calculate a percent figure. Each company’s percentage will be compared to the total average. See below for a sample. BUS COMPANY NUMBER OF TOTAL BKDN PERCENT ACCIDENTS PERCENT2 SERVICE PERCENT3 ROUTES TRIPS BKDN ACCIDENTS REPORTS COMPLAINTS TO TRIPS TO TRIPS TO TRIPS A 360 58680 3 0.01% 27 0.05% 46 0.08% B 48 7824 3 0.04% 4 0.05% 39 0.50% C 123 20049 11 0.05% 9 0.04% 27 0.13% D 91 14833 0.00% 10 0.07% 11 0.07% E 124 20212 20 0.10% 19 0.09% 18 0.09% TOTALS 746 121598 37 0.03% 69 0.06% 141 0.12% To score, if a company’s percentage is less than or equal to the total percentage for that category, the company will be awarded 6 points per category. Percentages greater than the total percentage for each distinct category (Accident, Breakdown, Service Complaints) will be scored according to the following scale: Vendor Category Percent Points Less than-Equal to Ave. 6 points 0-3% above average 5 points 4-7% above average 4 points 5-8% above average 3 points 9-12% above average 2 points 13-16% 1 points Greater than 17% 0 points Example: Company A had a lower percent of breakdowns than the average total, and would receive 6 points for breakdowns. If a company has a higher percentage than the average total, 0 point will be added to their score. Company B would not receive 6 points for breakdowns. The same calculation would be performed for accidents and service complaints. Any circumstance whereby a Breakdown or Accident is found by PTS to be ‘Non Reported’ by vendor within the required timeframe (see G-36) will count as (20) ‘Reported’ instances for the purpose of this Contractor Evaluation Scoring.
Maintenance Manual No later than 60 (sixty) days prior to the Project Completion Date, the Contractor shall, in consultation with the Authority’s Engineer, evolve a maintenance manual (the “Maintenance Manual”) for the regular and preventive maintenance of the Project Highway in conformity with the Specifications and Standards, safety requirements and Good Industry Practice, and shall provide 5 (five) copies thereof to the Authority’s Engineer. The Authority’s Engineer shall review the Maintenance Manual within 15 (fifteen) days of its receipt and communicate its comments to the Contractor for necessary modifications, if any.
Implementation Report Within 150 days after the Effective Date, Extendicare shall submit a written report to OIG summarizing the status of its implementation of the requirements of this CIA (Implementation Report). The Implementation Report shall, at a minimum, include:
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.
Research Use Reporting To assure adherence to NIH GDS Policy, the PI agrees to provide annual Progress Updates as part of the annual Project Renewal or Project Close-out processes, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year data access period. The PI who is seeking Renewal or Close-out of a project agree to complete the appropriate online forms and provide specific information such as how the data have been used, including publications or presentations that resulted from the use of the requested dataset(s), a summary of any plans for future research use (if the PI is seeking renewal), any violations of the terms of access described within this Agreement and the implemented remediation, and information on any downstream intellectual property generated from the data. The PI also may include general comments regarding suggestions for improving the data access process in general. Information provided in the progress updates helps NIH evaluate program activities and may be considered by the NIH GDS governance committees as part of NIH’s effort to provide ongoing stewardship of data sharing activities subject to the NIH GDS Policy.
