Risk-based Assessment. During the Division’s annual risk assessment process, TEs and Program Specialists will identify potential risk areas that could be addressed with PoDI activities on projects where those higher risk items are likely to occur. This includes evaluating results from last year’s risk activities, such as findings from program reviews, CAP reviews, focused reviews, and other project approval actions (per the Stewardship and Oversight Agreement) to determine if any risks should be carried over to the next year. Using a risk-based approach the Division will identify all the program, preconstruction and construction PoDI focused reviews or other activities for the next fiscal year.

Risk-based Assessment. During the FHWA Division’s (MoDIV) annual risk assessment process, TEs and Program Specialists will identify potential risk areas that could be addressed with PoDI activities on projects where those higher risk items are likely to occur. This includes evaluating results from last year’s risk activities, such as findings from program reviews, CAP reviews, focused reviews, and other project approval actions (per the Stewardship and Oversight Agreement) to determine if any risks should be carried over to the next year. Using a risk-based approach, the FHWA Division will identify all the program, preconstruction and construction PoDI focused reviews or other activities for the next federal fiscal year.

Risk-based Assessment. The PI team will meet to evaluate, and assess the last performance year’s focused reviews and determine if there are any outstanding risk that were identified from the focused reviews or other program or project observations. Using a risk-based approach the PI team will identify all the preconstruction and construction focused risk reviews for the next performance year.

Risk-based Assessment. Most jurisdictions impose a requirement that the custodian assign money laundering risk rating to each customer. This exercise identifies customers that may poses a higher risk and the custodian conducts enhanced due diligence and imposes more extensive monitoring and more frequent risk assessment on these accounts. Furthermore, many of the anti-money laundering laws applicable to the global custodians, including those in the United States, allow for custodian to take a risk-based approach to combatting money laundering. By allowing for a risk-based approach, custodians are able to allocate resources efficiently and direct their efforts to those customers and areas that pose the higher risk. This risk-based approach is articulated in the 2007 report titled “Guidelines on the Risk-Based Approach to Combatting Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing” issued by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). In this report, it has been noted that where the same standard is set for all customers and resources are evenly applied to all, there could be the unintended consequence of the customer identification or other program elements becoming simply a tick the box exercise. Most anti-money laundering regimes around the globe allow for some form of risk-based approach to conducting customer due diligence. Under a risk-based approach it is up to each firm to decide on the specific documents requested, as determined by the client’s AML risk. So while some of the listed documents may be obtained using a risk-based approach, the regulations do not prescribe a specific list of universally required documents and, therefore, custodians may not always hold the same documents for all clients. Most importantly, where a client’s risk is assessed as low, Simplified Due Diligence (“SDD”) applies. This less burdensome set of KYC requirements is appropriate because the majority of custodian’s FII clients are themselves regulated financial institutions or collective investment vehicles, publicly listed companies, regulated employer funds, or government pension funds. As these categories of institutions have qualified for this SDD, there is no requirement to obtain the detailed documentation listed above. However, custodians must obtain suitable evidence to document the categorization of these clients for SDD.

Risk-based Assessment. The Division will enter all Major Projects and all other pre-screened projects that have the potential to be a PoCI into the FHWA SharePoint-based Resource Deployment Tool. This tool will be used to conduct a risk-based assessment to identify areas of elevated risk for each project, identify the level of Division office capacity to manage the risk, and determine if the project is recommended by the Division Office for selection as a final PoCI. The Resource Deployment Tool considers the project risks in the areas of: 1) complexity, 2) Cost, 3) Schedule, 4) Urgency,

Risk-based Assessment. The Division Office will conduct a risk-based assessment of the pre-screened projects using the resource deployment tool that emphasizes the ten risk areas below. 1. Complexity 2. Cost 3. Schedule 4. Urgency 5. Environmental Considerations and outside Stakeholders 6. Funding 7. Project Administration 8. National/Regional Significance 9. Corporate Actions

Related to Risk-based Assessment

Risk Assessment An assessment of any risks inherent in the work requirements and actions to mitigate these risks.
Performance Assessment 6.1 The Performance Plan (Annexure A) to this Agreement sets out key performance indicators and competencies that needs to be evaluated in terms of – 6.1.1 The standards and procedures for evaluating the Employee’s performance; and 6.1.2 During the intervals for the evaluation of the Employee’s performance. 6.2 Despite the establishment of agreed intervals for evaluation, the Employer may in addition review the Employee’s performance at any stage while the contract of employment remains in force; 6.3 Personal growth and development needs identified during any performance review discussion must be documented in a Personal Development Plan as well as the actions agreed to and implementation must take place within set time frames; 6.4 The Employee’s performance will also be measured in terms of contributions to the goals and strategies set out in the Employer’s Integrated Development Plan (IDP) as described in 6.6 – 6.13 below; 6.5 The Employee will submit quarterly performance reports (SDBIP) and a comprehensive annual performance report at least one week prior to the performance assessment meetings to the Evaluation Panel Chairperson for distribution to the panel members for preparation purposes; 6.6 Assessment of the achievement of results as outlined in the performance plan: 6.6.1 Each KPI or group of KPIs shall be assessed according to the extent to which the specified standards or performance targets have been met (qualitative and quantitative) and with due regard to ad-hoc tasks that had to be performed under the KPI; 6.6.2 A rating on the five-point scale described in 6.9 below shall be provided for each KPI or group of KPIs which will then be multiplied by the weighting to calculate the final score; 6.6.3 The Employee will submit his self-evaluation to the Employer prior to the formal assessment; 6.6.4 In the instance where the employee could not perform due to reasons outside the control of the employer and employee, the KPI will not be considered during the evaluation. The employee should provide sufficient evidence in such instances; and 6.6.5 An overall score will be calculated based on the total of the individual scores calculated above.
Risk Assessments a. Risk Assessment - DST shall, at least annually, perform risk assessments that are designed to identify material threats (both internal and external) against Fund Data, the likelihood of those threats Schedule 10.2 p.2 occurring and the impact of those threats upon DST organization to evaluate and analyze the appropriate level of information security safeguards (“Risk Assessments”). b. Risk Mitigation - DST shall use commercially reasonable efforts to manage, control and remediate threats identified in the Risk Assessments that it believes are likely to result in material unauthorized access, copying, use, processing, disclosure, alteration, transfer, loss or destruction of Fund Data, consistent with the Objective, and commensurate with the sensitivity of the Fund Data and the complexity and scope of the activities of DST pursuant to the Agreement. c. Security Controls Testing - DST shall, on approximately an annual basis, engage an independent external party to conduct a review (including information security) of DST’s systems that are related to the provision of services. DST shall have a process to review and evaluate high risk findings resulting from this testing.
Periodic Risk Assessment Provider further acknowledges and agrees to conduct periodic risk assessments and remediate any identified security and privacy vulnerabilities in a timely manner.
Diagnostic Assessment 6.3.1 Boards shall provide a list of pre-approved assessment tools consistent with their Board improvement plan for student achievement and which is compliant with Ministry of Education PPM (PPM 155: Diagnostic Assessment in Support of Student Learning, date of issue January 7, 2013). 6.3.2 Teachers shall use their professional judgment to determine which assessment and/or evaluation tool(s) from the Board list of preapproved assessment tools is applicable, for which student(s), as well as the frequency and timing of the tool. In order to inform their instruction, teachers must utilize diagnostic assessment during the school year.
Data Protection Impact Assessment If, pursuant to Data Protection Law, Customer (or its Controllers) are required to perform a data protection impact assessment or prior consultation with a regulator, at Customer’s request, SAP will provide such documents as are generally available for the Cloud Service (for example, this DPA, the Agreement, audit reports or certifications). Any additional assistance shall be mutually agreed between the Parties.
Loss Assessment We will pay up to $1000 for your share of loss assessment charged during the policy period against you by a corporation or as- sociation of property owners, when the assess- ment is made as a result of:
Self-Assessment (a) Subject to clause 4.4(b), for Services that are Self-Assessable: (i) You must self-assess whether those Services are being delivered in compliance with the Quality Standards, using the self-assessment tool available on Our Website and in accordance with the Quality Framework; and (ii) You must promptly and, in any case, immediately upon request, provide a copy of Your self-assessment to Us. (b) Clause 4.4(a) does not apply if You hold any current Certification.
Needs Assessment 1. The Contractor shall conduct a cultural and linguistic group-needs assessment of the eligible client population in the Contractor’s service area to assess the language needs of the population and determine what reasonable steps are necessary to ensure meaningful access to services and activities to eligible individuals. [22 CCR 98310, 98314] The group-needs assessment shall take into account the following four (4) factors: a. Number or proportion of persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) eligible to be served or encountered by the program. b. Frequency with which LEP individuals come in contact with the program. c. Nature and importance of the services provided. d. Local or frequently used resources available to the Contractor. This group-needs assessment will serve as the basis for the Contractor’s determination of “reasonable steps” and provide documentary evidence of compliance with Cal. Gov. Code § 11135 et seq.; 2 CCR 11140, 2 CCR 11200 et seq., and 22 CCR98300 et seq. 2. The Contractor shall prepare and make available a report of the findings of the group-needs assessment that summarizes: a. Methodologies used. b. The linguistic and cultural needs of non-English speaking or LEP groups. c. Services proposed to address the needs identified and a timeline for implementation. [22 CCR 98310] 3. The Contractor shall maintain a record of the group-needs assessment on file at the Contractor’s headquarters at all times during the term of this Agreement. [22 CCR 98310, 98313]
Joint Assessment If the Premises are not separately assessed, Lessee's liability shall be an equitable proportion of the Real Property Taxes for all of the land and improvements included within the tax parcel assessed, such proportion to be conclusively determined by Lessor from the respective valuations assigned in the assessor's work sheets or such other information as may be reasonably available.

Risk-based Assessment Sample Clauses

Filter & Search

Related Clauses

Parent Clauses

Related to Risk-based Assessment