We use cookies on our site to analyze traffic, enhance your experience, and provide you with tailored content.

For more information visit our privacy policy.

Risk Evaluation Sample Clauses

Risk Evaluation a. Prohibited/High Risk Merchants and Activities. Entities classified in certain industries or accepting Transactions for certain prohibited activities do not qualify for the American Express OnePoint Program, but may qualify for our standard American Express Card acceptance program. Please contact our agent with any questions about those risk evaluation procedures under the program.
Risk Evaluation. On the basis of the review of the information described above, and relying solely thereon and upon the knowledge and experience of the Holder in business and financial matters, the Holder has evaluated the merits and risks of investment in the Note and/or the Shares and has determined that he is both willing and able to undertake the economic risk of this investment.
Risk Evaluation. The Offeror’s proposal submitted in response to Technical Factor 1 will be assigned a risk rating based on the proposal risks associated with:  Meeting proposed technical metrics and performance criteria  Probability that the product delivery schedule meets the proposed timeline  Manufacturing approach is sufficient to meet the delivery timelines defined in Section F of the solicitation and submitted IMS, while producing components that meet the SOW and Performance Specification requirements. The assigned Overall Technical Risk will be based on the definitions in Table M2 (above).
Risk Evaluation. The CYCLADES project will develop the service component of an open virtual archive environment. Such component will be built on top of an archive component. The archive component is being developed by the US Open Archive initiative. Therefore, the two activities are complementary in that they address two different but interacting aspects of an open archives environment: the archive environment and the service environment. Obviously, there exists a dependency of the CYCLADES project on the achievements and results of the OAi. We want, here, to evaluate the risk which is inherent in this dependency relationship between the two activities and to identify effective recovery actions. In order to make more tight the collaboration between CYCLADES and OAi we have agreed with one of the principal investigators of OAi, Cornell University (Dr Xxxx Xxxxxx), that a US proposal for funding had to be submitted to NSF (in response to the Cultural Heritage Applications Unit of the EC DG Information Society invitation for EU-US multi-partner, multi-national project proposals). The objectives of this twin proposal (see Annex 1) are to: Support the evolution and organisational stabilisation of the Open Archives initiative (OAi). Evaluate the effectiveness and cross-domain applicability of OAi conventions. Investigate and develop collection and service meta-data standards. Due to a lack of synchronization between the NSF and IST Calls this proposal has not yet been submitted. To face this lack of synchronization between the starting dates of the two projects the following recovery action is underway. Cornell University will submit a small “unsolicited” proposal to NSF as an extension of an ongoing DL project run by Cornell and funded by NSF. NSF has guaranteed that the evaluation and approval of this proposal will be done by October 2000. This means that Cornell could be able to collaborate with the CYCLADES project since its initial phases and thus guarantee coherence between the two projects. However, even in the worst case that the US proposal is not approved for funding CYCLADES can be equally carried out efficiently. Indeed, since the service environment will run on top of the archive environment this latter must be operational in order to be able to conduct a meaningful experimentation of the proposed service environment. The OAi has already defined agreements (technical mechanisms and organizational structures) to support interoperability of e-print archives. These agr...
Risk EvaluationThe employer shall issue a general regulation evaluating the risks associated with possible types of dangers and damages for all jobs at the work place and in the working environment, and shall establish manner and measures for removing them. In the case of any new danger and damage, and change in the level of risk in the working process, the employer shall make amendments to the general regulation referred to in paragraph 1 above and remove such risks.
Risk EvaluationThe SUPPLIER shall carry out a risk evaluation of the product to be delivered and of the manufacturing process. The risk evaluation is a part of the documentation the SUPPLIER is obliged to maintain; for archiving and retention, the defined retention periods apply. Both Design- and Process FMEA shall be required as risk analysis where a SUPPLIER delivers products manufactured in accordance with his own construction drawings. Otherwise, a process FMEA shall be undertaken. The SUPPLIER shall maintain a procedure to identify the hazards and evaluate the risks associated with its delivered products throughout their entire lifecycle. Compliance with this procedure shall be regularly monitored and adjusted if necessary. Where the SUPPPLIER identifies risks that are likely to affect the CUSTOMER’s product, it shall inform the CUSTOMER promptly and in writing. This shall also apply to risks which have been identified or which have arisen in similar or similarly constructed products. Decisions on any necessary corrective actions and information related to products in the field / recalls / notification of authorities shall rest with the CUSTOMER. The SUPPLIER shall maintain a system capturing failures / non-conformities as a means to ascertain weaknesses of products or processes. The system shall be used to define all necessary corrective and preventive actions (CAPA=Corrective and Preventive Action).
Risk Evaluation. Include an evaluation of the risk of hydraulic fracturing, erosion, contamination of drainage features, heave, or any other damage. This should include: (1) A detailed description of any drilling fluid used including details on the circulation system, locations where fluid will contact soil, and circulation pressures that will be used. (2) Monitoring needs during drilling, and a contingency plan if loss of drilling fluid or other complications are observed during drilling. (3) Measures to minimize the risk of damage to the dam or foundation. (4) Measures to prevent the possibility of cross-contamination and leakage from confined and separate ground water aquifers. (5) Measures to prevent drill contact with structural features, such as conduits. (6) Nearby instruments whose behavior will be monitored during the investigation and the expected response including threshold and limit values, and contingency plans for unexpected response. (7) An emergency action plan including a list of emergency equipment and supplies to have onsite (phone/radio, filter materials, grout materials, etc.). ER 0000-0-0000 31 Dec 14 Page 73 of 102
Risk EvaluationThe contractor shall state responsibility and procedures to determine the significance, intrinsic worth, and critically of the contractor operations in a manner that proper risk management techniques can be applied and notable safety risk reported to the JSC Health, Safety, and Environmental Compliance Office. The contractor will discuss ranking the risk in a severity classification. Risk evaluation tasks, managing the risks, and documenting the results will be discussed.
Risk Evaluation 

Related to Risk Evaluation

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and xxxx them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • Job Evaluation The work of the provincial job evaluation steering committee (the JE Committee) will continue during the term of this Framework Agreement. The objectives of the JE Committee are as follows: • Review the results of the phase one and phase two pilots and outcomes of the committee work. Address any anomalies identified with the JE tool, process, or benchmarks. • Rate the provincial benchmarks and create a job hierarchy for the provincial benchmarks. • Gather data from all school districts and match existing job descriptions to the provincial benchmarks. • Identify the job hierarchy for local job descriptions for all school districts. • Compare the local job hierarchy to the benchmark-matched hierarchy. • Develop a methodology to convert points to pay bands - The confirmed method must be supported by current compensation best practices. • Identify training requirements to support implementation of the JE plan and develop training resources as required. Once the objectives outlined above are completed, the JE Committee will mutually determine whether a local, regional or provincial approach to the steps outlined above is appropriate. It is recognized that the work of the committee is technical, complicated, lengthy and onerous. To accomplish the objectives, the parties agree that existing JE funds can be accessed by the JE committee to engage consultant(s) to complete this work. It is further recognized that this process does not impact the established management right of employers to determine local job requirements and job descriptions nor does this process alter any existing collective agreement rights or established practices. When the JE plan is ready to be implemented, and if an amendment to an existing collective agreement is required, the JE Committee will work with the local School District and Local Union to make recommendations for implementation. Any recommendations will also be provided to the Provincial Labour Management Committee (PLMC). As mutually agreed by the provincial parties and the JE Committee, the disbursement of available JE funds shall be retroactive to January 2, 2020. The committee will utilize available funds to provide 50% of the wage differential for the position falling the furthest below the wage rate established by the provincial JE process and will continue this process until all JE fund monies at the time have been disbursed. The committee will follow compensation best practices to avoid problems such as inversion. The committee will report out to the provincial parties regularly during the term of the Framework Agreement. Should any concerns arise during the work of the committee they will be referred to the PLMC. Create a maintenance program to support ongoing implementation of the JE plan at a local, regional or provincial level. The maintenance program will include a process for addressing the wage rates of incumbents in positions which are impacted by implementation of the JE plan. The provincial parties confirm that $4,419,859 of ongoing annual funds will be used to implement the Job Evaluation Plan. Effective July 1, 2022, there will be a one-time pause of the annual $4,419,859 JE funding. This amount has been allocated to the local table bargaining money. The annual funding will recommence July 1, 2023.

  • Self-Evaluation Each regular faculty member shall provide a self-evaluation. It shall address, among other items, the faculty member's fulfillment of professional responsibilities as referenced in Section 18.2.3 and an assessment of his or her own performance. The faculty member will share the self-evaluation with the Faculty Evaluation Committee and the first-level manager or designee. The self-evaluation will become part of the evaluation report.

  • 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.

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order. (b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation. (c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled. (d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.

  • PROGRESS EVALUATION Engineer shall, from time to time during the progress of the Engineering Services, confer with County at County’s election. Engineer shall prepare and present such information as may be pertinent and necessary, or as may be reasonably requested by County, in order for County to evaluate features of the Engineering Services. At the request of County or Engineer, conferences shall be provided at Engineer's office, the offices of County, or at other locations designated by County. When requested by County, such conferences shall also include evaluation of the Engineering Services. County may, from time to time, require Engineer to appear and provide information to the Williamson County Commissioners Court. Should County determine that the progress in Engineering Services does not satisfy an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, then County shall review same with Engineer to determine corrective action required. Engineer shall promptly advise County in writing of events which have or may have a significant impact upon the progress of the Engineering Services, including but not limited to the following: A. Problems, delays, adverse conditions which may materially affect the ability to meet the objectives of an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, or preclude the attainment of Project Engineering Services units by established time periods; and such disclosure shall be accompanied by statement of actions taken or contemplated, and County assistance needed to resolve the situation, if any; and B. Favorable developments or events which enable meeting goals sooner than anticipated in relation to an applicable Work Authorization’s or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto.

  • TEACHER EVALUATION A. The administration will be evaluating the teacher’s performance within the time of formal responsibility. The evaluation process and form will be shared with the Association Building Representatives at the beginning of each school year. (a) Probationary teachers shall be evaluated at least two (2) times a year. The first evaluation will be completed prior to December 1st and the second prior to April 15th. Each evaluation will be based upon announced, unannounced, informal observations, on the performance of other duties and responsibilities and the goals developed in the Individualized Development Plan (IDP). The announced and unannounced observations should be a minimum of thirty (30) minutes in length. The observations may occur at anytime prior to the development of the written evaluation, but at least one of them must be planned in consultation with the probationary teacher. The results of formal observations will be discussed with the teacher in a timely manner. The information gathered during the observations will be used to write the evaluations. (b) Tenured teachers will be evaluated on a rotating schedule, but no less than once every three- (3) years. The administration reserves the right to evaluate a tenured teacher more often. The evaluation will be based upon announced, unannounced, informal observations and on the performance of other duties and responsibilities. The announced and unannounced observations should be a minimum of thirty (30) minutes in length. The observations may occur at any time prior to the development of the written evaluation, but at least one of them must be planned in consultation with the tenured teacher. The results of formal observations will be discussed with the teacher in a timely manner. The information gathered during the observations will be used to write the evaluations. 2. The administrator shall prepare and submit a written evaluation and recommendations to the teacher prior to May 30th of the year they are evaluated. The administrator shall hold a conference with the teacher to discuss the written evaluation and recommendations. 3. Upon receipt of the evaluation the teacher will sign the form indicating his/her receipt of the report. The signature on the form does not constitute his/her approval unless specifically noted. 4. Teachers involved with the instruction of Advanced Placement courses will be evaluated. This evaluation in the first year will be made part of the formal evaluation only at the request of the teacher. B. A teacher who disagrees with the content or procedure of evaluation may submit a written answer which shall be attached to the file copy of the evaluation in question and/or submit any complaints through Level 4 of the grievance procedure. C. If an administrator believes a teacher is doing unacceptable work, the reasons shall be set forth in specific terms. Included will be examples of specific ways in which the teacher is to improve and assistance may be given by the administrator and other staff members. In subsequent conferences it shall be the responsibility of the individual teacher to inquire whether adequate improvement has taken place. D. Monitoring and observation of the work performance of the teacher shall be conducted openly. The public address or audio system or similar types of communications will not be used for the purpose of evaluation. E. The Board and the Association recognize that the ability of pupils to progress and mature academically is a combined result of the school, home, economic and social environment and that teachers alone cannot be held accountable for all aspects of the academic achievement of the pupil in the classroom. Test results of academic progress of students shall not be used as the sole determinant or in isolated instances to evaluate the quality of a teacher's service or fitness for retention. F. All communications, including evaluations by Milan Administrators, commendations, and documented complaints directed toward the teacher which are to be included in the personnel file shall be made available for review of the teacher prior to placement in the file; a copy of any such communication will be provided to the teacher at this time. Pre-placement information such as confidential credentials, letters of reference from universities, individuals, or previous employers are exempt from such review. A written statement for inclusion in the personnel file may then be made by the teacher in regard to materials that were not signed by the teacher. A representative of the Association may accompany the teacher. G. Ordinarily, observations of teachers shall not be for less than a full class period or for the duration of a particular teaching lesson.

  • FINANCIAL EVALUATION (a) The financial bid shall be opened of only those bidders who have been found to be technically eligible. The financial bids shall be opened in presence of representatives of technically eligible bidders, who may like to be present. The institute shall inform the date, place and time for opening of financial bid. (b) Arithmetical errors shall be rectified on the following basis. If there is a discrepancy between the unit price and total price that is, the unit price shall prevail and the total price shall be corrected by the Institute. If there is a discrepancy between words and figures, the lesser amount shall be considered as valid. If the Supplier does not accept the correction of the errors, his bid shall be rejected. (c) The AIIMS Jodhpur does not bind himself to accept the lowest bid or any bid and reserves the right of accepting the whole or any part of the bid or portion of the job offered; and the bidder shall provide the same at the rates quoted. The AIIMS Jodhpur reserves the right to reject any or all offers received in response to tender or cancel or withdraw the tender notice without assigning any reason, whatsoever.

  • BID EVALUATION The Commissioner reserves the right to accept or reject any and all Bids, or separable portions of Bids, and waive technicalities, irregularities, and omissions if the Commissioner determines the best interests of the State will be served. The Commissioner, in his/her sole discretion, may accept or reject illegible, incomplete or vague Bids and his/her decision shall be final. A conditional or revocable Bid which clearly communicates the terms or limitations of acceptance may be considered, and Contract award may be made in compliance with the Bidder’s conditional or revocable terms in the Bid.