Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.
Review Scope The parties confirm that the Asset Representations Review is not responsible for (a) reviewing the Receivables for compliance with the representations and warranties under the Transaction Documents, except as described in this Agreement or (b) determining whether noncompliance with the representations and warranties constitutes a breach of the Eligibility Representations. For the avoidance of doubt, the parties confirm that the review is not designed to determine why an Obligor is delinquent or the creditworthiness of the Obligor, either at the time of any Asset Review or at the time of origination of the related Receivable. Further, the Asset Review is not designed to establish cause, materiality or recourse for any Test Fail (as defined in Section 3.05).
Periodic Review The General Counsel shall periodically review the Procurement Integrity Procedures with OSC personnel in order to ascertain potential areas of exposure to improper influence and to adopt desirable revisions for more effective avoidance of improper influences.
Performance Review Where a performance review of an employee’s performance is carried out, the employee shall be given sufficient opportunity after the interview to read and review the performance review. Provision shall be made on the performance review form for an employee to sign it. The form shall provide for the employee’s signature in two (2) places, one (1) indicating that the employee has read and accepts the performance review, and the other indicating that the employee disagrees with the performance review. The employee shall sign in only one (1) of the places provided. No employee may initiate a grievance regarding the contents of a performance review unless the signature indicates disagreement. An employee shall, upon request, receive a copy of this performance review at the time of signing. An employee’s performance review shall not be changed after an employee has signed it, without the knowledge of the employee, and any such changes shall be subject to the grievance procedure of this Agreement. The employee may respond, in writing, to the performance review. Such response will be attached to the performance review.
Performance Reviews The Employee will be provided with a written performance appraisal at least once per year and said appraisal will be reviewed at which time all aspects of the assessment can be fully discussed.
Title Review Seller shall be obligated to clear any and all encumbrances of title of an ascertainable monetary amount (“Seller Liens”), which Seller’s Liens Seller shall cause to be satisfied and or released at or prior to Closing (with Seller having the right to apply the Purchase Price or a portion thereof for such purpose). Notwithstanding the foregoing, prior to the Due Diligence Date, Purchaser shall give notice (“Purchaser’s Title Notice”) to Seller of the existence of any encumbrances and defects in title to which Purchaser objects and that are not Permitted Encumbrances (“Title Objections”). Seller shall, within five (5) business days from receipt of Purchaser’s Title Notice, notify Purchaser of those Title Objections that Seller elects not to attempt to remove or correct, provided that failure of Seller to give said notice shall be deemed to mean that Seller shall remove or correct all of Purchaser’s Title Objections. In the event Seller elects to attempt to remove or correct Title Objections(s) and by the later of the Due Diligence Date or the date which is thirty (30) business days following Seller’s receipt of Purchaser’s Title Notice, Seller has not arranged for removal or correction of said Title Objections, then Purchaser shall either (i) terminate this Agreement in which event the Deposit shall be returned to Purchaser and the parties hereto shall have no further rights or obligations hereunder, except for rights and obligations which, by their terms, survive the termination hereof, or (ii) accept the condition of the title to the Property as it then is, without diminution of the Purchase Price. If Purchaser fails to elect (i) above, then Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected (ii) above. Encumbrances and defects to title that are not included in Purchaser’s Title Objections and those Title Objections that are accepted pursuant to this subsection shall be deemed to be Permitted Encumbrances. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, Seller’s Liens shall not be deemed Permitted Encumbrances. Recording fees for recording documents to discharge Title Objections and Seller’s Liens shall be borne by Seller.
Periodic Reviews During January of each year during the term hereof, the Board of Directors of the Company shall review Executive's Annual Salary, bonus, stock options, and additional benefits then being provided to Executive. Following each such review, the Company may in its discretion increase the Annual Salary, bonus, stock options, and benefits; however, the Company shall not decrease such items during the period Executive serves as an employee of the Company. Prior to November 30th of each year during the term hereof, the Board of Directors of the Company shall communicate in writing the results of such review to Executive.
Completion of Review for Certain Review Receivables Following the delivery of the list of the Review Receivables and before the delivery of the Review Report by the Asset Representations Reviewer, the Servicer may notify the Asset Representations Reviewer if a Review Receivable is paid in full by the Obligor or purchased from the Issuer in accordance with the terms of the Basic Documents. On receipt of such notice, the Asset Representations Reviewer will immediately terminate all Tests of the related Review Receivable, and the Review of such Review Receivables will be considered complete (a “Test Complete”). In this case, the related Review Report will indicate a Test Complete for such Review Receivable and the related reason.
Examination and Review A volunteer, upon presenting identification, shall be permitted by appointment to examine and copy his/her complete County volunteer file, MCFRS operating, or medical record. The volunteer shall indicate in writing, to be placed in his/her file, that he/she has examined the same. The custodian of medical records may determine, consistent with State law, that certain medical information will only be released to the physician or attorney of the volunteer upon receipt of a signed release from the volunteer. Medical records will be maintained in accordance with Section Three of this Article. The County may retain and store records in various formats, including as electronically imaged documents. Confidentiality must be maintained and assured in all formats. Unless otherwise expressly set forth in Sections One through Six, no other documents or information may be placed or maintained in the County volunteer file, MCFRS operating record, or medical file.
Review The practitioner reviews the treatment plan and discusses, when appropriate, case circumstances and management options with the attending (or referring) physician. The reviewer consults with the requesting physician when more clarity is needed to make an informed coverage decision. The reviewer may consult with board certified physicians from appropriate specialty areas to assist in making determinations of coverage and/or appropriateness. All such consultations will be documented in the review text. If the reviewer determines that the admission, continued stay or service requested is not a covered service, a notice of non-coverage is issued. Only a physician, behavioral health practitioner (such as a psychiatrist, doctoral-level clinical psychologist, certified addiction medicine specialist), dentist or pharmacist who has the clinical expertise appropriate to the request under review with an unrestricted license may deny coverage based on medical necessity.
