Separate decision processes Sample Clauses

Separate decision processes. The boards of NVAO and THE-ICE will both make their own decisions and decide on the possible follow-up, based on the assessment reports and the assessment frameworks applicable for their respective organisations. This collaboration agreement between NVAO and THE-ICE ensures institutions an efficient and effective procedure for acquiring double accreditation. NVAO and THE-ICE strive for as much reduction of the administrative burden of the accreditation processes as possible and therefore seek, when possible, to combine all accreditation processes an institution is involved in. The Hague, 18 May, 2021 (update to the original agreement of February 27th, 2017)
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Separate decision processes. The EAPAA Accreditation Committee and the NVAO board will each make their own decisions and decide on the possible follow-up, based on the assessment report and the assessment frameworks applicable for their respective organizations. This collaboration agreement between EEAPAA and the NVAO ensures institutions an efficient and effective procedure for acquiring double accreditation. The NVAO strives for as much reduction of the administrative burden of accreditation processes as possible and therefore strives, when possible, to combine all accreditation processes an institution is involved in. The Hague, 18 May 2021 (update to the original agreement of September 12th, 2016) On behalf of EAPAA On behalf of NVAO Xxxx. X. Brandsen Xx. Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx-Lub
Sample 1Sample 2
Separate decision processes. The boards of the NVAO and AACSB will both make their own decisions and decide on the possible follow-up, based on the assessment report and the assessment frameworks applicable for their respective organizations. This collaboration agreement between AACSB and the NVAO ensures institutions an efficient and effective procedure for acquiring double accreditation. The NVAO strives for as much reduction of the administrative burden of accreditation processes as possible and therefore strives, when possible, to combine all accreditation processes an institution is involved in. The Hague, 18 May 2021 (update to the original agreement of 25 May 2015, which was updated on 25 April 2016) On behalf of AACSB On behalf of NVAO Dr. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xx. Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx-Lub AACSB Chief Accreditation Officer Member of the Board NVAO Xx. Xxxxxxx X. Mescon,
Sample 1
Separate decision processes. The boards of the NVAO and EFMD will bath make their own decisions and decide on the possible follow-up, based on the assessment report and the assessment frameworks applicable for their respective organizations. This collaboration agreement between EFMD and the NVAO ensures institutions an efficient and effective procedure for acquiring double accreditation. The NVAO strives for as much reduction of the administrative burden of accreditation processes as possible and therefore strives, when possible, to combine all accreditation processes an institution is involved in. For EFMD
Sample 1
Separate decision processes. The boards of NVAO and THE-ICE will both make their own decisions and decide on the possible follow-up, based on the assessment reports and the assessment frameworks applicable for their respective organisations. Xxxxxxxxx, January 13th, 0000 Xxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxxxx 0xx, 0000
Sample 1
Separate decision processes. The EAPAA Accreditation Committee and the NVAO board will both make their own decisions and decide on the possible foilow-up, based on the Site Visit Report and the assessment frameworks applicable for their respective organisations. This collaboration agreement between EAPAA and NVAO ensures institutions an efficiënt and effective procedure for acquiring doublé accreditation. NVAO strives for as much reduction of the administrative burden of accreditation processes as possible and therefore strives, when possible, to combine all accreditation processes an institution is involved in. The Hague, September 12th, 2016 On behalf of EAPAA On behalf of NVAO '0 / Secretary-General EAPAA Member of the Board NVAO
Sample 1

Related to Separate decision processes

  • Alternative Dispute Resolution Process Owner may establish a dispute resolution process to be utilized in advance of that outlined in Tex. Gov’t Code, Chapter 2260.

  • Mediation Process A. Mediation is a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that may be requested by the City or the PBA. It is an alternative, not a substitute for the formal arbitration process contained in Section 19.7 above. Mediation is an informal process in which a neutral third party assists the opposing parties in reaching a voluntary, negotiated resolution of a charge of discipline. The decision to mediate is completely voluntary for the PBA and the City. Mediation gives the parties the opportunity to discuss the issues raised in the charging document, clear up misunderstandings, determine the underlying interests or concerns, find areas of agreement and, ultimately, incorporate those areas of agreement into solutions. A mediator does not resolve the charge or impose a decision on the parties. Instead, the mediator helps the parties to agree on a mutually acceptable resolution. The mediation process is strictly confidential. Information disclosed during mediation will not be revealed to anyone.

  • Informal Dispute Resolution Process 1. In the event there is a dispute under this Centralized Contract, the Contractor, OGS and Authorized User agree to exercise their best efforts to resolve the dispute as soon as possible. The Contractor, OGS and Authorized User shall, without delay, continue to perform their respective obligations under this Centralized Contract which are not affected by the dispute. Primary responsibility for resolving any dispute arising under this Centralized Contract shall rest with the Authorized User’s Contractor Coordinators and the Contractor’s Account Executive and the State & Local Government Regional General Manager.

  • Dispute Resolution Process Any claim, dispute or other matter in question not resolved by the process identified in Paragraph

  • Arbitration Process Any arbitration will be conducted pursuant to the applicable rules (the “Arbitration Rules”) of the American Arbitration Association, as modified herein, to the extent such modifications are not prohibited by the Arbitration Rules. The arbitration will be conducted in Indianapolis, Indiana. The parties will select a single arbitrator, but in the event that the parties are unable to agree, the arbitrator will be appointed pursuant to the Arbitration Rules. The arbitrator will be a practicing attorney with significant expertise in litigating and/or presiding over cases involving the substantive legal areas involved in the dispute. The parties to the arbitration will not request, and the arbitrator will not order, that any discovery be taken or provided, including depositions, interrogatories or document requests, except to the extent the amount in controversy exceeds $50,000. The arbitration will be concluded within three months of the date the arbitrator is appointed. The arbitrator’s findings, reasoning, decision, and award will be stated in writing and based upon applicable law. Judgment on the arbitration award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. In the event that the arbitration results in an award which imposes an injunction or contains a monetary award in excess of $100,000, the award will be reviewable on appeal initiated by filing notice of appeal with the AAA office within 30 days of the award, governed by the AAA Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules and conducted by a panel of three new arbitrators, ruling by majority, under the procedure for appointment from the national roster of arbitrators. Unless the applicable Arbitration Rules require otherwise, arbitration fees and costs will be shared equally by the claimant(s) and respondent(s), respectively, in any arbitration proceeding. Should the AAA be unavailable, unable or unwilling to accept and administer the arbitration of any claim under these arbitration provisions as written, the parties will agree on a substitute arbitration organization, such as JAMS, that will enforce the arbitration provisions as written. Because this Agreement memorializes a transaction in interstate commerce, the Federal Arbitration Act governs the interpretation and enforcement of these arbitration provisions. More information about arbitration, including the Arbitration Rules, is available at xxx.xxx.xxx or by calling 0-000-000-0000.

  • Consultation Process (a) At the time of providing written notice of reduction to affected Employee(s), the Employer shall:

  • Mini-Bid Dispute Resolution Process If the Authorized User does not have a dispute resolution policy, please refer to OSC or OGS dispute resolution policy for guidance in creating a policy. In the event the Contractor has any disputes with the Authorized User, the Contractor shall so notify the Authorized User in writing. If either party notifies the other of such dispute, the other party shall then make good faith efforts to solve the problem or settle the dispute amicably, including meeting with the party’s representatives to attempt diligently to reach a satisfactory result through negotiation. In the event that the Contractor and the Authorized User are unable to resolve a conflict through negotiation, then both parties will comply with the Authorized User’s stated dispute resolution policy which must be included as part of the Authorized User Agreement. If the conflict is still unresolved, please refer to section 4.2.1.II.A.3 for guidance. Mini-Bid Proposal Validity All Contractor responses to Authorized User Mini-Bids must remain open and valid for at least 60 days from the Mini-Bid opening date, unless the time for awarding the Authorized User Agreement is extended by mutual consent of the Authorized User and the Contractor. A Contractor’s Mini-Bid response shall continue to remain an effective offer, firm and irrevocable, subsequent to such 60 day period until either tentative award of the Authorized User Agreement by the Authorized User is made or withdrawal of the Contractor response in writing by the Contractor. Tentative award of the Authorized User Agreement shall consist of written notice to that effect by an Authorized User to a successful Contractor, who shall thereupon be obligated to execute a formal Authorized User Agreement. SIGNATURE PAGE

  • Selection Process The Mortgage Loans were selected from among the outstanding one- to four-family mortgage loans in the Seller's portfolio at the related Closing Date as to which the representations and warranties set forth in Subsection 9.02 could be made and such selection was not made in a manner so as to affect adversely the interests of the Purchaser;

  • CENTRAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS The following process pertains exclusively to disputes and grievances on central matters that have been referred to the central process. In accordance with the School Board Collective Bargaining Act, 2014 central matters may also be grieved locally, in which case local grievance processes will apply. In the event that central language is being grieved locally, the local parties shall provide the grievance to their respective central agents.

  • Application Process The employees wishing to enter into a job share arrangement will apply in writing to the Employer and forward a copy to the Union outlining the proposed commencement date of the job share, how the hours and days of work will be shared and how communication and continuity of work will be maintained. The Employer shall communicate a decision on a job share request in writing to the applicants. Applications to Job Sharing shall not be unreasonably denied.

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