Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.
Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances
Systems Review The Construction Administrator will conduct reviews of proposed roof, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, conveyance, sprinkler, telecommunications, and life safety systems, and will consider initial cost, availability, impact on the overall program, comfort and convenience, long-term maintenance and operating costs, and impacts on schedule.
Ongoing Review and Revisions As set forth in Section 35.7, the Parties have agreed to the coordination and exchange of data and information under this Agreement to enhance system reliability and efficient market operations as systems exist and are contemplated as of the Effective Date. The Parties expect that these systems and the technology applicable to these systems and to the collection and exchange of data will change from time to time throughout the term of this Agreement. The Parties agree that the objectives of this Agreement can be fulfilled efficiently and economically only if the Parties, from time to time, review and, as appropriate, revise the requirements stated herein in response to such changes, including deleting, adding, or revising requirements and protocols. Each Party will negotiate in good faith in response to such revisions the other Party may propose from time to time. Nothing in this Agreement, however, shall require any Party to reach agreement with respect to any such changes, or to purchase, install, or otherwise implement new equipment, software, or devices, or functions, except as required to perform this Agreement.
Additional RO Review Criteria (1) In addition to the requirements in Subparagraph 34A, the RO must:
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.
Scope of Review I conducted my review in accordance with Thai Standard on Review Engagements 2410, “Review of Interim Financial Information Performed by the Independent Auditor of the Entity.” A review of interim financial information consists of making inquires, primarily of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters, and applying analytical and other review procedures. A review is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with Thai Standards on Auditing and consequently does not enable me to obtain assurance that I would become aware of all significant matters that might be identified in an audit. Accordingly, I do not express an audit opinion.
Duration of Review This Articulation Agreement shall be effective from the date of affixing signatures and is subject to annual review by all parties affixing signatures. Any changes must be written and reflected in a new agreement. If no changes are indicated by the annual review, continuance of this agreement will remain in effect until terminated. Either party may terminate this agreement immediately without cause on 90 days written notice. In the event this agreement is terminated, students who are impacted shall have the opportunity to obtain credit according to the terms herein. Morehead State University ( MSU ) Responsibilities MSU shall be responsible for: ● Ensuring all institutional policies apply to articulated credit courses. ● Ensuring articulated credit is properly documented on postsecondary transcript in accordance with this agreement. ● Providing KDE with current postsecondary primary point of contact information to be published for general inquiries related to this Articulation Agreement and notifying KDE when updates are applicable. Secondary School (K-12) Responsibilities Secondary School (K-12) shall be responsible for: ● Providing detailed information to students in writing (i.e., a syllabus) consistent with the public postsecondary institution policy, which shall include the nature of the course and the expectations and requirements that correspond to its official catalog description. Course requirement information must include course prerequisites, course content, grading policy, attendance requirements, course completion requirements, performance standards, information on adding and dropping courses and other related course information. ● Promoting articulated credit opportunities among qualified high school students, parents and high school faculty. ● Ensuring proper Technical Education Data System (TEDS) data entry is maintained to allow for student testing. ● Ensuring articulated credit documentation (e.g., high school transcript with state course codes identified, CTE EOP assessment certificate(s), industry certification certificate(s)) is provided to the student upon meeting requirements. This document was completed by: bdavis Digitally signed by bdavis Date: 2018.12.10 14:14:21 -05'00' Articulation Agreement Kentucky Department of Education And Xxxxxxxx State University In Reference to Production Crop Career and Technical Education End-of-Program Assessment Agreement Number: AG - 18-19 - 0008 Signature Page The Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) and Morehead State University ( MSU ) enter into this Articulation Agreement on this 10 day of December , 20 18 . This Articulation Agreement shall be effective from the date of affixing signatures and is subject to annual review by all parties affixing signatures. Any changes must be written and reflected in a new agreement. If no changes are indicated by the annual review, continuance of this agreement will remain in effect until terminated. Either party may terminate this agreement immediately for cause or may terminate without cause on 90 days written notice. In the event this agreement is terminated, students who are impacted shall have the opportunity to obtain credit according to the terms herein. In testimony thereof, witness the duly authorized signatures of the parties hereto: Kentucky Department of Education Xxxxx X. Xxxxx, Ph.D. Commissioner of Education Date Morehead State University signed by Xxx Xxxxxx 1/3/2019
Readiness Review Includes all plans to be implemented in one or more Service Areas on the anticipated Operational Start Date. At a minimum, the HMO shall, for each HMO Program:
Program Review The Contracting Officer or other authorized government representative may hold semi- annual program review meetings. Such meetings will be held via telecom or video teleconferencing. However, the Government reserves the right to request a meeting in person. The meetings will include all BPA holders, representatives from prospective customer agencies, a combination of current and prospective customer agencies, or individual BPA holders. Some Federal Government Agencies and any approved State, Local and Tribal agencies may establish a central program management function. Such users may require their primary suppliers to participate in agency program review meetings on a periodic basis, at no additional cost to the Government.
