Usability Testing On or Before the Compliance Date Sample Clauses

Usability Testing On or Before the Compliance Date. At least once on or before the Compliance Date set forth in Section 5(a). LASD’s Consultant will arrange for usability testing consistent with industry standards with a cross-section of Persons with Visual Impairments, including Claimant, using different types of devices, assistive technology, browsers, and operating systems to ensure that the website is compliant with the Access Standard. LASD in good faith, will consider feedback provided through the usability testing process and work to resolve any issues that may arise. LASD will provide Claimant’s Counsel copies of any usability testing reports or results, within 10 business days of the receipt of the reports or results.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Usability Testing On or Before the Compliance Date

  • Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.

  • Transition Period LVRT Standard The transition period standard applies to wind generating plants subject to FERC Order 661 that have either: (i) interconnection agreements signed and filed with the Commission, filed with the Commission in unexecuted form, finally executed as conforming agreements, or filed with the Commission as non-conforming agreements between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2006, with a scheduled in-service date no later than December 31, 2007, or (ii) wind generating turbines subject to a wind turbine procurement contract executed prior to December 31, 2005, for delivery through 2007.

  • Follow-up Testing An employee shall submit to unscheduled follow-up drug and/or alcohol testing if, within the previous 24-month period, the employee voluntarily disclosed drug or alcohol problems, entered into or completed a rehabilitation program for drug or alcohol abuse, failed or refused a preappointment drug test, or was disciplined for violating the provisions of this Agreement and Employer work rules. The Employer may require an employee who is subject to follow-up testing to submit to no more than six unscheduled drug or alcohol tests within any 12 month period.

  • Partial Disposal During Term of Service Agreement Throughout the Term of the Service Agreement, LEA may request partial disposal of Student Data obtained under the Service Agreement that is no longer needed. Partial disposal of data shall be subject to LEA’s request to transfer data to a separate account, pursuant to Article II, section 3, above.

  • Minimum Call-Back Time An employee who is called in and required to work outside their regular working hours shall be paid for a minimum of two (2) hours at overtime rates unless the call-in is immediately prior to their normal work day, in which case there should be no minimum.

  • REPORTING AND CALL BACK TIME 11.1 Reporting time pay is contained in the Appendices attached to and forming part of this Agreement.

  • Post-Commercial Operation Date Testing and Modifications Each Party shall at its own expense perform routine inspection and testing of its facilities and equipment in accordance with Good Utility Practice as may be necessary to ensure the continued interconnection of the Large Generating Facility with the Participating TO’s Transmission System in a safe and reliable manner. Each Party shall have the right, upon advance written notice, to require reasonable additional testing of the other Party’s facilities, at the requesting Party’s expense, as may be in accordance with Good Utility Practice.

  • Commercial Operation Date (COD) Bus Terminal and Commercial Complex shall be deemed to be complete when the Completion Certificate or the Provisional Certificate, as the case may be, is issued under the provisions of Article 14, and accordingly the commercial operation date of the Project shall be the date on which such Completion Certificate or the Provisional Certificate is issued (the “COD”). The Bus Terminal and Commercial Complex shall enter into commercial service on COD whereupon the Concessionaire shall be entitled to demand and collect Fee in accordance with provisions of Article 27 and that the entry of Bus Terminal or part thereof into commercial service shall always be subject to compliance with the provisions of Clause 18.3 and Clause 26.2.

  • Substantial Completion Date Substantial Completion of the Work as defined in Article 6.1.2 of the General Conditions to the Continuing Contract for Construction Management shall be achieved by July 31, 2022.

  • Commercial Operation Date Testing and Modifications Prior to the Commercial Operation Date, the Connecting Transmission Owner shall test the Connecting Transmission Owner’s Attachment Facilities and System Upgrade Facilities and System Deliverability Upgrades and Developer shall test the Large Generating Facility and the Developer Attachment Facilities to ensure their safe and reliable operation. Similar testing may be required after initial operation. Developer and Connecting Transmission Owner shall each make any modifications to its facilities that are found to be necessary as a result of such testing. Developer shall bear the cost of all such testing and modifications. Developer shall generate test energy at the Large Generating Facility only if it has arranged for the injection of such test energy in accordance with NYISO procedures.

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