Who Makes Evaluations Sample Clauses

Who Makes Evaluations. A. Evaluation of a unit member shall be done by:
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (5)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Who Makes Evaluations. Each immediate supervisor under whom the unit member has served sixty (60) workdays or more during any rating period shall provide a performance evaluation, even though the unit member may have left his/her control. Each unit member shall be informed in writing of the name of his/her immediate supervisor and of the next level supervisor within thirty
Sample 1Sample 2See All (4)
Who Makes Evaluations. 7 Each administrator/supervisor is responsible for the evaluation of employees under their 8 direct supervision.
Sample 1Sample 2
Who Makes Evaluations. Each immediate supervisor under whom the employee has served for 60 working days or more during the rating period shall provide a performance evaluation, even though the employee may have left his/her supervision. PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED Performance evaluation reports shall be made on forms prescribed by the district and shall be prepared by the employee's immediate supervisor. The form shall be reviewed by the next higher supervisor. Any conduct not directly observed by the evaluator will be investigated first by the evaluator before being placed in the evaluation. Any negative evaluation shall include a specific recommendation for improvement. The immediate supervisor will present and discuss the performance evaluation report with the employee. The evaluation form shall be signed by the employee to indicate receipt, and will receive a signed copy. Performance evaluation reports will be filed in the employee's personnel records and shall be available for review by the employee. All personnel files shall be kept in confidence and shall be available for inspection only to other employees and officials of the district when actually necessary in the proper administration of the district affairs or the supervision of the employee. If a permanent employee should receive an unsatisfactory performance evaluation, not meeting district standards, he/she shall be given a written plan to improve his/her evaluation to meet district standards. The plan shall outline what the employee must do to meet the district standards including a meeting with their immediate supervisor, explaining what must be done by said employee to meet the standards. The supervisor will maintain communications with the employee regarding his/her performance.
Sample 1
Who Makes Evaluations. Each immediate supervisor under whom the employee has served for 60 working days or more during any rating period, shall provide a performance evaluation, even though the employee may have left his/her control. If an immediate supervisor has had less than sixty (60) working days to observe the employee under their immediate supervision, then the most recent immediate supervisor that has had at least sixty (60) working days to observe the employee will do the performance evaluation. Non- district employees, including consultants, shall not evaluate classified employees.
Sample 1
Who Makes Evaluations. 12.2.1 Each immediate supervisor under whom the unit member has served for 60 working days or more during the rating period shall provide a performance evaluation, even though the unit member may have left his/her control.
Sample 1
Who Makes Evaluations. 2 Each immediate supervisor is responsible for the evaluation of employees under their direct 3 supervision.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Who Makes Evaluations. Each immediate supervisor under whom a permanent employee has served for 60 working days or more during the rating period shall provide a performance evaluation, even though the employee may have left his/her control.
Sample 1

Related to Who Makes Evaluations

  • Annual Evaluations The purpose of the annual evaluation is to assess and communicate the nature and extent of an employee's performance of assigned duties consistent with the criteria specified below in this Policy. Except for those employees who have received notice of non-reappointment pursuant to the BOT- UFF Policy on Non- reappointment, every employee shall be evaluated at least once annually. Personnel decisions shall take such annual evaluations into account, provided that such decisions need not be based solely on written faculty performance evaluations.

  • TEACHER EVALUATIONS A. Each teacher shall have the right, upon request, to review the contents of his/her personal file folder.

  • Re-evaluation a) When a job has moved to a higher group as a result of re-evaluation, the resulting rate shall be retroactive from the date that Management or the employee has applied to the Plant Job Review Committee for re-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. No response 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. Yes - No 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?

  • Student Evaluations Student evaluations shall be completed by the end of the 12th week of the fall semester.

  • 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.

  • EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS 3. Any matter for which there is recourse under State or Federal statutes.

  • 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.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. Xxxxxxxxx & Xxxxxx will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Timing of Evaluations Annual performance evaluations shall normally take place near the anniversary date of completion of original probation. However, as to employees who have been rehired as a restoration or after a reduction in force, the date of rehire shall be the anniversary date for the annual evaluation. The Human Resources Department will attempt to secure agency cooperation in conducting the evaluation process in reasonable relationship to the above schedule. Failure to conduct a timely annual rating shall not be grievable. Deadline for Evaluation Meetings: A meeting to discuss an evaluation shall be held within forty- five (45) days after the applicable anniversary date, or after the end of any prescriptive period for remediation (“PPR”) or warning period. This deadline may be extended to accommodate the employee’s illness or injury. Where the deadline is not satisfied, the employee shall be granted an annual overall presumptive rating equal to their last annual overall rating, but not less than a Satisfactory (“S”) rating. However, if the time for annual evaluation falls during a PPR or warning period (See Disciplinary Action 14, Section 1(e), 2 & 3, the annual evaluation shall be waived, and the last evaluation in such process shall be deemed to be the annual evaluation. In the event the time for annual evaluation falls subsequent to the issuance of a notice of performance deficiency (Step 1) but prior to the commencement of a PPR, the employer may issue an evaluation which does not supersede the previously issued notice. A special evaluation may be used at any time except it shall not be used as a late annual evaluation. Written feedback furnished to an employee which would have constituted the annual evaluation had it been timely conducted, shall not be considered as an evaluation, shall not be placed in the employee’s file at the time of issuance, shall not be grievable and does not require the presence of a union representative when issued. An oral or written notice of performance deficiency (Step 1 in the order of progressive corrective action) shall not be grievable when issued, and, when issued, shall not require the presence of a union representative. However, once Step 2 of progressive corrective action has been implemented (a special or annual evaluation coupled with a PPR) such notice or a written record of such notice shall be placed in the employee’s personnel file and shall be fully grievable.

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