Xxxx’x Review Sample Clauses

Xxxx’x Review. The xxxx shall have the right and responsibility to make recommendations to the xxxxxxx concerning the award or denial of promotion to college faculty who hold tenure-track appointments. Such recommendations shall be in accordance with established criteria and the timetable as stipulated in the Western/WMU- AAUP Agreement.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (14)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Xxxx’x Review. The candidate's Xxxx shall review the candidate’s file and the recommendation of the DRC before considering the candidate's application for reappointment, tenure or promotion in accordance with the criteria and procedures in this Agreement, and shall make a full, reasoned, written recommendation to the URC concerning her reappointment, tenure or promotion accordingly. The Xxxx’x recommendation shall indicate how the candidate meets or does not meet the criteria required for each category of assessment. The Xxxx may solicit further information from the candidate where there are reasonable grounds for doing so. In cases where the Xxxx considers the DRC’s letter of recommendation insufficiently explicit, she may refer the letter back to the DRC for revision. The Xxxx'x written recommendation shall be made to the Chair of the URC, with copies to the candidate and the Chair of the DRC, who shall make the recommendation available to the DRC members.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (8)
Xxxx’x Review. The xxxx shall have the right and responsibility to make recommendations to the xxxxxxx concerning the award or denial of tenure to department faculty who hold tenure-track appointments. At the time of any review other than the final tenure review, all reviews of probationary faculty that are positive at all levels (DTC, chair, xxxx) will conclude at the xxxx’x level; only faculty members who receive a conditional review (positive with conditions, negative with conditions, and negative) at any previous level will have their recommendations and supporting materials forwarded to the xxxxxxx for review. Such recommendations shall be in accordance with established criteria and the timetable as stipulated in the Western/WMU-AAUP Agreement.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (8)
Xxxx’x Review. Within thirty (30) days of receiving the proposed bylaws, the xxxx shall review them to ensure that they comply with this Agreement and with the mission and goals of the University and either approve the proposed bylaws or return them to the unit for revision. (1) If the xxxx approves the proposed bylaws that a majority of the unit’s faculty voted to adopt or does not respond within thirty (30) days after receiving them, the bylaws shall be adopted as passed. (2) If the xxxx objects to any provision of the faculty’s proposed bylaws, the xxxx shall return the bylaws to the unit, together with his/her written objections.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (5)
Xxxx’x Review. 8.6.1 The xxxx will review each application and all materials submitted by the applicant, the written narrative of the PRC and any responses to the recommendation of the PRC from the candidate, and the written narratives of the department chairperson, ADF, and school director (As applicable), and any responses to the recommendations from the candidate, in order to determine whether the application meets the criteria to be recommended for a sabbatical leave. The xxxx shall then write a brief narrative evaluating each application on the basis of the established criteria and either recommend or not recommend. The xxxx’x recommendation and written narrative will be sent to the applicant via Interfolio. 8.6.2 Within two (2) business days of receiving the recommendation from the xxxx, the applicant may meet with the xxxx and/or submit a written response via Interfolio. The purpose of the response will be limited to clarification of material already included in the application. 8.6.3 After receipt and review of the candidate’s response or a meeting with the candidate, the Xxxx may revise the written narrative and recommendation to address the issues raised by the applicant or forward their original recommendation. The xxxx will forward the application, their narrative, and all associated materials to the University Sabbatical Review Committee, via the Interfolio. 8.6.4 If the xxxx identifies a potential issue related to the timing of the leave, the xxxx will meet with the PRC and the applicant(s) involved in an effort to resolve the issue. If the issue is not resolved, the xxxx will so inform the Xxxxxxx in writing.
Sample 1Sample 2
Xxxx’x Review. Within ten (10) working days of receiving and reading the applicant's packet, the Xxxx will inform the applicant of her/his decision. The Xxxx may approve, disapprove, or request modifications in writing to the applicant. If the Xxxx has disapproved or requested modifications and the applicant believes she/he may benefit from discussion with the Xxxx as to how to generate a successful proposal, she/he may within three (3) working days, request a meeting to review the proposal with the Xxxx. The applicant will have five (5) days from the date on which the meeting is held within which to submit a revised proposal to the Xxxx. The Xxxx will inform the applicant in writing of her/his approval or disapproval of the proposal. If the Xxxx disapproves the proposal, she/he will provide written reasons for such disapproval.
Sample 1Sample 2
Xxxx’x Review a. If the student appeals the Department Chair's decision from the Department Review, the appeal goes to the Xxxx of the Graduate School. The Xxxx of the Graduate School may take any of the following actions: i. Resolve the conflict through mediation; ii. Dismiss the charge; iii. Uphold the faculty member's or Department Chair's decision in its entirety; iv. Impose a lesser sanction; or v. Impose a greater sanction. If the Xxxx of the Graduate School finds the student responsible for academic dishonesty, the Xxxx must inform the OSC. The OSC may impose disciplinary sanctions. b. The Xxxx must notify the student in writing of the Xxxx'x decision, within ten (10) working days of receipt of the appeal. The Xxxx'x notification to the student must be either hand delivered or sent via certified mail and emailed to the student's address of record in MyNevada. If the notification is delivered in the proscribed manner, then the notification is deemed received.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Xxxx’x Review. The recommendations of the departmental committee or designee of the department shall be reviewed by the academic xxxx for that department. The xxxx may concur or disagree with the recommendations, may change the amount of any recommended increase, and/ or may recommend an increase for any member of the department that was not recommended by the committee or departmental designee. The xxxx may recommend that an individual faculty member receive a Faculty Merit Increase of any amount up to the maximum amount provided in provision 31.8 of this Article. Recommended increases may result in the placement of faculty unit employees between the rates for a step of his/ her rank/ classification in Appendix C.
Sample 1
Xxxx’x Review. The Xxxx (or in the cases of reappointment of athletic staff, the athletic director) shall then review the recommendations and shall normally support a well-documented recommendation by the bargaining unit members of the department. In the event that the Xxxx (or the athletic director) has compelling reasons, which shall not be arbitrary, for not supporting the recommendation of the bargaining unit members of the department, these reasons shall be stated in writing and forwarded to the bargaining unit members of the department, the chairperson, and the candidate. A candidate who is denied reappointment or is given a terminal appointment by action of the Xxxx shall have the right to an appeal as set out in Section B(5), below.
Sample 1

Related to Xxxx’x Review

  • Program Review The State ECEAP Office will conduct a review of each contractor’s compliance with the ECEAP Contract and ECEAP Performance Standards every four years. The review will involve ECEAP staff and parents. After the Program Review, the State ECEAP Office will provide the contractor with a Program Review report. The contractor must submit an ECEAP Corrective Action Plan for non-compliance with ECEAP Performance Standards. The Plan must be approved by the State ECEAP Office.

  • Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.

  • 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.

  • Utilization Review NOTE: The Utilization Review process does not apply to Services that are not covered by Blue Shield because of a coverage determination made by Medicare. State law requires that health plans disclose to Subscribers and health plan providers the process used to authorize or deny health care services un- der the plan. Blue Shield has completed documen- tation of this process ("Utilization Review"), as required under Section 1363.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. To request a copy of the document describing this Utilization Review pro- cess, call the Customer Service Department at the telephone number indicated on your Identification Card.

  • Post Review With respect to each contract not governed by paragraph 2 of this Part, the procedures set forth in paragraph 4 of Appendix 1 to the Guidelines shall apply.

  • 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.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances 1. If FEMA determines that the entire scope of an Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances in Appendix B of this Agreement, with determinations for Tier II Allowances being made by SOI-qualified staff, FEMA shall complete the Section 106 review process by documenting this determination in the project file, without SHPO review or notification. 2. If the Undertaking involves a National Historic Landmark (NHL), FEMA shall notify the SHPO, participating Tribe(s), and the NPS NHL Program Manager of the NPS Midwest Regional Office that the Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances. FEMA shall provide information about the proposed scope of work for the Undertaking and the allowance(s) enabling FEMA’s determination. 3. If FEMA determines any portion of an Undertaking’s scope of work does not conform to one or more allowances listed in Appendix B, FEMA shall conduct expedited or standard Section 106 review, as appropriate, for the entire Undertaking in accordance with Stipulation II.B, Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings, or Stipulation II.C, Standard Project Review. 4. Allowances may be revised and new allowances may be added to this Agreement in accordance with Stipulation IV.A.3, Amendments. B. Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings

  • Quarterly Review For a period commencing on the initial effective date of the Registration Statement and ending five years from the date of the consummation of the Business Combination or until such earlier time at which the Liquidation occurs or the Common Stock and Warrants cease to be publicly traded, the Company, at its expense, shall cause its regularly engaged independent registered public accounting firm to review (but not audit) the Company’s financial statements for each of the first three fiscal quarters prior to the announcement of quarterly financial information, the filing of the Company’s Form 10-Q quarterly report and the mailing, if any, of quarterly financial information to stockholders.

  • 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.

  • Midterm Review The Recipient shall: (a) carry out jointly with the Association, no later than 24 months after the Effective Date, a midterm review to assess the status of Project implementation, as measured against the performance indicators referred to in Section II.A.1 (a) of Schedule 2 to this Agreement. Such review shall include an assessment of the following: (i) overall progress in Project implementation; (ii) results of monitoring and evaluation activities; (iii) annual work plans and budgets;

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!