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.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Xxxx’x Review. 20.6 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:

Related to Xxxx’x Review

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances

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