Short-Form Evaluation Process Sample Clauses

Short-Form Evaluation Process. 22 After four (4) years of satisfactory long-form evaluations, the supervisor and employee 23 may mutually agree to participate in the short-form evaluation process. The short-form 24 evaluation (Appendix E-6) shall consist of:
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (7)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Short-Form Evaluation Process. The short form is an alternative evaluation process that may be used after the employee has received four (4) years of satisfactory in-district evaluations. Formal written request to use the short form process must be indicated by the staff member and approved by the evaluator prior to October 1 each year. A staff member may remain on the short form for up to four consecutive years with the approval of the evaluator, at which time the staff member will return to the long form process for a minimum of one (1) year before a return to the short form. A return to the short form must follow the approval process set forth in this section. The short-form evaluation process will consist of one of the following as a minimum:
Sample 1Sample 2
Short-Form Evaluation Process. 33 The short form of evaluation shall include either a 30-minute observation during the school year with
Sample 1Sample 2
Short-Form Evaluation Process. 26 The short form of evaluation shall include either a 30-minute observation during the school year 27 with a written summary or a final annual written evaluation based on the criteria and based on at 28 least two (2) observation periods during the school year, totaling at least 60 minutes without a 29 written summary of such observations being prepared. However, the long form evaluation process 30 shall be followed at least once every four (4) years and an employee or evaluator may request that 31 the long form evaluation process be conducted in any given school year. The short form evaluation 32 process may not be used as a basis for determining that an ESA/Support person’s work is 33 unsatisfactory under subsection (1) of this section nor as probable cause for non-renewal under RCW 34 28A.405.210. 36 The above process will be available to building administrators but shall not be used if a staff member 37 prefers the long form process. If an administrator would like to use the short form process, it is 38 agreed that: 39
Sample 1Sample 2

Related to Short-Form Evaluation Process

  • Evaluation Process A. The immediate supervisor will meet with an employee at the start of the employee’s probationary, trial services, transition, and annual review period to discuss performance expectations. The employee will receive copies of their performance expectations as well as notification of any modifications made during the review period. Employee work performance will be evaluated during probationary, trial service and transition review periods and at least annually thereafter. Notification will be given to a probationary or trial service employee whose work performance is determined to be unsatisfactory.

  • GRIEVANCE REPORT FORM Grievance # School District Distribution of Form 1. Superintendent

  • 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.

  • Application Process The employees wishing to enter into a job share arrangement will apply in writing to the Employer and forward a copy to the Union outlining the proposed commencement date of the job share, how the hours and days of work will be shared and how communication and continuity of work will be maintained. The Employer shall communicate a decision on a job share request in writing to the applicants. Applications to Job Sharing shall not be unreasonably denied.

  • Evaluation Procedure The procedural requirements set forth in this agreement to provide specificity to the statutory obligations established under sections 3319.111 and 3319.112 of the Ohio Revised Code and to conform to the framework for the evaluation of teachers developed under section 3319.112 of the Ohio Revised Code.

  • Selection Process The Mortgage Loans were selected from among the outstanding one- to four-family mortgage loans in the Seller's portfolio at the related Closing Date as to which the representations and warranties set forth in Subsection 9.02 could be made and such selection was not made in a manner so as to affect adversely the interests of the Purchaser;

  • Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.

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