Application Review Process. The Agencies agree to the need for clear and early communication about the merits and challenges of potential E3 participants. When VADEQ receives an application, it will forward a copy to the EPA Team co-chair or their designee for compliance screening. VADEQ will evaluate an individual Program application and conduct a compliance review to identify any recent or pending actions regarding the facility. The EPA co-chair will communicate any initial EPA reactions to the VADEQ Team co-chair or their designee within a target of three weeks. The decision to accept or reject an application will be made within a target of 45 days and that decision will be immediately communicated to the applicant by VADEQ. VADEQ will provide the public notice of its decision to accept an application in accordance with state law. For applications that are accepted, VADEQ will request that the facility submit a list of regulatory flexibility proposals, if any are sought. Upon receipt of such a list, VADEQ will request EPA involvement for flexibility that potentially requires federal action to implement. The VADEQ co- chair will provide an assessment of a need for federal involvement to the EPA co-chair in writing. EPA will promptly review the requested flexibility, identify the regulatory actions that will likely need federal action to implement, and will decide whether to proceed to the next phase. The EPA co-chair will communicate this information in writing to the VADEQ co-chair. The Team may hold meetings during this review process to help the Agencies decide whether or not to proceed to the negotiation phase of the project.
Application Review Process. A. Review Teaching Abroad & Sabbatical Committee members will be notified of the pending application(s) in a timely manner and a committee meeting will be convened as promptly as possible. After electing a chair as outlined in 707.6, the Committee will check applicants for eligibility and review the applications according to the criteria outlined in this agreement. The Committee may request the attendance of applicants and assist as needed with revisions to the application. After applications are adequately revised (if needed), the Committee shall make a written recommendation as promptly as possible, ranking all applications properly submitted and meeting the criteria as outlined in this agreement. The ranking will indicate the Committee’s priority as to the granting of leaves and shall follow the guidelines established in 707.7.C. The written recommendation will be forwarded by the committee chair to the vice president for instruction and all teaching abroad and sabbatical applicants. The vice president for instruction will review the committee’s recommendation and prepare their written recommendation. A copy of the vice president for instruction’s recommendation will be sent to each teaching abroad and sabbatical applicant. The vice president for instruction’s recommendation, along with the committee’s recommendation, will be presented to the president, who will make the final decision.
Application Review Process. The Scholarship is merit-based and thus the RSM MBA Awards Committee will select the candidate based on your MBA application. For example, essays, CV, admissions interview etc. Furthermore, the Awards Committee will look at your profile or aspects thereof such as your nationality, cultural background, experience, etc. Applications received after the scholarship deadline or are incomplete will not be considered. Which ECWO programme have you attended, if any:- Programme: Date Attended: Declaration: I have checked my EMBA application to the programme and the information provided by me is complete and correct. I understand that any omissions on my part, or the inclusion by me of false or plagiarised information, may disqualify me from the scholarship. I agree that the decision of the MBA Scholarship Awards Committee is final and that I have no right of appeal should my scholarship application be unsuccessful or request an explanation as to why I was not selected. Signature: Date: (signature is required – do not print name)
Application Review Process. 1. The UU CON will accept student application to SLCC as application to the RN-BS EP track. See Post Licensure BS (RN-BS Online) at xxxx://xxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx/programs/bs/online-rn-bs/ for application and admissions criteria.
Application Review Process. All applications will be initially reviewed for completeness by staff. Any incomplete applications will be returned to the applicant. Applications can be corrected and resubmitted only if the application deadline has not passed. An application review panel will be convened by the Napa County Health and Human Services Agency for rating the full applications and making funding recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. Each reviewer will be asked to read the application and evaluate them against the full application scoring criteria above. The review panel will then meet to discuss their scores, adjust as needed, and develop a composite score and recommendations to submit to the Board of Supervisors. The panel may suggest multi-year funding for a project even if the applicant did not originally make that request, provided that sufficient multi-year funding is available. The panel may also suggest partial funding or funding of only certain portions of an application and may recommend any changes it considers to be warranted before a proposal is awarded funding. The final selection of projects and the terms of funding shall be at the discretion of the Napa County Board of Supervisors. Contract Process Any proposal awarded funding by the Board of Supervisors will be managed through a contract with HHSA. All contractors will need to meet Office of Inspector General screening and County insurance requirements prior to their contract being forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for approval and execution. During the course of the development of the contract, HHSA staff may negotiate the scope of the project to better target it to evidence-based practices. Reporting Requirements Contractors will be required to submit bi-annual performance reports, as specified in their contract, for the period in which they are utilizing MSA grant funds to fund the project. Any agency awarded MSA grant funds will also, at the discretion of the Agency’s Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS) Administrator, be required to participate in the Agency’s HMIS system if the services provided by that contractor meet the requirements of the HMIS program. All agencies receiving MSA grant funds will be required to update and/or certify the currency of their information on the Napa Health Matters website on an annual basis. FY 2019-20 Key Dates & Deadlines Milestone Date Time Address BOS agenda item on FY 19-20 MSA application process February 12th, 2019 BOS meeting 2:00 p.m. Napa Coun...
Application Review Process. (1) The Village Administrative Authority shall verify that the permit application, including the supporting documentation as required by Subsection (C), is complete and that proposed plan complies with the standards identified in either Section 16.08 or Section 16.09, or both. If the Village Administrative Authority determines after such review that the proposed plan is deficient in any manner or that additional information is needed to evaluate the plan, the Village Administrative Authority shall notify the applicant of such deficiency or of the need for additional information. Within twenty (20) days after the date of such notification, the applicant shall correct the identified deficiencies or furnish the requested information, or both if appropriate. If the applicant fails to timely correct any identified deficiency or submit the requested information, the application shall be deemed denied and no further action will be taken on it. The applicant may then either submit a new application and plan for approval or appeal the determination of the Village Administrative Authority as provided under Section 16.12;
Application Review Process. The Coalition has selected a seven-member panel (LRC) to review loan and grant applications. The LRC will meet the third Tuesday of each month or as needed depending on the volume of loan applications; a quorum must be present to conduct any board business. LRC staff will have the power to call a meeting of the LRC as needed upon the receipt of completed application materials. Before an application is prepared, LRC staff will collect preliminary information to determine, to the maximum extent possible, that the potential borrower and project are eligible. The first step in the loan selection process will be LRC staff’s review of the proposed activity to screen for conformance with the purpose and program goals. This will include review by the Qualified Environmental Professional to ensure that environmental criteria has been met and all necessary eligibility tasks have been completed and documentation is in place. Based on the outcome of this initial review, the potential borrower will either be referred to other sources of financing or invited to prepare a complete application. Upon completion of the loan application, the LRC will conduct an analysis to ascertain the project’s potential for success. This review will entail a review of the business plan, and review of any reporting and documentation provided by LRC staff. The LRC will conduct a credit analysis to determine the repayment ability of the borrower and will consider the following items: • business cash flow • personal debt to income ratios • personal and business credit history • management • type of business • industry performance • collateral • other pertinent information If the analysis indicates the business plans are viable, and the borrower is creditworthy, the LRC will work with the applicant to structure the terms of the loan package. The LRC has the ultimate responsibility for approving or denying applications for funding within 30 days of receiving the completed application. However, the City of Cheyenne, acting as the “Lead Agency” under grants received from EPA must assure that the LRC’s actions are in accordance with the terms of Cooperative Agreement BP-96826401-0 between the City of Cheyenne and EPA. The LRC must not spend funds except for their intended use as defined in the Cooperative Agreement and the EPA Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund Administrative Manual.
Application Review Process. The Coalition has delegated the task of reviewing loan and grant applications to the LRC. The LRC will meet the second Tuesday of each quarter or as needed depending on the volume of loan applications. LRC staff may call a meeting as needed upon the receipt of completed application materials. Before an application is prepared, LRC staff will collect preliminary information to determine if the potential borrower and project are eligible. The first step in the loan selection process will be LRC staff’s review of the proposed activity to screen for conformance with the objectives and guidelines of the program. Based on the outcome of this initial review, the potential borrower will either be referred to other sources of financing or invited to prepare a complete application. Upon completion of the loan application, the LRC will conduct an analysis to ascertain the project’s potential for success. This review will entail a review of the business plan. A credit analysis may be conducted to determine the repayment ability of the borrower and will consider business cash flow, personal debt to income ratios, personal and business credit history, management, type of business, industry performance and collateral. If the analysis indicates the business plans are viable, and the borrower is creditworthy, the LRC will work with the applicant to structure the terms of the loan package. The LRC has the ultimate responsibility for approving or denying applications for funding. However, the City of Cheyenne, acting as the “Lead Agency” under grants received from EPA must assure that the LRC’s actions are in accordance with the terms of Cooperative Agreement BP-96826401-0 between the City of Cheyenne and EPA. The LRC must not spend funds except for their intended use as defined in the Cooperative Agreement and the EPA Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund Administrative Manual.
Application Review Process. Access Applicants must create an account on the CITF Data Access Portal, where they will be able to explore data variables and submit Data Access Applications. The Access Application form is completed by the Access Applicant of the Research Project and must include all supporting documentation. Once submitted, the Access Application is validated by the Data Access Office for completeness and conformity. If necessary, the Access Applicant will be instructed by the Data Access Office to make changes. The Data Access Committee will review each Access Application according to the Criteria for Approval. An Access Application can be Approved, Rejected or Conditionally Approved. Access Applicants can revise their Access Application according to the comments received from the Data Access Committee, if applicable. Once approved, the Access Agreement is signed by all parties. The Data Management team proceeds with data preparation and processing steps in order to initiate data sharing with the Approved Institution. Once data sharing has commenced, if there are any changes to the research project or research project personnel from the original Data Access Application that could affect the use of the CITF Data, an Amendment form must be completed by the Applicant, validated, reviewed and approved by the CITF Data Office and CITF Data Access Committee before changes can be carried out by the research team. Should a data breach occur that is known or, with reason, assumed to have affected the CITF Data, immediate notice must be given to the CITF and the CITF data security policy should be followed. Access Applicants accessing the data must also comply with the CITF Publication Policy when publishing research using CITF Data.
Application Review Process. 1. Santa Xxxx County, the Cities and the School Board shall ensure that the minimum Level of Service Standard established for each school type is maintained by evaluating school capacity as part of the Future Land Use Map amendment process. No new residential large scale comprehensive plan amendment may be approved by the County or Cities, until a School Capacity Availability Determination Letter has been issued indicating that adequate school facilities exist or are planned for in the 5‐year School District Facilities Work Plan. This shall not limit the authority of a local government to deny a comprehensive plan amendment or its functional equivalent, pursuant to its home rule regulatory powers.
