Company may review KPIs. (a) The Company may review and adjust the KPIs from time to time, including the targets contained within the KPIs.
Company may review KPIs Sample Clauses
Related to Company may review KPIs
Review The practitioner reviews the treatment plan and discusses, when appropriate, case circumstances and management options with the attending (or referring) physician. The reviewer consults with the requesting physician when more clarity is needed to make an informed coverage decision. The reviewer may consult with board certified physicians from appropriate specialty areas to assist in making determinations of coverage and/or appropriateness. All such consultations will be documented in the review text. If the reviewer determines that the admission, continued stay or service requested is not a covered service, a notice of non-coverage is issued. Only a physician, behavioral health practitioner (such as a psychiatrist, doctoral-level clinical psychologist, certified addiction medicine specialist), dentist or pharmacist who has the clinical expertise appropriate to the request under review with an unrestricted license may deny coverage based on medical necessity.
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.
Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.
Administrator Compliance Statement On or before ninety (90) days after the end of each fiscal year, commencing with the fiscal year ended March 31st immediately following the Closing Date, the Administrator shall deliver to the Issuer a statement of compliance addressed to the Issuer and signed by an authorized officer of the Administrator to the effect that (i) a review of the Administrator’s activities during the immediately preceding reporting year (or applicable portion thereof) and of its performance under this Agreement during such period has been made under such officer’s supervision, and (ii) to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, the Administrator has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout such reporting year (or applicable portion thereof) or, if there has been a failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material respect, specifically identifying each such failure known to such officer and the nature and the status thereof. If the Administrator is the same party as the Servicer, such party’s compliance with Section 3.11(a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement will satisfy the Administrator’s obligations set forth in this Section 1.21(b).
Literature Review A-E shall conduct a literature review to determine which species have been identified as special status by state, federal, and local resources agencies and organizations, and have a potential to occur on the project site or in the immediate vicinity. Sources to be reviewed include: (1) special status species lists from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and California Native Plant Society (CNPS); (2) database searches of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the Electronic Inventory of the CNPS; (3) the most recent Federal Register listing package and critical habitat determination for each federally Endangered or Threatened species potentially occurring on the project site; (4) the CDFG Annual Report on the status of California’s listed Threatened and Endangered plants and animals; and (5) other biological studies conducted in the vicinity of the project site.
Standard of Review The Parties acknowledge and agree that the standard of review for any avoidance, breach, rejection, termination or other cessation of performance of or changes to any portion of this integrated, non-severable Agreement (as described in Section 22) over which FERC has jurisdiction, whether proposed by Seller, by Buyer, by a non-party of, by FERC acting sua sponte shall be the “public interest” standard of review set forth in United Gas Pipe Line Co. v.
Compliance Review During the Term, Developer agrees to permit the GLO, HUD, and/or a designated representative of the GLO or HUD to access the Property for the purpose of performing Compliance-Monitoring Procedures. In accordance with GLO Compliance-Monitoring Procedures, the GLO or HUD will periodically monitor and audit Developer’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, the CDBG-DR Regulations, the CDBG Multifamily Rental Housing Guidelines, and any and all other Governmental Requirements during the Term. In conducting any compliance reviews, the GLO or HUD will rely primarily on information obtained from Developer’s records and reports, on-site monitoring, and audit reports. The GLO or HUD may also consider other relevant information gained from other sources, including litigation and citizen complaints. Attachment G GLO Contract No. 20-063-039-C547 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION
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.
Annual Statement of Compliance The Officer’s Certificate required to be delivered by the Issuing Entity, pursuant to Section 3.9 of the Indenture or the Officer’s Certificate required to be delivered by the Servicer pursuant to Section 4.01(a) of the Servicing Agreement, as applicable.
REPORT SUBMISSION 1. Copies of reporting packages for audits conducted in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F-Audit Requirements, and required by PART I of this form shall be submitted, when required by 2 CFR 200.512, by or on behalf of the recipient directly to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse (FAC) as provided in 2 CFR 200.36 and 200.512
