Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
Representations and Recommendations Unless otherwise stated in writing, neither Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc, nor its brokers or licensees have made, on their own behalf, any representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to any element of the Property including but not limited to, the legal sufficiency, legal effect, or tax consequences of this transaction. Any information furnished by either party should be independently verified before that party relies on such information. Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc. recommends that Buyer consult its attorneys and accountants before signing this Agreement regarding the terms and conditions herein and that Seller satisfy itself as to the financial ability of Buyer to perform.
Manufacturer's Recommendations All work or materials shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations and requirements. The Contractor shall obtain the manufacturer’s recommendations and requirements, for its use at the Site in executing the Work, copies of bulletins, circulars, catalogues, or other publications bearing the manufacturer’s titles, numbers, editions, dates, etc. If the manufacturer’s recommendations and requirements are not available, the Contractor shall request installation instructions from the Design Professional.
Determinations of Director Pursuant to the Act and Section II of the Agreement and subject to the remaining terms and provisions of the Agreement and all Appendices thereto, the Director hereby determines that the financial assistance to be provided by the OPWC to the Recipient is in compliance with the Act and is provided to the Recipient for the sole and express purpose of financing the Eligible Project Cost and/or reimbursing the Recipient for such Eligible Project Cost.
Classification Changes When the University determines that a revision of a class specification for positions covered by this agreement is needed, and such revision affects the collective bargaining unit designation, the University shall notify AFSCME in writing of the proposed change. AFSCME shall notify the University, in writing, within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the proposed changes, of any comments it has concerning the proposed changes or of its desire to discuss the proposed changes.
Determinations and Actions by the Board of Directors All actions, calculations and determinations (including all omissions with respect to the foregoing) which are done or made by the Board of Directors in good faith pursuant to this Agreement, shall not subject the Board of Directors to any liability to the holders of the Rights.
PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION OF RECOMMENDED ACTION The purpose of the Agreement is to provide the City with the services for one full-time equivalent senior criminalist from the Department to perform DNA testing, analysis, and forensic-related consulting as requested by the City, effective July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2021. The City’s current agreement with the County for this position expires on June 30, 2016. This Agreement will not result in the creation of an additional senior criminalist position, as the position was created during the previous agreement.
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION AND SOLICITATION LIMITATIONS No state contractor, prospective state contractor, principal of a state contractor or principal of a prospective state contractor, with regard to a state contract or state contract solicitation with or from a state agency in the executive branch or a quasi-public agency or a holder, or principal of a holder of a valid prequalification certificate, shall make a contribution to (i) an exploratory committee or candidate committee established by a candidate for nomination or election to the office of Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, State Comptroller, Secretary of the State or State Treasurer, (ii) a political committee authorized to make contributions or expenditures to or for the benefit of such candidates, or (iii) a party committee (which includes town committees). In addition, no holder or principal of a holder of a valid prequalification certificate, shall make a contribution to (i) an exploratory committee or candidate committee established by a candidate for nomination or election to the office of State senator or State representative, (ii) a political committee authorized to make contributions or expenditures to or for the benefit of such candidates, or (iii) a party committee. On and after January 1, 2011, no state contractor, prospective state contractor, principal of a state contractor or principal of a prospective state contractor, with regard to a state contract or state contract solicitation with or from a state agency in the executive branch or a quasi-public agency or a holder, or principal of a holder of a valid prequalification certificate, shall knowingly solicit contributions from the state contractor's or prospective state contractor's employees or from a subcontractor or principals of the subcontractor on behalf of (i) an exploratory committee or candidate committee established by a candidate for nomination or election to the office of Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, State Comptroller, Secretary of the State or State Treasurer, (ii) a political committee authorized to make contributions or expenditures to or for the benefit of such candidates, or (iii) a party committee. DUTY TO INFORM State contractors and prospective state contractors are required to inform their principals of the above prohibitions, as applicable, and the possible penalties and other consequences of any violation thereof. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS Contributions or solicitations of contributions made in violation of the above prohibitions may result in the following civil and criminal penalties: Civil penalties—Up to $2,000 or twice the amount of the prohibited contribution, whichever is greater, against a principal or a contractor. Any state contractor or prospective state contractor which fails to make reasonable efforts to comply with the provisions requiring notice to its principals of these prohibitions and the possible consequences of their violations may also be subject to civil penalties of up to $2,000 or twice the amount of the prohibited contributions made by their principals. Criminal penalties—Any knowing and willful violation of the prohibition is a Class D felony, which may subject the violator to imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or not more than $5,000 in fines, or both.
Decisions of the Board The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chairperson shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Board of Arbitration shall be final and binding and enforceable on all parties, but in no event shall the Board of Arbitration have the power to change this Agreement or to alter, modify or amend any of its provisions. However, the Board shall have the power to dispose of any discharge or a discipline grievance by any arrangement which in its opinion it deems just and equitable.
