{"component": "clause", "props": {"groups": [{"snippet_links": [{"key": "promotion-to-associate", "type": "clause", "offset": [30, 52]}, {"key": "of-the-work", "type": "clause", "offset": [103, 114]}, {"key": "and-tenure", "type": "clause", "offset": [154, 164]}, {"key": "members-of-the-department", "type": "definition", "offset": [179, 204]}, {"key": "the-department-chairperson", "type": "clause", "offset": [216, 242]}, {"key": "academic-units", "type": "clause", "offset": [250, 264]}, {"key": "the-\u2587", "type": "clause", "offset": [287, 292]}, {"key": "the-candidate", "type": "definition", "offset": [416, 429]}, {"key": "other-institutions", "type": "clause", "offset": [433, 451]}, {"key": "the-materials", "type": "definition", "offset": [484, 497]}, {"key": "external-review", "type": "definition", "offset": [512, 527]}, {"key": "the-faculty-member", "type": "clause", "offset": [621, 639]}, {"key": "capable-of", "type": "definition", "offset": [728, 738]}, {"key": "assessment-of-the", "type": "clause", "offset": [772, 789]}, {"key": "academic-rank", "type": "definition", "offset": [855, 868]}, {"key": "equal-to", "type": "definition", "offset": [869, 877]}, {"key": "the-promotion", "type": "definition", "offset": [899, 912]}, {"key": "according-to", "type": "definition", "offset": [949, 961]}, {"key": "department-or-school", "type": "definition", "offset": [985, 1005]}, {"key": "will-be-given", "type": "clause", "offset": [1066, 1079]}, {"key": "opportunity-to-object", "type": "clause", "offset": [1083, 1104]}, {"key": "in-writing", "type": "definition", "offset": [1106, 1116]}, {"key": "for-cause", "type": "clause", "offset": [1141, 1150]}, {"key": "actual-bias", "type": "definition", "offset": [1160, 1171]}, {"key": "lack-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [1209, 1216]}, {"key": "responsibility-to-communicate", "type": "clause", "offset": [1293, 1322]}, {"key": "authority-to", "type": "definition", "offset": [1420, 1432]}, {"key": "final-list", "type": "clause", "offset": [1442, 1452]}, {"key": "the-chairperson", "type": "clause", "offset": [1478, 1493]}, {"key": "provide-a", "type": "definition", "offset": [1613, 1622]}, {"key": "written-statement", "type": "clause", "offset": [1623, 1640]}, {"key": "not-sustain", "type": "definition", "offset": [1667, 1678]}, {"key": "written-objections", "type": "clause", "offset": [1683, 1701]}, {"key": "to-serve", "type": "definition", "offset": [1840, 1848]}, {"key": "external-evaluator", "type": "definition", "offset": [1855, 1873]}, {"key": "a-person", "type": "definition", "offset": [1906, 1914]}, {"key": "to-provide", "type": "clause", "offset": [1960, 1970]}, {"key": "professional-performance", "type": "clause", "offset": [2002, 2026]}, {"key": "the-individual", "type": "clause", "offset": [2045, 2059]}, {"key": "examples-of-the", "type": "clause", "offset": [2095, 2110]}, {"key": "personal-relationships", "type": "clause", "offset": [2127, 2149]}, {"key": "thesis-or-dissertation", "type": "clause", "offset": [2261, 2283]}, {"key": "having-been", "type": "clause", "offset": [2312, 2323]}, {"key": "intellectual-property", "type": "definition", "offset": [2472, 2493]}, {"key": "related-to", "type": "definition", "offset": [2503, 2513]}, {"key": "having-a", "type": "definition", "offset": [2551, 2559]}, {"key": "financial-partnership", "type": "definition", "offset": [2560, 2581]}, {"key": "consulting-arrangement", "type": "clause", "offset": [2585, 2607]}, {"key": "family-friend", "type": "definition", "offset": [2656, 2669]}, {"key": "personally-known", "type": "definition", "offset": [2726, 2742]}, {"key": "per-se", "type": "definition", "offset": [2769, 2775]}, {"key": "professional-committee", "type": "definition", "offset": [2938, 2960]}, {"key": "in-confidence", "type": "clause", "offset": [3002, 3015]}, {"key": "letters-of", "type": "definition", "offset": [3076, 3086]}, {"key": "in-addition-to", "type": "clause", "offset": [3114, 3128]}, {"key": "the-representative", "type": "clause", "offset": [3139, 3157]}, {"key": "selection-of-the", "type": "clause", "offset": [3158, 3174]}, {"key": "provide-the", "type": "clause", "offset": [3216, 3227]}, {"key": "guidelines-for", "type": "clause", "offset": [3285, 3299]}, {"key": "the-school", "type": "clause", "offset": [3300, 3310]}, {"key": "the-reviewer", "type": "definition", "offset": [3347, 3359]}, {"key": "right-to", "type": "definition", "offset": [3490, 3498]}, {"key": "the-evaluator-will", "type": "clause", "offset": [3567, 3585]}, {"key": "be-protected", "type": "clause", "offset": [3586, 3598]}, {"key": "titles-and-references", "type": "clause", "offset": [3670, 3691]}, {"key": "not-entitled", "type": "definition", "offset": [3716, 3728]}, {"key": "such-information", "type": "definition", "offset": [3871, 3887]}], "size": 10, "snippet": "In cases involving tenure and promotion to Associate or (Full) Professor, the quality and significance of the work must be evaluated by full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty members of the department as well as the Department Chairperson, or in academic units without Chairpersons, the \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587. In addition, the department must solicit evaluations from acknowledged scholars and practitioners in the discipline of the candidate at other institutions, nationally or internationally. The materials submitted for external review shall include, within reasonable quantitative limits set by the Chair, all those selected by the faculty member. These scholars and practitioners should be at \u201carm\u2019s length\u201d with the candidate and be capable of providing an objective, informed assessment of the candidate\u2019s work. Typically the external evaluators will have an academic rank equal to or above the rank of the promotion sought. Evaluators will be selected according to procedures outlined in department or school RPT guidelines. Whatever procedures are adopted, candidates will be given an opportunity to object, in writing, to proposed evaluators for cause, meaning actual bias or prejudice toward the candidate or lack of qualifications to review the candidate\u2019s record. The candidate also has the responsibility to communicate to the Chair or \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 in writing any factor that might prejudice the \u201carm\u2019s length\u201d standing. The authority to name the final list of evaluators rests with the Chairperson or \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587, but in cases where the Chair or \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 chooses evaluators challenged for cause by the candidate, he or she must provide a written statement explaining why he/she did not sustain the written objections of the candidate. The final list of evaluators must be chosen in a way that ensures that the candidate cannot identify who has been asked to serve as an external evaluator. An \u201carm\u2019s length\u201d evaluator is a person who is not compromised in his or her ability to provide an objective evaluation of the professional performance and reputation of the individual being evaluated. The following are examples of the professional or personal relationships that are commonly perceived to put in question the objectivity of an external evaluator: \u2022 having acted as the thesis or dissertation advisor for the candidate \u2022 having been a faculty or student colleague at a previous institution \u2022 having been a co-investigator on grants, a co-author on publications or a co-inventor of intellectual property \u2022 having related to the candidate by birth or marriage \u2022 having a financial partnership or consulting arrangement with the candidate \u2022 having a close personal or family friend (vacation together, godparents etc.) Evaluators who are personally known to the candidate are not, per se, excluded from eligibility, nor are persons with whom the faculty member being evaluated may have discussed a project, attended a conference or participated on a professional committee. External evaluators should be solicited in confidence. The evaluators should be informed as to who will see their letters of evaluation once submitted. In addition to providing the representative selection of the candidate\u2019s publications, the Chair will provide the outside evaluators with the candidate\u2019s C.V. and the RPT guidelines for the school, college, unit or department to aid the reviewer in his/her assessment of the candidate\u2019s work. The faculty member being considered for reappointment, promotion or tenure has the right to see the evaluators\u2019 letters but in such a form that the identity of the evaluator will be protected by eliminating all identifying material such as letterheads, names and titles and references. While the candidate is not entitled to know the identity of the external evaluators, faculty members and administrators who are reviewing the candidate\u2019s dossier are entitled to such information.", "samples": [{"hash": "78Bd4rcJbdM", "uri": "/contracts/78Bd4rcJbdM#external-evaluation", "label": "Collective Bargaining Agreement", "score": 23.3093776703, "published": true}, {"hash": "jjdSmjAANYl", "uri": "/contracts/jjdSmjAANYl#external-evaluation", "label": "Collective Bargaining Agreement", "score": 23.2792606354, "published": true}, {"hash": "9eyPuYSkZjU", "uri": "/contracts/9eyPuYSkZjU#external-evaluation", "label": "Collective Bargaining Agreement", "score": 23.2792606354, "published": true}], "hash": "1f4a59f4abe668ddc6f7bbee49b03f24", "id": 1}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "the-\u2587", "type": "clause", "offset": [4, 9]}, {"key": "in-consultation-with", "type": "definition", "offset": [28, 48]}, {"key": "where-applicable", "type": "clause", "offset": [72, 88]}, {"key": "external-referees", "type": "clause", "offset": [113, 130]}, {"key": "to-provide", "type": "clause", "offset": [131, 141]}, {"key": "agree-to", "type": "clause", "offset": [211, 219]}, {"key": "by-the-applicant", "type": "clause", "offset": [265, 281]}, {"key": "list-of-names", "type": "clause", "offset": [324, 337]}, {"key": "the-requirement", "type": "clause", "offset": [393, 408]}, {"key": "submitted-by", "type": "clause", "offset": [533, 545]}, {"key": "the-chair", "type": "clause", "offset": [588, 597]}, {"key": "be-prepared", "type": "clause", "offset": [743, 754]}, {"key": "the-member", "type": "clause", "offset": [783, 793]}, {"key": "upon-receiving", "type": "clause", "offset": [822, 836]}, {"key": "a-copy-of-the", "type": "clause", "offset": [909, 922]}, {"key": "curriculum-vitae", "type": "clause", "offset": [932, 948]}, {"key": "the-referee", "type": "definition", "offset": [1028, 1039]}, {"key": "letters-of-appraisal", "type": "clause", "offset": [1310, 1330]}, {"key": "supporting-documentation", "type": "clause", "offset": [1401, 1425]}], "size": 8, "snippet": "(1) The \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587/Administrator, in consultation with the applicant\u2019s Chair (where applicable), will select three (3) external referees to provide evaluations of the applicant. If the \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587/Administrator is unable to agree to at least three (3) of the referees nominated by the applicant, the applicant may submit a supplementary list of names that the \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587/Administrator is prepared to use to meet the requirement of at least three (3) referees. Alternatively, the applicant may agree to a mutually acceptable roster from a pool of names submitted by the applicant, the \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587/Administrator and the Chair/Director. All of the nominees must, in any case, be acceptable to the applicant.\n(2) The \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587/Administrator shall confirm that the referees will be prepared to provide an evaluation of the Member's research.\n(3) Immediately upon receiving such confirmation, the \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587/Administrator shall forward to each referee a copy of the Member's curriculum vitae, the publications (or other substantive evidence) and a letter requesting that the referee evaluate the Member's submitted publications as well as any other published or unpublished research of the Member which is known to the referee. The referee shall be requested to provide his/ her evaluation within four (4) weeks.\n(4) Once the \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587 receives the required letters of appraisal from the external referees, he/she shall forward all applications and supporting documentation to the TPCAC.", "samples": [{"hash": "6nmyE9ihf5W", "uri": "/contracts/6nmyE9ihf5W#external-evaluation", "label": "Collective Agreement", "score": 28.4538516998, "published": true}, {"hash": "lPFGFenje5w", "uri": "/contracts/lPFGFenje5w#external-evaluation", "label": "Collective Agreement", "score": 27.9091148376, "published": true}, {"hash": "47FXCML1FJO", "uri": "/contracts/47FXCML1FJO#external-evaluation", "label": "Collective Agreement", "score": 27.045173645, "published": true}], "hash": "8cbe681f1e57bc70575011e8963da7cd", "id": 2}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "review-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [157, 166]}, {"key": "of-work", "type": "clause", "offset": [183, 190]}, {"key": "annual-evaluation", "type": "definition", "offset": [192, 209]}, {"key": "a-permanent", "type": "clause", "offset": [238, 249]}, {"key": "advisory-panel", "type": "definition", "offset": [250, 264]}, {"key": "peer-review", "type": "clause", "offset": [278, 289]}], "size": 5, "snippet": "9.1. IFIs should develop a mechanism for external evaluation of their work \u2013 to be conducted by local or international experts. This may take several forms: review of selected pieces of work; annual evaluation of the quality of analysis; a permanent advisory panel or board; or peer review by an IFI in another country.", "samples": [{"hash": "6znamWodomJ", "uri": "/contracts/6znamWodomJ#external-evaluation", "label": "Memorandum of Understanding", "score": 32.9441490173, "published": true}, {"hash": "1cbHjGFfTpW", "uri": "/contracts/1cbHjGFfTpW#external-evaluation", "label": "Memorandum of Understanding", "score": 31.3126792908, "published": true}, {"hash": "8IecSCW6DsH", "uri": "/contracts/8IecSCW6DsH#external-evaluation", "label": "Memorandum of Understanding", "score": 31.2716197968, "published": true}], "hash": "0c73a2619f120739ae809ec0a775077f", "id": 3}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "review-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [157, 166]}, {"key": "of-work", "type": "clause", "offset": [183, 190]}, {"key": "annual-evaluation", "type": "definition", "offset": [192, 209]}, {"key": "a-permanent", "type": "clause", "offset": [238, 249]}, {"key": "advisory-panel", "type": "definition", "offset": [250, 264]}, {"key": "peer-review", "type": "clause", "offset": [278, 289]}, {"key": "of-information", "type": "definition", "offset": [325, 339]}, {"key": "note-10", "type": "definition", "offset": [350, 357]}, {"key": "working-day", "type": "definition", "offset": [358, 369]}, {"key": "requested-by", "type": "clause", "offset": [406, 418]}, {"key": "fiscal-council", "type": "clause", "offset": [426, 440]}, {"key": "at-no-cost", "type": "definition", "offset": [460, 470]}, {"key": "council-members", "type": "clause", "offset": [507, 522]}, {"key": "signed-agreements", "type": "clause", "offset": [538, 555]}, {"key": "adhere-to", "type": "clause", "offset": [582, 591]}, {"key": "confidentiality-requirements", "type": "definition", "offset": [596, 624]}, {"key": "information-provided-by", "type": "clause", "offset": [654, 677]}], "size": 4, "snippet": "9.1. IFIs should develop a mechanism for external evaluation of their work \u2013 to be conducted by local or international experts. This may take several forms: review of selected pieces of work; annual evaluation of the quality of analysis; a permanent advisory panel or board; or peer review by an IFI in another country. Date of information request2 (note 10 working day turnaround): Notes: All information requested by the NI Fiscal Council should be provided at no cost and in a readable format. NI Fiscal Council members and staff have signed agreements indicating that they will adhere to the confidentiality requirements when handling and processing information provided by NICS Departments.", "samples": [{"hash": "kcR4R0KCWXP", "uri": "/contracts/kcR4R0KCWXP#external-evaluation", "label": "Memorandum of Understanding", "score": 31.1675987244, "published": true}, {"hash": "ghwHT5A9FUG", "uri": "/contracts/ghwHT5A9FUG#external-evaluation", "label": "Memorandum of Understanding", "score": 31.1675987244, "published": true}, {"hash": "hEz3obNVGKf", "uri": "/contracts/hEz3obNVGKf#external-evaluation", "label": "Memorandum of Understanding", "score": 30.9294471741, "published": true}], "hash": "5db4713b7039ef203c6338a57483d17a", "id": 4}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "independent-experts", "type": "definition", "offset": [89, 108]}, {"key": "created-by", "type": "definition", "offset": [133, 143]}, {"key": "business-opportunity", "type": "clause", "offset": [249, 269]}, {"key": "final-decision", "type": "definition", "offset": [358, 372]}, {"key": "in-case-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [401, 411]}, {"key": "description-of-the", "type": "definition", "offset": [460, 478]}, {"key": "evaluation-criteria", "type": "clause", "offset": [490, 509]}, {"key": "the-market", "type": "clause", "offset": [561, 571]}, {"key": "the-team", "type": "definition", "offset": [610, 618]}, {"key": "the-project", "type": "definition", "offset": [679, 690]}, {"key": "to-generate", "type": "definition", "offset": [844, 855]}, {"key": "evolution-of-the-services", "type": "clause", "offset": [963, 988]}, {"key": "provide-information", "type": "clause", "offset": [1039, 1058]}, {"key": "particular-product", "type": "definition", "offset": [1101, 1119]}, {"key": "the-products", "type": "clause", "offset": [1186, 1198]}, {"key": "services-to-be", "type": "clause", "offset": [1199, 1213]}, {"key": "the-competition", "type": "definition", "offset": [1267, 1282]}, {"key": "reduction-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [1530, 1542]}, {"key": "equal-opportunities", "type": "clause", "offset": [1567, 1586]}, {"key": "social-impact", "type": "clause", "offset": [1615, 1628]}, {"key": "job-creation", "type": "clause", "offset": [1636, 1648]}, {"key": "the-individual", "type": "clause", "offset": [1797, 1811]}, {"key": "date-of-submission", "type": "definition", "offset": [2034, 2052]}, {"key": "the-application", "type": "clause", "offset": [2162, 2177]}, {"key": "an-individual", "type": "clause", "offset": [2239, 2252]}, {"key": "evaluation-report", "type": "definition", "offset": [2253, 2270]}, {"key": "final-score", "type": "clause", "offset": [2276, 2287]}, {"key": "individual-assessments", "type": "clause", "offset": [2328, 2350]}], "size": 3, "snippet": "All applications in the Filtered List of Applicants will be assessed and scored by three INDEPENDENT EXPERTS (from the Experts Panel created by the <IMPACT> Connected Car consortium for each vertical/challenge), on the following criteria: \u25cf Team. \u25cf Business Opportunity. \u25cf Strategic Fit. Additionally, Transversal Criteria, will be taken into account in the final decision to rank finalist proposals, in case of score tying (see description below). A detailed description of the three main evaluation criteria is offered below: ideas and their understanding of the market dynamics they are trying to tap into. The team should be balanced, cross functional, be fully dedicated to the project and with a strong background and skills. \u25cf Market attractiveness: applicants have to demonstrate the level of users, sales and profitability they expect to generate. This can be demonstrated using measurable indicators such as - engaged users, revenues, profits, expected evolution of the services or product. \u25cf Differentiation: applicants have to provide information about the degree of competition for their particular product/service and if the idea is disruptive and breaks the market. i.e. the products/services to be brought to market can be clearly differentiated from the competition. \u25cf Environmental threats: applicants have to assess the external aspects that may have impact in their project idea and how they expect to face it. Additionally, TRANSVERSAL CRITERIA such as \u2018Environment and low carbon economy contribution\u2019 (e.g. reduction of greenhouse emissions), \u2018Equal Opportunities\u2019 (e.g. gender balance) and \u2018Social Impact\u2019 (e.g. job creation) will be taken into account in the final decision. The top-ranked proposals will be included in the \u201cList of Pre-Selected Applicants\u201d and passed to the individual external evaluation to be ranked for the next phase. Ties will be solved using the following criteria, in order: \u25cf Business Opportunity score. \u25cf Team score. \u25cf Strategic Fit Score. \u25cf Contribution to transversal criteria. \u25cf Date of submission: earlier submitted proposals go first. Within this list of Pre-Selected Applicants, each evaluator will rank the application assigning a score from 0 to 7 for each criterion and produce an Individual Evaluation Report. The final score will be calculated as an average of the individual assessments provided by the Evaluators.", "samples": [{"hash": "7YCrTwT6fyO", "uri": "/contracts/7YCrTwT6fyO#external-evaluation", "label": "Grant Agreement", "score": 25.4803638458, "published": true}], "hash": "bdc735f5a79e2d443515a4c56599315c", "id": 5}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "good-practice", "type": "clause", "offset": [13, 26]}, {"key": "an-independent", "type": "clause", "offset": [27, 41]}, {"key": "five-years", "type": "definition", "offset": [88, 98]}, {"key": "the-council", "type": "clause", "offset": [105, 116]}, {"key": "the-oecd", "type": "definition", "offset": [186, 194]}, {"key": "way-forward", "type": "clause", "offset": [229, 240]}, {"key": "key-stakeholders", "type": "definition", "offset": [386, 402]}, {"key": "in-particular", "type": "clause", "offset": [404, 417]}, {"key": "the-finance-committee", "type": "definition", "offset": [418, 439]}, {"key": "the-process", "type": "clause", "offset": [463, 474]}, {"key": "external-evaluator", "type": "definition", "offset": [493, 511]}, {"key": "the-terms-of-reference", "type": "definition", "offset": [517, 539]}, {"key": "the-evaluation", "type": "clause", "offset": [544, 558]}, {"key": "local-ownership", "type": "clause", "offset": [941, 956]}, {"key": "relationship-with-the-legislature", "type": "clause", "offset": [1029, 1062]}, {"key": "access-to-information", "type": "clause", "offset": [1068, 1089]}], "size": 2, "snippet": "In line with good practice an independent external evaluation will be conducted four to five years after the Council\u2019s establishment. This will include progress towards adhering towards the OECD principles and recommendations on way forward to further aspire to these. This evaluation could be undertaken by OECD or another independent Fiscal Institution which is now well established. Key stakeholders, in particular the Finance Committee, would be consulted on the process for appointing an external evaluator, and the Terms of Reference for the evaluation. Source: OECD, 2014, Recommendations on Principles for Independent Fiscal Institutions - \u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587://\u2587\u2587\u2587.\u2587\u2587\u2587\u2587.\u2587\u2587\u2587/gov/budgeting/OECD-Recommendation-on-Principles-for-Independent- Fiscal-Institutions.pdf The twenty-two Principles for Independent Fiscal Institutions (fiscal councils and independent parliamentary budget offices) proposed below are grouped under nine broad headings: (1) local ownership; (2) independence and non-partisanship; (3) mandate; (4) resources; (5) relationship with the legislature; (6) access to information; (7) transparency; (8) communication; and (9) external evaluation.", "samples": [{"hash": "kcR4R0KCWXP", "uri": "/contracts/kcR4R0KCWXP#external-evaluation", "label": "Memorandum of Understanding", "score": 31.1675987244, "published": true}, {"hash": "ghwHT5A9FUG", "uri": "/contracts/ghwHT5A9FUG#external-evaluation", "label": "Memorandum of Understanding", "score": 31.1675987244, "published": true}], "hash": "79db85cbbdf944c9b04410f1a6140443", "id": 6}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "the-funding", "type": "clause", "offset": [15, 26]}, {"key": "a-list", "type": "definition", "offset": [77, 83]}, {"key": "field-of", "type": "definition", "offset": [150, 158]}, {"key": "artificial-intelligence", "type": "definition", "offset": [159, 182]}, {"key": "open-call", "type": "definition", "offset": [209, 218]}, {"key": "number-of", "type": "clause", "offset": [249, 258]}, {"key": "best-fit", "type": "definition", "offset": [291, 299]}, {"key": "scope-of-the", "type": "clause", "offset": [304, 316]}, {"key": "project-activities", "type": "definition", "offset": [324, 342]}, {"key": "according-to", "type": "definition", "offset": [392, 404]}, {"key": "award-criteria", "type": "definition", "offset": [419, 433]}], "size": 2, "snippet": "In this phase, the Funding Box platform will undertake the task of compiling a list of external independent evaluators with extensive know-how in the field of artificial intelligence and e- health. The ASCAPE Open Call Committee will then appoint a number of evaluators, from the list, that best fit the scope of the ASCAPE project activities. Your project will be evaluated by these experts according to the following award criteria:", "samples": [{"hash": "itfmDDzMSh0", "uri": "/contracts/itfmDDzMSh0#external-evaluation", "label": "Grant Agreement", "score": 30.5708522797, "published": true}, {"hash": "1yCftg3Lg2a", "uri": "/contracts/1yCftg3Lg2a#external-evaluation", "label": "Grant Agreement", "score": 30.3615112305, "published": true}], "hash": "776ceb3a8e1bbf5e83e110277c3e7abf", "id": 7}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "executive-leadership-team", "type": "clause", "offset": [27, 52]}, {"key": "external-consultant", "type": "definition", "offset": [106, 125]}, {"key": "not-limited", "type": "clause", "offset": [163, 174]}, {"key": "the-position", "type": "clause", "offset": [194, 206]}, {"key": "independent-evaluation", "type": "definition", "offset": [323, 345]}, {"key": "market-value", "type": "definition", "offset": [363, 375]}, {"key": "the-panel", "type": "clause", "offset": [412, 421]}], "size": 2, "snippet": "The relevant member of the executive leadership team may approve for an evaluation to be undertaken by an external consultant for a variety reasons, including but not limited to: \u2022 the level of the position in the organisational hierarchy \u2022 seeking to benchmark positions and/or obtain external relativities \u2022 requiring an independent evaluation of job worth and market value \u2022 where agreement is not reached by the panel", "samples": [{"hash": "cKkz5XParGB", "uri": "/contracts/cKkz5XParGB#external-evaluation", "label": "Enterprise Agreement", "score": 27.4990005493, "published": true}, {"hash": "rnDDMf4ynM", "uri": "/contracts/rnDDMf4ynM#external-evaluation", "label": "Enterprise Agreement", "score": 23.3367557526, "published": true}], "hash": "d1ffc67e7f8ec21ed97e4f61b20204e8", "id": 8}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "the-joint", "type": "clause", "offset": [0, 9]}, {"key": "study-programme", "type": "clause", "offset": [17, 32]}, {"key": "according-to", "type": "definition", "offset": [75, 87]}, {"key": "the-national", "type": "clause", "offset": [88, 100]}], "size": 2, "snippet": "The Joint Master Study Programme will be periodically externally evaluated according to the national legislations.", "samples": [{"hash": "69BISwQ1UOW", "uri": "/contracts/69BISwQ1UOW#external-evaluation", "label": "Joint Master Study Programme Agreement", "score": 27.2176589966, "published": true}, {"hash": "709vW5dBEVQ", "uri": "/contracts/709vW5dBEVQ#external-evaluation", "label": "Joint Master Study Programme Agreement", "score": 25.0328540802, "published": true}], "hash": "6e8706685808264fb130a3361fc7c217", "id": 9}, {"snippet_links": [{"key": "the-commonwealth", "type": "clause", "offset": [6, 22]}, {"key": "an-evaluator", "type": "clause", "offset": [34, 46]}, {"key": "performance-of-the-program", "type": "clause", "offset": [63, 89]}, {"key": "the-project", "type": "definition", "offset": [101, 112]}, {"key": "at-any-time", "type": "clause", "offset": [114, 125]}, {"key": "during-the-term", "type": "clause", "offset": [126, 141]}, {"key": "each-party-must", "type": "clause", "offset": [147, 162]}, {"key": "costs-of", "type": "definition", "offset": [176, 184]}, {"key": "participating-in", "type": "definition", "offset": [185, 201]}, {"key": "this-clause", "type": "clause", "offset": [222, 233]}], "size": 2, "snippet": "\u200c\n(a) The Commonwealth may engage an evaluator to evaluate the performance of the Program, including the Project, at any time during the Term.\n(b) Each party must bear its own costs of participating in an evaluation under this clause 7.5.", "samples": [{"hash": "eeRn4EGteLT", "uri": "/contracts/eeRn4EGteLT#external-evaluation", "label": "Project Agreement", "score": 21.09740448, "published": true}], "hash": "7d8f5c55f1962002fa396e2c593a2465", "id": 10}], "next_curs": "ClwSVmoVc35sYXdpbnNpZGVyY29udHJhY3RzcjgLEhZDbGF1c2VTbmlwcGV0R3JvdXBfdjU2IhxleHRlcm5hbC1ldmFsdWF0aW9uIzAwMDAwMDBhDKIBAmVuGAAgAA==", "clause": {"title": "External Evaluation", "children": [["impact", "Impact"], ["excellence", "Excellence"]], "parents": [["faculty-based-criteria-for-continuing-appointment", "Faculty-Based Criteria for Continuing Appointment"], ["defects-after-practical-completion", "Defects after Practical Completion"], ["disposal-of-the-property", "Disposal of the Property"], ["implementation-framework", "Implementation framework"], ["other", "Other"]], "size": 48, "id": "external-evaluation", "related": [["program-evaluation", "Program Evaluation", "Program Evaluation"], ["joc-evaluation", "JOC EVALUATION", "JOC EVALUATION"], ["self-evaluation", "Self-Evaluation", "Self-Evaluation"], ["financial-evaluation", "FINANCIAL EVALUATION", "FINANCIAL EVALUATION"], ["annual-evaluation", "Annual Evaluation", "Annual Evaluation"]], "related_snippets": [], "updated": "2025-07-23T06:00:56+00:00", "also_ask": ["What criteria should define the scope and authority of the external evaluator?", "How can parties ensure the evaluator\u2019s findings are binding and enforceable in court?", "What safeguards prevent bias or conflicts of interest in the selection of the evaluator?", "How does this clause compare to arbitration or expert determination provisions?", "What are the key risks if the external evaluation process is vague or incomplete?"], "drafting_tip": "Specify evaluator qualifications and evaluation criteria to ensure objectivity; define timelines to promote timely completion.", "explanation": "The External Evaluation clause establishes the right or requirement for an independent third party to assess certain aspects of a contract, project, or deliverable. Typically, this clause outlines the scope of the evaluation, the qualifications of the evaluator, and the process for conducting and reporting the assessment. For example, it may apply to verifying compliance with technical standards or confirming the achievement of project milestones. Its core function is to provide an objective, unbiased review, thereby increasing transparency and trust between the parties and helping to resolve disputes based on expert findings."}, "json": true, "cursor": ""}}