External Review by Independent Review Organization Sample Clauses

External Review by Independent Review Organization. In accordance with IC 27-13-10.1-1 and IC 27-8-29-1, the Contractor shall maintain an external grievance procedure for the resolution of decisions related to an adverse utilization review determination, an adverse determination of medical necessity, or a determination that a proposed service is experimental or investigational. An external review does not inhibit or replace the member’s right to appeal a Contractor decision to a State fair hearing. Within thirty-three (33) calendar days from the date of the Contractor’s decision, a member, or a member’s representative may file a written request for a review of the Contractor’s decision by an independent review organization (IRO). The IRO shall render a decision to uphold or reverse the Contractor’s decision within seventy-two (72) hours for an expedited appeal, or fifteen (15) business days for a standard appeal. The determination made by the independent review organization is binding on the Contractor.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (8)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
External Review by Independent Review Organization. In accordance with IC 27-13-10.1-1 and IC 27-8-29-12, the Contractor must maintain an external grievance procedure for the resolution of decisions related to an adverse utilization review determination, an adverse determination of medical necessity or a determination that a proposed service is experimental or investigational. An external review does not inhibit or replace the member’s right to appeal the Contractor’s decision to a State fair hearing. A member or a member’s representative may file a written request for a review of the Contractor’s decision by an independent review organization (IRO) within one hundred and twenty (120) calendar days of receipt of the appeal decision. The IRO shall render a decision within fifteen (15) business to uphold or reverse the Contractor’s decision. The determination made by the IRO is binding on the Contractor.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (8)
External Review by Independent Review Organization. In accordance with IC 27-13-10.1-1 and IC 27-8-29-1, the Contractor shall maintain an external grievance procedure for the resolution of decisions related to an adverse EXHIBIT 1.A. SCOPE OF WORK utilization review determination, an adverse determination of medical necessity, or a determination that a proposed service is experimental or investigational. Members must first exhaust the Contractor’s grievance and appeals process. An external review does not inhibit or replace the member’s right to appeal a Contractor decision to a State fair hearing. A member may seek external review by an IRO, and such process may run concurrently with a State fair hearing. Within one hundred and twenty (120) calendar days from the date of the Contractor’s decision, a member, or a member’s representative may file a written request for a review of the Contractor’s decision by an independent review organization (IRO). The IRO shall render a decision to uphold or reverse the Contractor’s decision within seventy-two (72) hours for an expedited appeal, or fifteen (15) business days for a standard appeal. The determination made by the independent review organization is binding on the Contractor. IRO clinicians do not have to be Indiana licensed.
Sample 1Sample 2

Related to External Review by Independent Review Organization

  • Engagement of Independent Review Organization Within 60 days after the Effective Date, Xx. Xxxxxx shall engage an individual or entity, such as an accounting, auditing, or consulting firm (hereinafter “Independent Review Organization” or “IRO”), to perform the reviews listed in this Section III.C. The applicable requirements relating to the IRO are outlined in Appendix A to this IA, which is incorporated by reference.‌

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 11. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan. SCHEDULE 5 Execution of Project and Operation of Project Facilities; Financial Matters

  • 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.

  • Independence of Asset Representations Reviewer The Asset Representations Reviewer will be an independent contractor and will not be subject to the supervision of the Issuer or the Owner Trustee for the manner in which it accomplishes the performance of its obligations under this Agreement. Unless authorized by the Issuer or the Owner Trustee, respectively, the Asset Representations Reviewer will have no authority to act for or represent the Issuer or the Owner Trustee and will not be considered an agent of the Issuer or the Owner Trustee. Nothing in this Agreement will make the Asset Representations Reviewer and either of the Issuer or the Owner Trustee members of any partnership, joint venture or other separate entity or impose any liability as such on any of them.

  • Review of assessment The assessment of the applicable percentage should be subject to annual review or earlier on the basis of a reasonable request for such a review. The process of review shall be in accordance with the procedures for assessing capacity under the Supported Wage System.

  • Inspections of Asset Representations Reviewer The Asset Representations Reviewer agrees that, with reasonable advance notice not more than once during any year, it will permit authorized representatives of the Issuer, the Servicer or the Administrator, during the Asset Representations Reviewer’s normal business hours, to examine and review the books of account, records, reports and other documents and materials of the Asset Representations Reviewer relating to (a) the performance of the Asset Representations Reviewer’s obligations under this Agreement, (b) payments of fees and expenses of the Asset Representations Reviewer for its performance and (c) a claim made by the Asset Representations Reviewer under this Agreement. In addition, the Asset Representations Reviewer will permit the Issuer’s, the Servicer’s or the Administrator’s representatives to make copies and extracts of any of those documents and to discuss them with the Asset Representations Reviewer’s officers and employees. Each of the Issuer, the Servicer and the Administrator will, and will cause its authorized representatives to, hold in confidence the information except if disclosure may be required by law or if the Issuer, the Servicer or the Administrator reasonably determines that it is required to make the disclosure under this Agreement or the other Transaction Documents. The Asset Representations Reviewer will maintain all relevant books, records, reports and other documents and materials for a period of at least two years after the termination of its obligations under this Agreement.

  • BUSINESS REVIEWS Vendor must perform a minimum of one business review with Sourcewell per contract year. The business review will cover sales to Participating Entities, pricing and contract terms, administrative fees, supply issues, customer issues, and any other necessary information.

  • Business Review Meetings In order to maintain the relationship between the Department and the Contractor, each quarter the Department may request a business review meeting. The business review meeting may include, but is not limited to, the following: • Successful completion of deliverables • Review of the Contractor’s performance • Review of minimum required reports • Addressing of any elevated Customer issues • Review of continuous improvement ideas that may help lower total costs and improve business efficiencies.

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