Grant Duration Clause Samples
Grant Duration. Grants will ordinarily be awarded for a one-year period, but may be for a shorter or longer period, at the discretion of the Board. The Foundation may consider renewing a grant on a case- by-case basis if the Foundation has no information indicating that the original grant is being used for any purpose other than that for which it was made, any reports due at the time of the renewal decision pursuant to the terms of the original grant have been furnished, and the criteria and procedures for renewal are objective and nondiscriminatory.
Grant Duration. The period that the Programme should continue to be implemented by the Grantee.
Grant Duration. The grant period for expenditure of these funds will commence on the date of this agreement and end on [termination date]. Extension of the grant period may be made in unusual circumstances, but only upon the express written authority of [Ministry X] made pursuant to a request received before the expiration of the original grant period. Any portion of the funds not used within the grant period and/or for the purpose stated above, must be immediately returned to [Ministry X].
Grant Duration. The Company grants Holder warrants (the "Warrants") to purchase up to 600,000 shares of Common Stock at the Exercise Price (as defined in section 2), subject to adjustment as provided in Section 8, during the period commencing on the date hereof and ending ten years hereafter (the "Exercise Period").
Grant Duration. While beneficiaries and company management alike were chiefly satisfied with the KFMW grant process, a theme that emerged in terms of impact was a strong desire for a longer grant duration or increased rounds of distribution. These sentiments were more frequently expressed in India than in Kenya. In the former country, some company leaders felt that no sustained impact could be achieved within the short time frame the grant was in place. Similarly, many beneficiaries were disappointed that the grant support only lasted 2 months, after which time they experienced difficulties in affording the distributed foods on their own. Fifty six percent of Indian respondents desired a continuation of the program and 11.8% desired an increase in frequency of food assistance. In a similar vein, some company leaders in India noted that the distribution quantity could not adequately support an entire family for a significant amount of time. Survey results also reflected this sentiment as 13.1% of respondents wanted an increase in the quantity of food assistance and 19.6% wanted the program to expand coverage to include workers’ household members. Many beneficiaries in Kenya longed for additional rounds of food distribution. Tea farmers for example requested more support noting that the distribution should not have been a one-time occurrence. Here, 51.1% of respondents voted for a continuation of the program and 8.7% for increased frequency of food assistance. To wholly understand the success or lack thereof of the grant and inform recommendations for future programming, data was also collected regarding its impact on the companies/workforces. In both countries, company leaders reported that in addition to the direct beneficiary benefits other outcomes of the KFMW grant were increased motivation, attendance, and productivity within their workforces. In the absence of going without sufficient food and the challenges associated with that, beneficiaries demonstrated a renewed drive to be at work and were better able to focus on their tasks. In accordance with these accounts, some beneficiaries, when surveyed, reported perceived improvements in their motivation and productivity at work. This was more so true in India where 39.1% and 42.2% of respondents reported improved motivation and productivity respectively. However, in Kenya, perceptions of increased work productivity were not measured and only 1 respondent reported increased motivation. Company leaders further shared that...