Level of Funding. Unilever’s total funding commitment under this Agreement shall not exceed the following amount: 588,960 Rupees (Approximately 10,000 Euro) Unilever’s Total Funding Commitment pursuant to this Agreement (excluding VAT) For the avoidance of doubt, the foregoing shall include all travelling and other expenses unless otherwise agreed under clause 3.2 hereof. Said amount shall be allocated to the following cost headings: Item Funding (in Rupees) Programming 40,000 Junior Research Fellow (Research Assistant) 260,000 Consumables 40,800 Field work 55,000 Equipment (e.g. Desktop/ Laptop / Printer) 95,000 Total 490,800 Xxxx up – University Overhead (20%) 98,160 Travelling and other expenses (excluding VAT) N.A. Grand Total (excluding VAT) 588,960 If any of the above amounts are allocated (to any extent):
Level of Funding. The EAA will provide funding for the costs of implementing the Program during each year of Phase I and Phase II (Annual Funding Obligation) in accordance with each Annual Program Budget approved by the Implementing Committee and the EAA Board. As long as adequate to implement the Program, the Annual Funding Obligation for 2013 will be at the amount indicated for 2013 in Table 7-1 of the HCP. The Annual Funding Obligation for 2014, and each Program year thereafter, may be increased or decreased from the Annual Funding Obligation for 2013 based on the Annual Program Budget developed for the year in accordance with Article Four. The Annual Funding Obligation for any Program year will be limited to the 2013 Annual Funding Obligation, adjusted for a 2% increase, compounded annually for the years that have elapsed since 2013. The EAA will ensure that any funds collected or received for the Program that are in excess of Program Expenditures during any year and result in a Fund Balance, as provided in Subsection 5.5.4, will be applied to Program Expenditures in subsequent years, subject to the provisions of Subsection 5.5.4.
Level of Funding for xxxxxxxx xxxx of impacts The budget and work programmes for future incentive measures will be set on a multi- annual basis as a result of political and other considerations outside the scope of this evaluation. Despite this, it is worth using the evidence collected to establish a minimum level of funding that will lead to progress towards future programme objectives in a cost-effective fashion. This evaluation has determined that an appropriate level of funding has been devoted to testing transnational projects, major sport events and studies, surveys and conferences. With regard to the networking projects, the budget constraints of the Preparatory Actions did not allow all subject areas to be funded concomitantly. While doing so may lead to a degree of overlap and capacity issues in some organisations (some of the same organisations, for example, received funding for networking projects in 2009 and 2010), the evidence indicates that there is sufficient interest in each subject area to allocate funding for all of them at once. In addition, future networking projects could potentially run for longer than the current limit of one year. (While this was ideal for the Preparatory Actions, experimental in nature, networks would gain in effectiveness and efficiency from longer funding periods.). At the same time, the evaluation has judged the amount of funding dedicated to each subject area to be about right. After considering the unavoidable „teething problems‟ inherent in Preparatory Actions, the available budget allowed the Commission to employ a robust (but not overly restrictive) selection process (about in line with other programmes funding networking projects, e.g. the European Health Programme) while achieving considerable progress towards the specific objectives. It is unlikely that in most subject areas (e.g. doping), significantly more funding could have been absorbed successfully without sacrifices in project quality (i.e. awarding funding to more projects would have entailed support for projects of sub-optimal quality), while in others (e.g. social inclusion) the high proportion of quality proposals that the Commission was obliged to reject indicates that a larger budget could have been absorbed effectively and efficiently. Taking into consideration the EUR 8.5m budget for networking projects over the three years of Preparatory Actions, an annual allocation of about EUR 15m could be put forward as a minimum for achieving a xxxxxxxx xxxx of impact...
Level of Funding. Reimbursement to the Service Provider shall be through a cost reimbursement contract. These expenditure levels are contingent upon the necessary State and Federal funds to operate the Project. If State or Federal funding sources are not available and alternative funding cannot be obtained, the Project will be adjusted so as not to incur un-reimbursable expenses.
Level of Funding. The Cooperator’s total funding commitment under this Agreement shall not exceed the following amount: $2,084,000 The Cooperator Total Funding Commitment pursuant to this Agreement Said amount shall be allocated to the following cost headings: Item Funding Task 1: Selection of Chemicals $25,000 Task 4: Addition of metabolic capacity to one cell line for use in HTTr and HTPP $10,000 Task 5: Run HTTr in 12 cell lines Sequencing – Technician Support - $1,091,000 $160,000 Task 6: Run HTPP in 12 cell lines $42,000 Task 7: Run assays required for toxicokinetics (TK) $264,000 Task 8: Run in vitro disposition measurements $45,000 Task 9: Metabolite determination $165,000 Task 11: Cross-species extrapolation $255,000 Travelling and other expenses (excluding VAT) $27,000 Total (excluding VAT) $2,084,000 The foregoing shall include all travelling and other expenses as may be incurred by the Center and/or its staff connected with the SOWs.
Level of Funding. This agreement authorizes DWD/DVR to award up to $24,000.00 to CCHMC for the provision of services provided through September 30, 2020 (Exhibit 1-Services to be Provided). Services to include Statewide Meetings, New Staff Orientation & Training for Success, and Special Events/Meetings. Dollars identified above are allocated but not available, and therefore not committed, until this agreement has been fully signed. This agreement also includes a no-cost extension for Model Fidelity Reviews at the following Project Search sites: Xxxxxx Xxxxx Medical Center Minocqua, WI Mercyhealth Janesville, WI UW-Platteville Platteville, WI Aspirus Wausau, WI DWD will reimburse CCHMC for services performed during this agreement period based on properly submitted invoices. Invoice Instructions: Address the invoice as follows:
